Toolkit

For

Mainstreaming Biodiversity on Southern Jordan

*Draft*

Boshra Salem

December, 2014

1

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank the International Union for Conservation of Nature – Regional office of west Asia ((IUCN-ROWA) who have supported this toolkit realization. Thanks are due to Dr Hany El Shaer for providing valuable contribution and advices. Thanks are also to Prof. Zuhair Amr for providing a detailed field study of the study area.

2

Table of Content

Section Page List of Figures 4 List of Tables 5 List of Boxes 5 List of Acronyms 6 About the Toolkit 7 Introduction 9 PART I

1. Overview of the Biodiversity in Jordan 9 1.1. Major Soil Types 14 1.2. Jordan Biography 15 1.3. Biodiversity in Jordan 18

2. Overview of the Study Area 25 Part II

3. The Biodiversity Mainstreaming Toolkit 39 3.1. Goals of the Mainstreaming Biodiversity 40 3.2. Desired Biodiversity Outcomes 3.3. Diagnosis of the Current State of Biodiversity

Mainstreaming 42

3.4. Identify sectors and development goals which biodiversity concerns are to be mainstreamed

46

3.5. Stakeholders of the Study Area 47 3.6. Develop a Business Case 49 3.7. Identify enabling factors for Mainstreaming 51 3.8. Develop a monitoring and Evaluation system

for Biodiversity 51

References 53 Appendix 1: AMOEBA Toolkit 55 Appendix 2: National Sectorial Plans and Policies Relevant to SLM

– Jordan 60

List of Figures

Figure # Figure name page

3

Figure 1 Map of Jordan 11 Figure 2 Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall 1990-2009.

Data extracted from World Bank data .www.worldbank .org 11

Figure 3 Distribution of Rainfall in Jordan After ICARDA- OASIS report 1

12

Figure 4 Physiographic regions Source GCEP. Jordan country Study on Biological Diversity 1998 http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/Counprof/ PDF%20files/Jordan.pdf

13

Figure 5 Phytogeography of the (a) Middle East and (b) Jordan 15 Figure 6. Ecological Habitats in Jordan 17 Figure 7 vegetation map of Jordan according to the classification of

plant species made by the Royal Botanic garden 18

Figure 8 Location of the study area 25 Figure 9 Bio geographical map of Jordan showing the study area 27 Figure 10 Location of the 5 studied segments n the study area. After

Z.Amr, 2014 Rapid assessment study of Biodiversity of Shawbak

28

Figure 11 Protected areas within the study site (Cyan polygons) 29 Figure 1 land uses within the study area 38 Figure 13 Representation of the mainstreaming issues 40 Figure 14 Flow Chart of the Biodiversity Mainstreaming 41 Figure 15 Distribution of the selection of approaches to address

complex issues like biodiversity 46

4

List of Tables

Table # Table name page Table 1 Jordan: Evolution of population and labour force size 12 Table 2 Phyto geographical regions of Jordan and the associated

endemism 16

Table 3 The key attributes of IBAs in Jordan (data obtained from the 5th national biodiversity report)

19

Table 4 Population size of Ma'an and Tafiela by administrative regions

26

Table 5 Plant species categories in DBR (Source: RSCN, 1994) 30

Table 6 Entry points for mainstreaming at different levels 47

Table 7 Summary of the Data to be included in the business case 50

Table 8 Monitoring and Evaluation questions

51

Boxes

Box 1 Valuation of Ecosystem Services 42 Box 2 Stakeholders of the Study Area 48 Box 3 Biodiversity messaging that speaks to key policy priorities of

most governments: 49

5

List of Acronyms

ADDSR Agriculture Directorate for Developing the Sharah Region (MOE) CBD Convention on Biological Diversity DBR Dana Biosphere Reserve FAO Food and Agriculture Organization IBA Important Bird Areas ICARDA International Centre for Agricultural Research in dry Area IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature MAB Man and the Biosphere MOE Ministry of Environment MOA Ministry of Agriculture M&E Monitoring and evaluation MSP Medium – Size Project NSAD National Strategy for Agriculture Development NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan RBG Royal Botanic Garden RSCN Royal Society for Conservation of Nature SLM Sustainable Land Management UNCCD United Nation Convention for Combating Desertification

6

About the Toolkit

This toolkit is a component of a GEF MEDIUM-SIZE PROJECT (MSP)” Mainstreaming Biodiversity in the Sylvo-pastoral and Rangeland Landscapes in the Al Sharah Agricultural Development Region of Southern Jordan” . This GEF project aims at promoting a new way of mainstreaming biodiversity in Jordan: new approaches to ecosystem management, policy implementation, partnerships, more effective capacity development, institutional development, and community collaboration. The more specific Objective of the project is to mainstream biodiversity conservation in sylvo-pastoral and rangeland management activities particularly in buffer zones associated with existing (and proposed) Nature Reserves and to produce local economic benefits and poverty alleviation in a sustainable and replicable manner. Another aim of developing this tool-kit is to support the implementation of the NBSAP through “mainstreaming” biodiversity into other sectors. Mainstreaming biodiversity is about having NBSAP issues supported in the actions of other sectors, particularly to avoid the unintended loss of or impacts on biodiversity. The most strategic path is to work for a “win-win” arrangement that meets the obligations or mandate of both sectors. This tool-kit will be mainly designed for policy makers. The project “Mainstreaming Biodiversity in the Sylvo-pastoral and Rangeland Landscapes in the Al Sharah Agricultural Development Region of Southern Jordan” is designed to produce four Outcomes. Outcome 1 of which is “Enhanced capacity building and awareness raising for biodiversity mainstreaming in local communities and government agencies”. As the capacity building and awareness of some of the values of biodiversity (intrinsic through to economic) is relatively low in rural Jordan, the project will pay special attention to increasing the capacity of the government institutions (primarily ADDSR) and local communities to incorporate biodiversity conservation as a complementary economic activity. This includes the initiation of new biodiversity conservation mechanisms and tools. This toolkit also presents a review of the current state of knowledge on biodiversity in Jordan generally and specifically on the study area of the project. It is intended to support biodiversity - development mainstreaming efforts by synthesizing experience to date that can help make a strong business case for integrating biodiversity in policy, planning and budgetary processes. It will be of use to policy-makers and stakeholders interested in or working on biodiversity and development mainstreaming. The information in this report is largely based on a review of existing literature and inputs from experts on biodiversity –development mainstreaming, and the fifth national report on the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Jordan.

7

Introduction

Drylands are defined by water scarcity and characterized by seasonal climatic extremes and unpredictable rainfall patterns (Davis et al., 2012) This definition is in line with the definitions of IUCN, UNEP and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the UNCCD. Yet despite their relative levels of aridity, drylands contain a great variety of biodiversity, much of which is highly adapted to dryland ecology. As a result there are many animal and plant species and habitats found only in drylands: some semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas are among the most biodiverse regions in the world. Diversity is also great within drylands, for example between areas of different aridity, temperature or altitude. Drylands, including dry sub-humid, semi-arid, arid and hyper-arid lands, cover 41.3%2 of the earth’s land surface and dryland biodiversity plays a pivotal role in the global fight against poverty, climate change and desertification. Paradoxically, many people also consider the drylands to be barren with little value or interest (Davis et al., 2012). Species richness is generally lower in the drylands than in tropical forests but within-species diversity may be higher due to this diversity of habitats and the isolation of populations. The cultural diversity, dramatic landscapes and iconic wildlife of the drylands contrast starkly with the negative attitudes that some people hold towards them. Many traditional land management practices have proven to be more economically viable than more ‘modern’ alternatives, whilst simultaneously providing conservation benefits. The ecological rationale of these traditional strategies developed through a deep understanding by the indigenous communities of their surrounding natural environment ensures both economic and environmental sustainability. Species have adapted to these factors in many unique ways creating a variety of habitats that are essential to the survival of species as well as to the livelihoods of people. Wetlands, forests, mountains and other habitat types provide vital resource patches within the drylands. The biodiversity in drylands is of tremendous global importance, being central to the well-being and development of millions of people in developing countries. Global leaders from governments and civil society, in June 2012, the Rio +20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development, reaffirmed the intrinsic value of biological diversity and recognized the severity of global biodiversity loss and degradation of ecosystems. Biodiversity must always be approached in terms of two inseparable concepts: pattern and process, where pattern’ covers the composition and structure of biodiversity. It refers to a snapshot’ of different categories of biodiversity (e.g. species, habitats, communities or ecosystems) that have been mapped or otherwise identified in a particular place, at a specific time. Process refers to the ecological and evolutionary processes that maintain the variety and distribution of biodiversity and allow it to persist over time. IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is strongly committed to the conservation and sustainable management of drylands biodiversity. As a Union of more than 200 government organizations and over 900 non-government organizations, as well six Commissions of 11,000 voluntary scientists and experts, IUCN is strongly positioned to champion dryland biodiversity and to demonstrate and promote innovative ways to achieve the shared goals of

8

biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. For the United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, drylands biodiversity also is a cross-cutting priority throughout its work on ecosystem management, environmental governance, early warning and assessment, and beyond. Although the conservation status of dryland biodiversity is not well monitored, many known drivers of biodiversity loss are present in the drylands. These drivers include rapid demographic shifts and urbanisation, agricultural expansion, land use change, weakening of governance arrangements and the introduction and spread of alien invasive species. Accelerating dryland development is anticipated to increase the rate of biodiversity loss. The combination of habitat loss and fragmentation reduce the opportunities for dryland biodiversity to adapt and survive, with the additional impacts of climate change further exacerbating the problem. The drylands perhaps more than any other biome offer opportunities for achieving both conservation and development objectives simultaneously and in many cases have shown to do so (Davis et al., 2012). The Aichi targets on protected areas could be more easily achieved, or even surpassed, in drylands by legitimizing and supporting Indigenous and community conserved areas, and traditional natural resource management strategies. Drylands provide local populations with food, fuel and water, but often these values are not well captured in government accounts, and are easily dismissed by government planners in pursuit of alternative capital investments. Other dryland ecosystem services have great value but are seldom accounted for and the cost of losing them may be felt too late. Dryland biodiversity has great value, both to local resource users and to the global beneficiaries of ecosystem services such as carbon storage and sequestration. However, ecosystem services are widely taken for granted, which is a major factor in their loss. Methods exist for effectively quantifying such values, although these are far less well developed or applied in drylands as they are in forest or coastal ecosystems. Furthermore, it is not always possible or even desirable to put a monetary value on ecosystem services, particularly cultural and spiritual services. It is important to ensure that people, particularly those from outside the drylands, understand the values of the services they are enjoying, and that appropriate measures are put in place to protect against their loss. A concerted effort is required to mainstream dryland biodiversity and coordinate actions between all government sectors, and this poses particular challenges of scale in the drylands. Government institutions need to be tailored towards supporting and augmenting the skills of land managers and government staff often require new skills to conduct more participatory planning. As the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and the Millennium Development Goals have underlined, a disaggregated approach to conservation and development in drylands serves the interests of neither. It Is therefore important to mainstream biodiversity on the agenda of other sector’s ministries, or government departments and in having biodiversity issues integrated into their policies and practices. This needs an investment in relationship building and an effort to find common grounds to work together and to identify common objectives. In this kit mainstreaming biodiversity refers to the process of embedding biodiversity considerations into

9

policies, strategies and practices of key public and private actors that impact or rely on biodiversity, so that it is conserved and sustainably used both locally and globally. This report is divided into two parts. Part 1 contains two descriptive chapters. Chapter one is a general overview of biodiversity characteristic in Jordan, and chapter two is on Biodiversity in in the study area. The second part of the report is a full description of a tool kit to be used for mainstreaming and embedding biodiversity considerations in national policies and strategies. This part contains a chapter with illustration of the biodiversity proposed tool kt and its component.

10

PART I.

1. Overview of the Biodiversity in Jordon Jordan covers an area of 89,800 km2 of which 88,802 sq km is land and 540 km2 is water including a 26 km long coastline. With its varied topography it includes a range of mountains that runs from north to south with altitudes ranging from 500 metres to over 1 700 metres, which form the Highlands (Figure 1) (. East of the mountain range, the land slopes gently to the east to form the eastern deserts. In the west, the land slopes steeply towards the Jordan Rift Valley, which extends from Lake Tiberias in the north (elev. 220 m below the sea level) to the Red Sea at Aqaba. The Dead Sea lies about 120 km south of Lake Tiberias, with water level at about 405 m below the sea level. Less than 5% of the country’s land area is arable land. This variation of physical environment is strongly reflected in the diversity of live in the country in terms of cultural and natural heritage and in particular as related to biological diversity. The climate of Jordan is mostly arid desert with a relatively short rainy season between November and April. (Figure 2 and 3) It is a drought-prone country largely influenced by the range of mountains in the West. The western part of Jordan, or the Highlands, has a Mediterranean climate characterized by a hot, dry summer (up to 45oC) and a cool, wet winter (average 13oC) separated by two short transitional periods. The southern and eastern parts of the country are arid with hot dry summers and cold dry winters.mm in the highlands to less than 50 mm in the east.

Figure 1. Map of Jordan

Figure 2. Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall 1990-2009. Data extracted from World Bank data .www.worldbank .org

11

Demographically, Jordan is home to around 6.5 million people, and is considered a young population; more than 70% of the population is under 30 years of age, which suggests that an investment in youth can be an instrument for national development and sustainability (The Fifth National Report on the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity). Those between the age of 15 and 24 comprise 22% of the population, 80% of which are urbanized with literacy ratio of almost 96%, one of the highest in the region and of good reputation of educational systems, including those related to environmental education and biodiversity centered learning and sensitization.

Table 1. Jordan: Evolution of population and labour force size

Size [Millions] Annual growth rate [%]

1998 2003 2008 2013 1998-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013 Total population 4.63 4.98 5.91 7.27 1.47 3.48 4.23 Total labour force 1.25 1.36 1.69 2.12 1.7 4.44 4.64 Labour force in agriculture 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.12 -1.73 1.76 0 Agricultural population n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Source: FAOSTAT, FAO of the UN, Accessed on January 24, 2014. http://faostat.fao.org/site/550/default.aspx#ancor Major topographic features in Jordan, is classifieds into four main physiographic regions (Figure 4): 1. Jordan Rift Valley and Wadi Araba, . The rift valley extends from Lake Tiberias in the north

to the Gulf of Aqaba in the south. It is the Jordanian part of a continental shelf extending from Aqaba in the South to the Adasiyyah in the north. This zone is divided into three areas: (a) The

Figure 3. Distribution of Rainfall in Jordan

After ICARDA- OASIS report 1

12

2. Jordan Valley which , lies between 200–400 m below sea level, extending from Lake Tiberias in the north to the Dead Sea, with a length of 104 km and a width of between 4 and 16 km; it is surrounded in the east and west by high mountains. Rainfall decreases from approximately 300 mm in the north to 102 mm in the south. (b) The Southern Ghor : this also lies below sea level to the south of the Dead Sea. Annual rainfall is less than 100 mm. (c) The Wadi araba , this area extends between the Southern Ghor and Aqaba on the Red Sea. It is extremely dry, with limited cultivated areas using underground water. The Jordan Valley and the Southern Ghor are among the most important agricultural areas, as there is a permanent source of water from the Yarmouk River and side dams for the former, and from surface water for the latter. Due to their position below sea level and high temperatures (microclimate), these two are the most important winter vegetable producing areas. Cultivable lands in Ghors total approximately 34000 ha, all irrigated. The majority of holdings are between 3 and 4 ha. Farmers use modern agricultural techniques in irrigation, production and marketing.

3. The Highlands: These extend from the Yarmouk River in the north assing through the

Ajloun mountains, the hills of Ammon and Moab, and the Edom mountains. Many creeks and wadis drain from the east to the Jordan River, Dead Sea, and Wadi Araba. The average altitude ranges from 600 m in the north to 1000 m in the middle and 1500 m in the south. The highlands, which are a succession of catchment and sub-catchments, comprise: a semi-arid zone (350–500mm annual rainfall) and a small sub-humid zone (over 500 mm annual rainfall).

4. The Arid Zone (Plains). This comprises the plains between the Badia (semi desert) and the Highlands. Rainfall ranges between 200 mm in the East and 350 mm in the West. More than 50% of the arable land is in this zone, the rainfed crops are mainly barley (areas of 200–300 mm of rainfall) wheat and fruit trees (where rainfall ranges between 300 and 350 mm).

Figure 4. Physiographic regions Source GCEP.

Jordan country Study on Biological Diversity 1998 http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/Counprof/

PDF%20files/Jordan.pdf

13

5. Badia (Eastern Desert). This covers about 8090000 ha or 90% of the Kingdom. It is characterized by a very sparse vegetation cover and an annual rainfall of less than 200mm. In the past it was only used for grazing. In the last two decades, however, 20000 ha have been irrigated, using underground water, to grow vegetables especially tomatoes, watermelon and potatoes), plus fruit trees and cereals, especially wheat.

1.1. Major soil types

The soils of the Rift Valley in Zor, Wadi Araba and parts of Ghor belong to the order entisols and enceptisols (ustochrepts). The other parts of the rift are covered by aridisols. In the north of the Valley, the soils are deep and of moderate to medium structure (Al Qudah, B. (2000). These soils have good water holding capacity and are relatively fertile. The soils of the Highlands are non-cracking soils (xerochrepts), cracking clayey soils (vertisols) and shallow loamy soils (xerothents). The soils are generally calcareous with fair nutrient level but suffer from nitrogen and phosphorous deficiency and occasionally iron and manganese deficiency. Their organic content is less than 1%. The texture is heavy loam to clayey with high water olding capacity. The soils of the Steppe region are aridisols and entisols. They are deep to moderately deep, slightly gravely, with fine silty loam texture in the surface and subsoil horizons. The subsoil horizons are rich in CaCO3 (calciorthids). The surface layer is dark, yellowish brown to brown. The high silt content of the surface soil and the absence of suitable organic content are responsible for the poor infiltration rate that leads to higher run-off and decreases the water storage capacity of the soil profile. Consequently, the vegetative growth is retarded and further soil degradation occurs. In general the soils of this region suffer from deficiencies of nitrogen and phosphorous. These soils are highly susceptible to gully and wind erosion particularly when disturbed by ploughing or subjected to over grazing.

14

The soils of the Desert region are aridisols and entisols. Soil depth varies considerably from one place to another. In the basalt area in the north, the deep clayey, well structured, soils occur below moderately weathered basalt pavement (camborthids). Recent soils are saline, rather silty due to the effect of wind sediments or are like the soils which occupy the mudflats. Older soils are clayey, deep, and contain higher amounts of CaCO3. In the middle of Badia and to the south of Azraq, the soils become saline and contain gypsum (gypsiorthids). In the south around Disi and Mudawwara, the weathered sandstone shale and granite have resulted in the formation of sandy soils. The soils are in general low in organic matter, sandy to sandy loam in texture, often highly saline or alkaline and are generally devoid of vegetation. Their water holding capacity and fertility status is very low. 1.2. Jordan phytogeography. Jordan Phytogeography is part of the biogeographical zones of the Middle East (Figure 5). It is influenced by the Mediterranean, Saharo-sindian and Irano-Turanian biogeographical zones. Jordan’s wide range of physical conditions and location at the junction of three continents − Europe, Asia and Africa − contribute to various differentiated biogeographical regions and ecosystems (Table 2).

Table 2 . Phyto geographical regions of Jordan and the associated endemism

(a)

(b)

Figure 5. Phytogeography of the (a) Middle East and (b)

Jordan

15

These ecosystems include deserts with poor plant cover; sub-tropical ecosystems, including Sudanian species of tree and dwarf shrub prominent in the sparse and very open vegetation; aquatic ecosystems, comprising rivers, wadis and wetlands, the latter varying from salt marshes to marine ecotypes; and the scarp and highland ecosystems, comprising of escarpments and mountains, hills and undulating plateaus with natural woodland (Pinus, evergreen/deciduous oak

16

woodland) and steppe, the latter consisting of a transition area where desert biota is gradually replaced by “Mediterranean” biota. (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Ecological Habitats in Jordan

Although Jordan has only about 1% of forest coverage, a more detailed analysis shows that this cover varies widely between Governorates. Forests are located mostly in Governorates in the northwest, which receive more than 200 mm per year of rainfall, areas around the capital city of Amman, and in some areas of the South. Forests occupy between 20 to 30% of the land area in these Governorates, and play an important environmental role in protecting watersheds and in supporting tourism. But in general, plant diversity in Jordan has declined dramatically and some species have become extinct totally from the wild. The main factors contributing to low forest cover and diversity are habitat encroachment by urban and agricultural development, deforestation, and deterioration of rangelands by overgrazing and soil erosion, illegal collection, and depletion of the major water resources. Afforestation and reforestation on rangelands are among the main forestry activities of the forestry department in Jordan as key measures in rehabilitating and restoring rangeland ecosystems and increasing their productivity.

1.3. Biodiversity in Jordan:

17

Jordan has only 10% of its total area arable. This represent (arable lands area 8.9 million dunum) according to the ministry of agriculture indicators. In such conditions sustainable use of natural resources is a big challenge owing to the scarcity of water, the ongoing processes of land degradation due to water and wind erosion, and increase population which reduces the economic development gains. These challenges are more exacerbated due to the anthropogenic impacts of over-grazing, unsustainable agricultural and water management practices, and over exploitation of vegetation cover. Poverty in the arid and semi-arid areas of Jordan also contributes to the increasing rates of resource degradation. It is deriving farmers and herders to produce their basic needs using unsustainable practices. Jordan embraces four bio-geographic regions, ( the Mediterranean, Irano-Turanian, Saharo-Arabian and Sudanian), each comprise thirteen vegetation types which provide the natural habitats for over 4,000 species of fauna and flora from the terrestrial, marine and reshwater environments in addition to genetic resources. Jordan’s 2,622 species of vascular plants represent 1% of the world flora. 100 are endemic, including Iris nigricans, Jordan’s floral emblem, Plantagomaris-mortui, Crucianella transjordanica, Centaurea procurrens, Scrophularia nabataerum, Tamarix tetragyn, and T. palaestina. Further, Jordan hosts 644 animal species of which, 83 are mammal species, including the globally threatened Capra nubiana, Gazella dorcus, Gazella subgutturosa, Gazella gazelle and Oryx leucoryx. The Royal Botanic Garden (RBG) has taken the lead in the classification of Jordanian plant species and assessing more than 1,000 plant species so far.Figure 7 shows the vegetation map of Jordan. Avifauna composition is especially rich in Jordan because of its geographical location associated with the Great Rift Valley and lying on a major migratory birds route. There are 436 species of

Figure 7. vegetation map of Jordan according to the classification

of plant species made by the Royal Botanic garden

18

birds including Geronticus eremita, Chlamydotis macqueenii, Nephron percnopterus, Serinus syriacus and Vanellus gregarius .. The key attributes of Jordan important bird areas (IBA) are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. The key attributes of IBAs in Jordan (data obtained from the 5th national biodiversity report)

Total number of birds 329 Globally threatened birds 10 Land birds 226 Sea Birds 24 Migratory Birds 270 Water birds 100 Number of IBAa 27

The Gulf of Aqaba hosts more than 348 species of fish, 151 species of hard corals and 120 species of soft corals, in addition to a variety of invertebrate’s species including snails, crabs and sea worms. A total of three threatened species of sea turtles were recorded in the Gulf of Aqaba. The rate of endemism is considered high among the Red Sea fishes and represents 13.7% of the total fish species recorded with seven species of fishes recognized as endemic to the Gulf of Aqaba. More than 20% of mollusks and echinodermata as well as several species of algae occurring in the Gulf may be endemic. (The Fifth National Report on theImplementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2014 .) The country is also rich in agro-biodiversity, including a wealth of native and endemic species and varieties which have been adapted over centuries. Of particular importance are the medicinal and aromatic plants, as well as herbs and spices, distributed all over the country from the eastern desert to the western highlands and from the semi-arid north to the extremely arid south. However this biodiversity is under threat as habitat is lost due to over grazing, ploughing for rainfed cultivation of barley, and subsequent accelerated soil loss and degradation. Although much of Jordan Highlands was once covered by Mediterranean evergreen forest most of the indigenous vegetation has either been cleared for wood and agriculture or been degraded through human land uses. Freshwater diversity is also high with 15 of species recoded including the endemic Aphanius sirhani. Further, Jordan hosts 110 species of herpeto-fauna including three species of amphibians, 107 species of reptiles where the later constitutes of 37 snakes, one tortoise, one terrapin and 68 species of lizards; including the flagship species of the Uromastyx aegyptia and Varanus griseus. Wild plants constitute a very important component of Jordan’s biological diversity. Conservation of this natural heritage is listed high on the priorities of the government. The total number of plant species recorded in Jordan exceeds 2500 species of which 100 are endemic. The endemic species include Iris petrana, Cousinia dayi, Plantago maris-mortui, Crucianella transjordanica,

19

Centaurea procurrens, Scrophularia nabataerum, Tamarix tetragyn, and T. palaestina. There are 375 rare or very rare species including species of the genus Orchis, Romulea, Biarum and Globularia; 150 are endangered (including species of the genus Juniperus and Cupressus) and currently about 75 species are considered extinct. These species represent 152 families and about 700 genera. Flowering plants constitute the most dominant group of species and are particularly visible in the spring. Several species have ornamental or medicinal value. The importance of the medicinal plants as a source of preventive and/or curative health value (for both people and livestock) have been recognized by local people since time immemorial. A total of 485 species of medicinal plants, which belong to 330 genera and 99 families, are reported from Jordan (project document: Oran and Al-Eisawi, 1994).Those identified medicinal plants are herbs, shrubs and trees. Flagship species would include Iris petrana, Jordan’s floral emblem, Iris negranesis, Moringa peregrina, Salvadora persicum, Cyclamen persicum, Aloe vera, Pinus halepensis, Juniperus phoenicia, Acacia arabica, Pistacia palestina and others. There are three main types of rangelands in Jordan: steppe rangelands (100-200 mm of average annual rainfall), desert rangelands (less than 100 mm), and mountainous rangelands (more than 200 mm). In the past, rangelands provided around 70 percent of feed requirements for animal grazing, but today it has declined to about 20-30 percent. This has been attributed mainly to overgrazing which accelerates the process of degradation particularly in low rainfall zones. At the same time, the number of grazing animals is constantly growing and results in more pressure on the limited resources of rangelands. Prolonged heavy grazing has changed rangeland both quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitatively, it results in fewer and smaller plants and low vegetative cover. Qualitatively, it results in a decrease in the most palatable and nutritious plants. Moreover, the availability of subsidized feeds had in the past promoted an increase in the livestock population. In the past, Jordan’s grazing lands were characterized by effective traditional land tenure systems and grazing rights which were associated with tribal institutions. These traditional arrangements protected the resource contributed to its conservation and continued productivity under the prevailing environmental and social conditions. With the transformation of these systems, elimination of traditional rights, and the declaration of grazing lands as state-owned land, sustainable use of land resources has been disrupted and new land uses have encroached. Since 1960, the Ministry of Agriculture has developed and managed 34 range reserves to protect and manage the rangelands plant species and conserve the ecosystem where these reserves includes all ecological zones in Jordan. Under this system, specialists determine the grazing capacity and grant grazing licenses for a specific period of time for a specified number of animals. Main Threats to Biodiversity: Natural terrestrial and aquatic habitats in Jordan have been lost, affecting the faunal composition of these areas. Biodiversity remains exposed to several threats which has led to a sharp decline in most of the Jordanian flora and fauna numbers, including the extinction of several species. The following are the main threats to biodiversity:

20

1. Land degradation, conversion and urbanization increasing development pressures,

combined with population growth, are accelerating habitat degradation, climate change, species loss and the general depletion of key natural resources, especially water as well as biodiversity. They are also affecting the livelihoods of local pastoral and agricultural communities, who now find traditional grazing areas, agricultural lands and hunting areas dissected and degraded by infrastructure and urban expansion. As a result, overgrazing, over hunting and deforestation are widespread, adding more pressure on remaining natural areas.

2. Tourism development, The tourism sector already poses a major threat to biodiversity, and given the planned exponential growth of the sector, this threat is expected to grow significantly. Although few of Jordan’s current visitors are nature tourists per se, tourists do visit protected areas and high biodiversity areas. Biodiversity is being threatened by mass tourism across the landscape as a whole, and the tourism footprint on biodiversity is expected to grow over time. Threats posed by tourism may be divided into two categories: direct threats and indirect threats. The prime direct threats from tourism activities to biodiversity are dude to Hotel and tourism infrastructure development: Development of hotels and other tourism, High visitor numbers, Effluent discharges. The indirect threats from tourism on biodiversity include; Roads development, Encroachment by local population that practice intensive resource use to support their livelihood needs. A further increase in agriculture and pastoralist activities is expected as the local population will aim to meet increased demand for food produce from tourism establishments, causing additional pressure on biodiversity from overgrazing, loss of the vegetation cover, wood-cutting, etc.

3. Climate change: There is “very high confidence” (as laid down by the IPCC) that climate

change is already affecting living systems. The responses of both fauna and flora span an array of ecosystems and organizational hierarchies, from the species to the community levels. Recent scientific research on global meta-analyses revealed significant range shifts averaging 6.1 km per decade toward the poles (or meters upward), and significant mean advancement of spring events by 2.3 days per decade.

4. Habitat Degradation and Destruction: Uncontrolled urban expansion occurs in the form of

deforestation and transformation of forests into agricultural and urbanized areas, due to the increase of Jordan’s population and industrial development. Overgrazing and extensive woodcutting, in addition to intensive agricultural practices, are major threats to wildlife in Jordan as they result in soil erosion and destruction of natural habitats. Unplanned mining and quarrying are leading to further habitat destruction. Uncontrolled vehicle movement has led to habitat destruction and has caused disturbance to mating areas of migratory species, decreasing successful breeding and number of migratory birds visiting Jordan.

5. Unbalanced water use and unplanned water extraction from surface and underground water

resources threaten many areas of Jordan and consequently, the habitats and micro ecosystems of both animals and plants. Pollution of surface and underground water

21

resources and aquifers due to agro-chemicals, sewage discharge and solid waste disposal causes further threat to the presence and reproduction of many faunal species.

6. Persecution of Wildlife, Trade and Spread of Disease : Illegal hunting has caused the

extinction of several species of Jordanian wildlife, and is considered to be one of the main factors threatening faunal biodiversity in the country. The impact of this threat further increased after the introduction of modern hunting techniques. Illegal trade of native species directly affects faunal populations. Additionally, the illegal dissemination of non-native species causes severe stress on some species and is a threat to their presence. Little is known about the status and transmission of diseases in wild animals. Increased contact with wildlife has led to the transmission of some diseases from livestock to wild animals and vice-versa, either through direct contact or predation. Further, several wild animal species in Jordan are thought to be vectors or reservoirs for some diseases. These diseases may affect both humans and wild fauna and could be a real threat to the distribution and relative abundance of certain species.

7. Invasion of Alien and Exotic Species: Introduction of alien species is a major threat to native

animal and plant species. Alien species and invasive exotics can become pests by adapting to habitat changes and causing destruction to natural habitats and agricultural areas. On the other hand, feral species, which invaded the country long ago, might affect their wild relatives through competition and interbreeding.

8. Weak Enforcement of Laws: Weak enforcement of laws is a perennial issue, despite the fact

that there has been a great improvement with the designation of Protected Areas (all forms) in recent years as a result of capacity building at the national and local levels. The problem of enforcement is mainly related to the ineffective application of the bylaws and regulations by the juridical systems. This is often justified in recent years by the argument related to the sensitive regional political conditions which require a more lenient approach to law enforcement in general and to the enforcement of environment laws in particular.

9. The Issue of Refugees; More than one million Syrian refugees have entered Jordan during

the last three years. They escaped the crisis in their country, leaving behind their livelihoods and most of their resources. The majority of these refugees were integrated into the Jordanian society, while a substantial number remained in designated refugee camps such as the Zaatari Camp in the Mafraq area. It is not an easy task to assess or quantify the specific impacts of the refugees on the various natural resources and ecosystems in the host regions, nonetheless, some of these impacts are easier to estimate than others. These impacts include pressures exerted on water resources, agricultural areas, rangelands, and open spaces. In the case of the refugee camps, most of the impact on natural resources is represented by water use (mostly for domestic purposes). From another point of view, the influx of refugees has increased competition with host communities on a large set of income sources and jobs. Further, the wave of refugees caused a sudden increase in the cost of services and real estate which impacted the purchasing power of host Jordanian communities, thus forcing them to exercise more direct and indirect pressures on natural

22

resources. One clear example is the increasing trend of illegal tree cutting to compensate for increased fuel prices, overgrazing of livestock in response to inability to secure high cost fodder, and illegal wildlife hunting as a reflection of reduced ability to procure domesticated sources of meat such as chicken and lamb.

23

2. Overview of the Study Area

The study area was initially identified by the project to constitute Shouwbak Development Area. It is rectangular in shape with 21 km in width and 42.5 km in length, with a total surface area of 892.5 km2. It lies between 30°41'6.23"N, 35°38'14.86"E to the east and 30°37'10.39"N 35°26'0.72"E to the west of its northern borders, and 30°20'10.51"N 35°49'19.06"E to the east and 30°15'59.29"N, 35°37'56.13"E to the west. According to Governorates, it lies within Tafila and Ma’an Governorates. Altitude ranges from as low as 610 m asl near Fynan to as high as 1570 m asl near Al Rashadeyed.

Figure 8. Location of the study area The study area falls within two governorates; Ma'an and Tafiela. Estimated population of the two governorates and their administrative sub-divisions are provided in Error! Reference source not found. at end-year. Both governorates do have young population regardless of immigration; population growth within the study area is relatively high.

Table 4: Population size of Ma'an and Tafiela by administrative regions

Area Population Size Tafiela Governorate 89400

24

Tafiela District 55690 Bsaira District 22980 Hasa District 10730 Ma'an Governorate 121400 Ma'an District 65710 Ma'an Sub-District 34340 Iel Sub-District 9410 Jafr Sub-District 8730 Mraighah Sub-District 8480 Athroh Sub-District 4750 Petra District 30710 Shobak Qasabah District 14280 Huseiniya District 10700

A Key issue of concern within the study are is the growing population of non-Jordanian labor force as this situation is causing demographic challenge and is affecting unemployment rates among locals. Tibini (2014) explained that low wages favor non-Jordanian labors and is dessive to locals, especially women who used to play a role in the farming of fruits. Locals of the study area are decendants of Bedouin tribes, namely; Al Hawitat, Bani Attyah, Al-Ammarin and Al-Maraiyah. These tribes have strong relationships and marriage between them forming strong community fabric.

The study area has diverse of ecological characters, and therefore different biological resources, conservation status and type and extent of land uses. Accordingly the study area has been divided into three types of conservation practices: designated areas I, which include protected nature reserves, rangeland reserves and archaeological sites, and designated areas II for important bird areas, and undesignated areas, which comprise un-delineated or un-designated areas. [Designated areas are areas of land identified delineated and determined by the government of Jordan for a specific land use].

As mentioned in the previous chapter, Jordan is influenced by four major biogeographic regions. Vegetation cover, soil texture, altitude and annual rain fall are among the major factors that shaped these biogeographic regions. Al-Eisawi(1985) and Disi & Amr(1998) agreed on the delineation of these four regions based on vegetation cover as well as animal distribution in Jordan. According to the biogeographical region map of Jordan, the study area is located within both the Mediterranean and the Irano-Turanian zones. The Mediterranean region lies between the Irano-Turanian from the east and the west (Figure 9).

25

Irano-Turanian

Mediterranean

Figure 9. Bio geographical map of Jordan showing the study area

• The Mediterranean biogeographic region: This region is represented by the mountain ranges extending from the north near Irbid, to Ra’s an Naqb in the south. It consists of forested vegetation with an abundance of Juniperus phoenicea, Retama raetam, Pistacia atlantica, Pinus halepensis, Quercus calliprinos,Quercus coccifera and Quercus ithaburensis. Open areas are characterized by high cover of the Thorny Burnet,Sarcopoterium spinosum. The altitude varies from 700 to 1500 m asl, with an average annual rain fall of 400-600 mm. The soil consists of several types, terra rosa, sandy and sandy-loamy due to erosion of the Nubian sandstone that dominates much of southern part of Jordan, and calcareous soil in the centre and north.

• Irano-Turanian biogeographic region: This region is represented by a narrow strip that surrounds the Mediterranean ecozone except in the far north. The Irano-Turanian region extends to the north-east, joining the Syrian Desert. The vegetation is dominated by Anabasis articulata, Artemesia herba-alba, Astragulus spinosum,Retama raetam,Urginea maritima, Ziziphus lotus, Zygophyllum dumosum and scattered Juniperus phoenicea and Pistacia atlantica trees.The altitude ranges from 400 to 700 m asl, with average annual rainfall of 50-100 mm. The layer of surface soil is very thin or absent in some instances and surface rockiness is very high.

Biodiversity data of the study area in described in terms of 5 segments as shown in Figure 10 below.

26

Segment I: Protected areas” Dana Biosphere Reserve”

The northern borders of the study area are located within the southeastern borders of Dana Biosphere Reserve (Figure 11). This is the largest nature reserves in Jordan with a total area of about 320 km2. It covers the Mediterranean, Irano-Turanian and the Sudanian penetration regions. Dana Biosphere Reserve hosts a variety of forest system including the Phoenician Juniper, Juniperus phoenicea and Ever Green Oak, Quercus calliprinosin the highlands and Acacia in the lowlands near Fynan and Wadi Araba.

Oran (2014) reported 383 plant species belong to 198 genera and 48 families from Tafilah area. This include several species of wild trees (Cupressus sempervirens, Ceratonia siliqua, Quercus

Figure 10. Location of the 5 studied segments n the study area. After Z.Amr, 2014 Rapid assessment study of Biodiversity of Shawbak

Figure 11. Protected areas within the study site (Cyan polygons)

27

sp. and Juniperus phoenica), as well asendemicspecies(Iris petrana). 833 species of plants are estimated to occur in Dana Biosphere Reserve, however, 670 species within 71 families have been documented (Annex 2). Initially, only 555 were reported (RSCN, 1994). Danin (1997)described Rubia danaensis, Micromeria danaensis, and Silene danaensis as new species to science from sandstone and limestoneoutcrops in the Dana Reserve. It is also listed as an Important Plant Area in the Middle East (Radfordet al., 211). The Mediterranean region showed the highest number of species, while the sand dune desert exhibited the lowest diversity. This section of DBR within the study area is dominated by the Phoenician Juniper, Juniperus phoenicea, which appears as scattered individuals above 600m elevation, where as its density starts to increase at higher altitude. Other large trees found on flattened areas are represented by the wild Pistachio, Pistacia atalntica, and the Evergreen Oak, Quercus coccifera

Dana IBA occupies about 883.15 km2, with a variety of biotops. The orthern borders of the study area lie within Dana IBA. Thirty-eight species of birds were listed to occur in Dana IBA according to Birdlife International IBA criteria . The Sooty Falcon and the Bearded Vulture are near threatened, the Egyptian Vultureis endangered, while the Lappet-faced Vulture and the Syrian Serinare vulnerable according to the IUCN Red list categories (Evans, 1994). Another IBA is Jarba IBA. This IBA occupies about 118.61 km2. Within the study site, it intersects around Al Mansheyah village and extends to the south-west. Only five species that fit the IBA criteria are known to occur in Jarba IBA. These are Lesser Kestrel, Upcher's Warbler, Syrian Serin , and Finsch's wheatear.

Within DBR, 93 species are considered rare, 33 are known or their medicinal use while 34 and 14 are edible and poisonous respectively (Table 5).

Table 5: Plant species categories in DBR (Source: RSCN, 1994)

Category Number of species

Rare species 93 New species to Jordan 3 Species restricted to Shawbak area

75

Endemic species 8 Species with known medicinal use

33

Edible species 34 Poisonous species 14

The mammals of Jordan are summarized by Amr (2012) with a total of 78 species. The mammals of Dana Biosphere Reserve (DBR) were extensively studied with a total of 51 species. Amr et al. (1996) identified the carnivores (Canidae, Hyaenidae and Felidae). The confirmation of

28

their presence is based on actual trapping (Vulpes vulpes, V. cana, Felis silvestris and Caracal caracal), finding skulls and remains (H. hyaena and Canis lupus pallipes).

Rodents of DBR were subjected to extensive study on the basis of stratification. This study showed a pattern of altitudinal distribution of rodents within Dana Biosphere Reserve with a total of 13 species (Yousef & Amr, 2005).

At least 14 species of bats were recorded from DBR. Species encountered are:Rhinolophus blasii,Rhinolophus clivosus, Barbastella leucomelas, Eptesicus bottae, Hypsugo ariel, Myotisnattereri, Pipistrellus kuhlii, Pipistrellus pipistrellus, Plecotus christii, Otonycteris hemprichii and Tadarida teniotis (Qumsiyeh et al., 1992; Benda et al., 2010).Catullo et al. (1996) investigated the status of the Nubian Ibex,Capra nubiana, in DBR with notes on its distribution within the area.

Key species that are known in DBR include the Nubian Ibex, the Rock Hyrax and Blanford's Fox in the mountainous region, while the Dorcas Gazelle is a key species in the lowlands in Wadi Araba . Species of conservation status according to the IUCN categories include Blanford's Fox, Caracal, The Striped Hyena, Nubian Ibex, Dorcas Gazelle, Blasius'sHorseshoe Bat, and the Egyptian Fruit Bat .

DBR is an important area for several migrant bird species, passing across the reserve twice a year during spring and autumn. Many birds originating from Europe and Russia migrate southwards to the Middle East and Africa during autumn. During spring, these birds travel back to their homelands northwardsfor breeding. Key species of DBR include the Griffon Vulture, Syrian Serin, lesser kestre, Short-toed Eagle and Chukar). At least 15 birds of prey were reported from DBR, some of which is considered rare or endeared such as Griffon Vulture, Egyptian Vulture, Short-toed Eagle, Golden Eagle, Spotted Eagle, Lesser Spotted Eagle, Honey Buzzard and the Imperial Eagle. Other birds of prey include the Kestrel, the Lesser Kestrel, and the Peregrine.

Thirty five species of reptiles and two species of amphibians have been reported from DBR They are represented in 14 families (Disi et al., 2001, Disi & Amr, 1010; Amr & Disi, 2011). Most of recorded species are under the Least Concern categories of the IUCN. However, two species have special conservation value, the Petra Rock Lizard, an endemic subspecies known from Petra area and its vicinity, and a relict viper, the Levantine Viper. Sinai Cat Snake reaches its more western range of distribution around Dana area. Key species of DBR include Sinai Cat Snake, Levantine Viper and Petra Rock Lizard.

Segment 2 : Designated Area “Fujij Rangeland Exclosure”

The area under investigation lies within the most western edge of the Irano-Turanian ecozone at an attitude of about 1267 m asl. The study site is located opposite to Al-Fugig Pastor Reserve on its western borders. It is bordered northwards by Al-Quadsyeh village, and is about 10 km from Shawabak township. Eastwards, the location overlooks the eastern desert. The soil is predominantly loamy calcareous with a mixture of xeric soil elements. The area is flat with gentle slopes towards the eastern side, with two small wadis. Both wadis enjoy relatively rich vegetation

29

cover that consists mainly of along other flowering plants. The site is heavily eroded due to continuous ploughing, grains cultivation and massive grazing. Signs of heavy degradation due to grazing and shrubs collection for fire are evident in some parts of the study area, where dead remain of Noaea mucronata and Artemisia herpa-alba .

The vegetation of this area is considered steppe, with both Irano-Turanian and Mediterranean elements (Baierle, 1993). At least three types of vegetation communities can be observed in this stretch; Mediterranean Batha steppe dominated by Ononis sp.,Teucriumsp. as well as others where precipitation exceeds 250 mm annually, Noaea, Cerasus and Astragalus dominate in areas above 1500 metres where rainfall exceeds 300 mm p.a. and snow cover can be more prolonged, while Artemisia steppe is mainly found in the southern half of the study area where rainfall is less and run-off greater(Baierle, 1993). Artemisia steppe also dominates grazed areas. Scattered and few flowering plants can be observed in this degraded habitats. This includes Noaea mucronata, Artemisia siberi, Gagea reticulata, Cardaria draba, Scorzonera sp., and Adonis sp

Few scattered information on the natural history of Shouback area were published along with other faunastic studies. In a study on the reptiles of southern Jordan, El -Oran et al. (1994) collected several snakes’ species from the vicinity of Shawabak. Disi et al. (2001) included records of various lizards from Shawabak area, covering both the Irano-turanian and the Mediterranean biotops. Additionally, Disi & Hatough-Bouran (1999) reported one species of amphibians and 42 species and subspecies of reptiles belonging to two orders and 12 families. They indicated that two reptilian species and 11 species of mammals were found to be rare and endangered. This site is deprived from any flagship species or any indicator species of rich and viable ecosystem. The area is heavily impacted by agriculture and grazing to its fullest. Only generalist species with no specific requirements were observed.

Most of the mammals of this degraded area include rodents (Mounds of the Palestine mole, Spalax ehrenbergi, were observed in the study site, along with burrows of Trisram jird, Meriones tristrami. Both species are common rodents within the area and are considered as agricultural pests. TheRed Fox, Vulpes vulpes, was observed on several occasions in this area.

The birds of this section were thoroughly investigated by Khoury (1998b). He reported 42 species from the vicinity of Al Qadesyeh to Shwabak, crossing Fujij area . Previous shorts reports included some records from this area (Hollom, 1959; Mountfort, 1965; Wallace, 1984; Andrews, (1995). Of the reported species, 13 species certainly bred, 16 probably breed, while seven possibly breed.

Eleven species of reptiles were reported from this region. Most of which are shared with DBR. However, all reported species have no conservation status . Around Shawbak Castel, the scorpion, Birulatus haasi was described as an endemic species to Jordan (Amr & Al Oran, 1994). This is a small-sized scorpion, with an average length of 20mm. Prosoma: heavily granulated. Median eyes small separated by two ocular diameters, lateral eyes absent. Body basically pale yellowish, median eyes surrounded by black pigment. On a global scale, this species is known only this region of Jordan, thus requires protection.

30

Segment 3 Large-Scale Agricultural Orchids Area

Although the biogeographical map of Jordan indicates that this area is within the Mediterranean ecozone, the area is definitely within the Irano-Turanian zone. This is based on the vegetation cover in the surrounding and adjacent areas. The vegetation cover is mainly Anabasis syriaca with scattered Noaea mucronata and Artimisia siberi.

Limited species of flowering species were recorded from this region. This is partly due to the sampling period. More floristic studies should be undertaken to identify the flora of this region. During our field visits in the past two years we identified about 17 species in cultivated wadi sytems, including invasive species and introduced. Flora of the grazed areas revealed the presence of at least 12 species, with Anabasis syriaca being the dominant species . This representation is typical for overgrazed land since Artimisia siberi is over dominated by the unpalatable Anabasis syriaca and Peganum harmala.

A man-made small dam is located between the apple orchids in Shawbak area) This catchment receives flood water from the western slopes. Trapped water is used for irrigation of the orchids and for small scale vegetable cultivation in the surrounding region of the dam by contractors coming from other regions. The vegetation of the dam area includes some 15 species, dominated by Tamarix aphylla and Typha sp. Other primary plants include Achillea fragrantissima, Artimisia siberi and Anabasis syriaca

Little is known about the biodiversity of mammals in this segment. However, it shares many elements with the Irano-Turaian and the dry Meditternian region of south-west Jordan. However, scattered records from Ash Shawbak area are scanty. Three species of batswere recorded from Ash Shawbak Castle (Benda et al., 2010). Other small mammals and carnvovres were recorded from the vicinity of Ash Shawbak (Amr, 2012).

Several species of raptors and soaring birds were observed in this segment. Some are passage migrant, summer visitors and some are considered resident. Two species are considered of conservation value, Egyptian Vulture and the Pallid Harrier.

Other breeding and resident species include the Collared Dove, Steptopelia decaocto, the Turtle Dove, Streptopelia turtur, Hoopoe, Upupa epops, Crested Lark, Galerida crsitata, Woodchat Shrike, Lanius senator, Rufous Bush Robin, Cercotrichas galactotes, Desert Finch, Rhodospiza obsolete, Greenfinch, Carduelis chloris, Linnet, Carduelis cannabina, House Sparrow, Passer domesticus, Short-toed Lark, Calandrella brachydactyla, and the Isabelline wheatear, Oenanthe isabellina.

Virtually no previous studies on the reptiles and amphibians were conducted within the boundaries of the study site However, scattered records of snakes and other reptiles can give an idea on the herpetology of the area (El-Oran et al., 1994; Disi et al., 2001; Amr & Disi, 2011). Segment 4 . Al Hisha Forest

Al Hisha is represented by scattered stands of the Palestine oak,Quercus calliprinos forest. At the turn of the 20th centaury, the Hisha forests were under sever clearing for the construction of

31

the Hijazi Railway. This caused a drastic decline and deforestation that can be seen at the present. It is also believed that intensified browsing by livestock and continued human impact reduced the vegetation and forests further to steppe following the collapse of the Byzantine town life at Petra (Fall, 1990).

Some historical trees are still surviving around Al Mansheyah area, and protected by the locals. Large trees such as the Wild Pistachio, Pistachia atalntica and the European Olive, Olea europaea, can be seen in this area. Oran (1994a) gave a comprehensive account on the flora of Shawbak area. She reported a total of 381 species belong to 59families and 223 genera. The study area covers the entrance of Shawabak town, as Manasura, A'il, Mqari'a, AI-Fujaij, and Al-Hisha al-Baida.Other data on the flora of Al Hisha area are included in Ruben & Disi (2006).

Al Hisha represents the most southern limit for the distribution of Quercus calliprinos, andthe Wild Pistachio, Pistachia atalntica. It is considered as southerly remnants for the Mediterranean forests in southwest Asia (Fall, 1990). Few scattered stands or individual trees of the European Olive, Olea europaea, and Karoob, Ceratonia siliqua, can be observed. In addition, other shrubs such as Daphne linearifolia and the Spiny Hawthorn, Crataegus aronia, are common in this type of forest. Of the most distinctive plants, Iris petrana, an endemic species to Jordan, with high populations in the Petra and Al Hisha area (Oran, 1994b). Other endemic species includeIris edomensis, Pistachia khinjuk, Origanum dayi, Teucrium leucocaldum, Cousinia moabitica and C. postiana. Iris petrana and Quercus calliprinoscan be considered as key species for Al Hisha area.

The mammals of segment 4 is very similar to section 4, perhaps with less wild animals due to high population within this section.

Bird Data on this segment could be derived from studies that focused on Petra area. As for the avifauna, the most comprehensive study was conducted by Wittenberg (1987). He reported 122 species of birds from Petra area. 35% of the resident species reache thier most northern range of distrubion including the Palestinian Sunbird, Nectarinia asea, and Cercomela melanura, and Oenanthe leucopyga, while 15% reach their mostsouthern range such as Parusmajor, Petronia petronia and Cardueliscarduelis. Carpodacus synoicus reaches its most westerly distribution and the Syrian Serin, Serinus serinus, reaches its most eastern range. Wallace (1984) reported 13 species of birds from the vicinity of Shawbak. Two amphibians and at least 27 reptilian species occur in this area) The most distinctive species in this area is the Petra Lizard, Phoenicolacerta kulzeri petraea. This is an endemic subspecies to Petra, Shawbak and Dana areas, and is considered as key species that requires conservation.

Segment 5. New Development Area North of Ma’an This section of the study area is located to the north of Ma’an city, mostly to the west of the Desert highway. Recent developments within this area include the establishment of Al Hussein University, Pilgrims city and a student's housing complexes. Also a water harvesting dam was also constructed within this section aiming to rehabilitate rangeland and pastoral habitat During

32

the last few decades several querying projects were established within this section by local investors and).

This segment is located within the Irano-Turanian biogeographical region. It is characterized by its arid nature and upper soil covered by gravel or small-sized chert or flint. Vegetation is confined to narrow wadi systems directed from the south west to the north east. Maximum altitude is about 1170 m asl in the mid southern end of the site, while minimum altitude 1115 m asl around the mid south eastern borders.

The main wadi is known as Wadi Abu Al Jarathem, extending from south-west crossing the concession area at its south-eastern borders. This wadi is relatively rich in vegetation, while other tributary wadis are dry and hold either no or very scarce vegetation. The overall area is barren with vegetation cover that does not exceed 1% of the total area.

Quarrying is main disturbing activity in the site. Three large scale operational quarrying areas are located within the study area. One in the most upper north border, the second and the largest is located in the north western borders and a third about 2 km from the second quarrying site. In the mid central area, a small deserted quarrying site was observed.

To the mid south-eastern borders, Al Jardaneh dam is located. This dam receives its flood rain water from Wadi Abu Al Jarathem and the other small wadi systems. Vegetation of this site is dominated by Tamarisk,Tamarix aphylla, with scattered Iranian Syrian Rue,Peganum harmala, Ecballium elaterium, the squirting cucumber, and the Spiny Zilla,Zillia spinosa.

A total of 38 species belonging to 14 families were reported from the study site.These species were found along Wadi Abu Al Jarathem. Altitudinal variations within the plant communities along this wadi were noted. The lower part of this area is dominated with Diplotaxis acris along with Farstia aegyptia. Other associated species with lower abundance include Atriplex halimus, Anabasis articulata, Noaea mucronata, Centaurea aegyptiaca, Filago pyramidalis, Ifloga spicata, Onopordon sp., Zillia spinosa, Ephedra alata, Thymus bovei and Astragalus spinosus. The upper part of the wadi systemsis dominated by Achillea fragrantissima withThymus boveiand Artimisia siberi . Other species were found in this section with low abundance include Diplotaxis acris. The upper section was dominated by Phlomis brachyodon associated withAchillea fragrantissima,and Thymus bovei. This section includes the highest number of species. Another 26 species were also reported from this section.

The study site in particular was not studied in details in previous faunal studies. However, scattered records from Ma'an area are scant .In the arid Ma'an area, most studies were conducted in Al Jafr area by Atallah (1967) with additional updates by Amr (2012). Eight species of rodents, one hare, one hedgehog and two carnivores were reported from Al Jafr area and the arid region of Ma'an. Only one species of bats was recorded from Ma'an area near Al Hussain University (Amr, 2012). Virtually no previous studies on the reptiles and amphibians were conducted within the boundaries of the study site. However, scattered records of snakes and other reptiles can give an idea on the herpetology of the area (El-Oran et al., 1994; Disi et al., 2001; Amr & Disi, 2011).

33

So far, 7 snakes (including the False-horned Viper), and seven species of lizards and geckos have been recorded from the vicinity of the arid parts of Ma'an. The recorded species are desert adapted species that are known to occur along the Irano-Turanian region and could be extended further into the Saharo-Arabian biotope.

Land uses in the study area

Land uses within the study area broadly constitute rangeland, agricultural, residential , industrial and protected designated areas. However mixed uses are noticeable given than it falls mostaly within rural categories (Figure 2).

It worth mentioning that land uses are changing rapidly. The agricultural and industrial activities are expanding within the area driven by economic incentives by the government to maximize benefits from natural resources and land availability. This is important as part of the government developmental strategy to enhance the area contribution to national economy and Key to enhance the welfare of locals.

Accordingly ongoing developments are expected to generate more and more pressures to the local environment driven by economic drivers and investment magnitude.

Figure 2: land uses within the study area

34

Agriculture Industrial Residential Mixed Land Use

PART II.

3. The Biodiversity Mainstreaming Toolkit

Biodiversity and poverty reduction are intrinsically linked and demand an integrated approach. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has long emphasized the need for integrating, “or mainstreaming’, biodiversity into national and local development and poverty reduction strategies, most recently in its new Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011-2020). Mainstreaming biodiversity is about more than applying “safeguards” to ensure that poverty reduction and development processes do no harm to biodiversity, but also recognizing the potential of biodiversity for achieving desirable development outcomes. It is thus as much a political issue —requiring a process of institutional change — as it is a technical one. Although there has been limited experience in biodiversity mainstreaming to date, many lessons can be learned from environmental mainstreaming efforts. www.environmental- mainstreaming.org) . A useful way to start addressing the challenge of biodiversity mainstreaming or to add emphasis and impetus to existing efforts can be to establish a tool it to be used by environmental ‘champions’, or change agents to address key leaders and decision-makers from different stakeholders. Such change agents can work formally and informally to examine what biodiversity mainstreaming means in the country context, identify examples of approaches used to date in the country, consider drivers, opportunities and problems, and make recommendations. Types of Change agents and their classification can be classified And their role determined according to the AMOEBA tool kit described by Atkisson 2010. (see appendix 1 for using AMOEBA tool kit). Before considering the mainstreaming biodiversity issues, the following questions need to be answered by yes or no:

Is there a need to do more to ensure biodiversity conservation are integrated in development decisions? (Why have a mainstreaming tool)

If yes, then

Is there difficulty in finding the right approaches using tools, methods or tactics? (How to design an easy tool to address the problem)

If yes , then

Does the experience of using such approaches, for environmental mainstreaming exist? (what are the capacities required for the change agents?)

Follow the change agent’s tool kit and the mainstreaming tool kit.

The Figure 13 is a general and simple representation of the mainstreaing issues.

Stand-alone initiatives for biodiversity mainstreaming try to strengthen

35

environmental organisations or environment-development pilot projects, redressing the imbalance of environment’s invisibility and lack of influence. They can be highly relevant where environmental mainstreaming is at an early stage and a ‘champion’ is needed. They can be easier to fund-raise for, monitor and manage. But ultimately they are difficult to ‘scale up’. On the other hand, initiatives that aim right from the start to be truly systemic, such as national sustainable development strategies, can be good at mapping needs and rehearsing new approaches, but do not themselves provide all those needs. They often come across as an imposition or conditionality if pushed by ‘heavyweight’ external players such as the World Bank, IUCN. Their likelihood of success is higher where environmental mainstreaming has already reached a significant stage, where the institutional and political climate is right for moving from an ad hoc approach to a systemic approach to mainstreaming. (http://www.environmental-mainstreaming.org/Environment%20Inside/Chapter%207/chapter7.html).

Biodiversity Mainstreaming tool: Figure 14 shows a flow chart to be followed of the steps to be followed to develop a biodiversity mainstreaming tool. Each of the items in the Figure is discussed below with a relevant example to mainstream biodiversity in Jordan, particularly in the case study.

3.1 Goals of mainstreaming biodiversity:

The main goal of this toolkit is to integrate biodiversity mainstreaming approach into public-sponsored and poverty reduction activities that promote the enhancement of the quality of the life of rural communities. The outcome would be improve economic productivity of land and enhance gender empowerment of communities affected by land degradation and unsustainable use of natural resources. Biodiversity conservation in Jordan Figure 14. flow chart to develop a biodiversity tool kt

Figure 13. Representation of the mainstreaming issues

36

during the past two decades has primarily focused on the creation of protected areas managed

by the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (RSCN). It is important to emphasis on the fact that there generic complexities of mainstreaming, i.e. its multi-issue, multi-layer, context-specific nature. There is a need to tailor approaches to local context, to be clear on the specific mainstreaming goal, and to involve the right actor. Developing a mainstreaming toolkit requires mutual collaboration between biodiversity and development and ‘Integration’ . In this way it can be considered as a process of political and institutional change, where cross-sector coordination is essential. Often biodiversity mainstreaming is led by the environment sector, including biodiversity, cuts across key sectors (for example, agriculture, mining, forestry). Therefore it requires cross-sector coordination to strengthen links and actions between. sectors and associated public and private sector institutions that affect and/or benefit from biodiversity.

37

Change agents need to present compelling information, analysis and recommendations to be simple and understandable by the economists and planners leading on development planning. This can involve economic valuation of biodiversity services . (Box 1). 3.2. Desired Biodiversity outcomes

Once the need for a main goals of streaming tool is assessed and proved to be required, the outcomes need to be identified, these might be:

• Central and sectorial institution consider biodiversity issues in their plans and programs

• Improve economic productivity of land • Enhance gender empowerment of

communities affected by land degradation and unsustainable use of natural resources

• Improved investments in biodiversity conservation

• Improved biodiversity information in case of action

Such outcomes would require capacity building on the following levels:

• Individual levels • Environmental organization,

governmental and no governmental • Sectoral and central authorities • Public media and eider enabling

environment

Effective mainstreaming identifies, mobilises, builds on and builds up the above elements of capacity. But such capacity cannot be developed overnight. Thus any mainstreaming ‘project’ needs to see itself as playing a particular role in a long-term process that will already have begun and that will necessarily continue. In this way, it is important to work towards a systemic approach with using system thinking.

3.3.Diagnosis of the current state of biodiversity mainstreaming: identifying problems

Box 1. Valuation of ecosystem services in Jordan

In 2012, RSCN in cooperation with the Ministry of Environment commissioned a strategic pilot study valuation of the ecosystem services for two prime protected areas of Dana and Ajloun Protected Areas in Jordan. This assignment represented a strategic decision by the RSCN, in light of the decreasing level of support and understanding of various national and local agencies and groups to the benefits and functions of ecosystem services as represented by the protected areas, to pro-actively attempt to provide a valuation of these services. The areas in which the valuations took place were (i) Ajloun Woodland Reserve (with the Yarmouk reserve for further application) and (ii) Dana Biosphere Reserve (with the planned Masuda or Shoubak reserves for further application). After review of the various methodologies available for valuation of ecosystem services, the Surrogate Market Approaches were selected to be the most relevant and viable ones within the scope of time and capacity available. The total value for the year 2010 for Ajloun Woodland Reserve was calculated to be 305,373.47 JD. The total value for the year 2010 for the Dana Biosphere Reserve was calculated to be 1,724,497.65 JD. The value for Ajloun seemed low as a standalone figure. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that these values are just a small part of the total monetary and non-monetary values of the protected areas. The value for Dana was more robust, as would be expected for a much larger reserve. The Fifth National Report on the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity, September 2014

38

Development and financial sectors and technical staff in energy, irrigation and mining ..etc have little attention of the vital links between resource use and biodiversity, and between the benefits of biodiversity conservation, economic development and poverty eradication. In this development sector little attention is given to biodiversity in action plans and programs and environmental issues are seen as luxury ones with no appropriate appreciation of the impacts of biodiversity loss on livelihood and national economy

Stakeholders outside the conservation field are unaware of importance of biodiversity and /or conservation action plans and CBD requirements according to the country’s commitment to CBD. They provide inadequate budgetary allocation to biodiversity conservation efforts. Accordingly, impacts on biodiversity are huge due to irrational practices, e.g. overgrazing, unsustainable agricultural and water management practices and overexploitation of vegetative cover, and poor consideration on biodiversity issues and environmental concerns in general in national plans and polices.

The above trends lead to the following problems in the study area:

Biodiversity is under threat as habitat is lost due to over grazing, ploughing for rainfed cultivation of barley, and subsequent accelerated soil loss and degradation. Although much of Jordan Highlands was once covered by Mediterranean evergreen forest in the west which gradually becomes a natural steppe in the east, since the Nabatean and Roman periods most of the indigenous vegetation has either been cleared for wood and agriculture or been degraded through inappropriate land use.

Degradation in Arable Land: Less than 5% of the total land area considered arable. As a consequence it has few natural resources and agricultural productivity is greatly reduced. Therefore, a major challenge for the HKJ is to promote the sustainable use of natural resources for agricultural purposes. This challenge is being made harder by the ongoing processes of degradation which combine to undermine any social and economic development gains. About 41% (36,000 km2) of Jordan’s total land area is characterized as degraded of which 22 percent of the total land mass is classified as moderately degraded.

Jordan is ranked as one of the 5 poorest countries in water resources. The available renewable water resources are continuing to drop. Competition between demands on limited fresh water quantities is also increasing. In 2002, total annual water withdrawal and total water use was estimated at 1,020 million m3, up from 984 million m³ in 1993 and 619 million m³ in 1986. In 2004 the National Water Master Plan reported that agricultural water withdrawal accounted for 64 % of the total water withdrawal, and 36% was recorded for domestic, industrial and tourism purposes. The deficit is increased by the unsustainable practice of overdrawing highland aquifers, resulting in lowered water tables and declining water quality.

Rangeland degradation is driven by overgrazing. According to the Ministry of Agriculture, early grazing of range plants, ploughing of rangelands to establish ownership rights, property rights, urbanization, uprooting of bushes for use as fuel wood, arbitrary movement of vehicles, quarries and mining activities are also causing degradation of rangelands. The impact of overgrazing on

39

the vegetation is evident from the excessive uprooting of the green matter (grass and bushes), leading to reduced seeding, reduced regeneration, and the consequent loss of plant production in the following year. Also, there is a change in the floristic composition, and a decline in volume and frequency of plants. In addition, a much stronger decline in productivity occurs during a drought compared to non-degraded rangelands.

Soils in almost all the Southern Highlands are calcareous and low in organic matter. Because of increasing cultivation pressure on land, natural replenishment of nutrients and maintenance of organic matter during fallow periods is now insufficient to maintain soil productivity over the long term. The low nutrient status of many soils is further exacerbated by the scarce use of inorganic fertilizers and manure. Furthermore, soil productive capacity is reduced because of physical degradation, structural and porosity damage, crust formation and compaction of the soil.

The proposed project area is heavily dependent on seasonal, scarce and variable rainfall. Drought years sharply reduce yields and leave the smallholders food insecure. Consecutive droughts from 1998 to 2001 highlighted the vulnerability of much of Jordan’s agriculture, although good rains during 2001 and 2002, and heavy winter rains in 2002 and 2003 have lifted the immediate threat.

Due to dramatic human pressure, sustainability of farming practices has worsened in the Southern Highlands, exacerbating pressure on land and increasing land degradation processes. The poorest farmers are increasingly growing cereals on marginal (from the agro-ecological view) areas. Wheat and barley are now grown with little to no rotation, with no nutrient replenishment, and at places avoiding even fallow. Small landholding sizes and topographic features of the area tend to oblige longitudinal mechanized tillage operations along the slopes. Sustainable rangeland management practices have become a memory of the past due to growing human as well as animal population, and also as a consequence of the disruption of the traditional living and production patterns of the Bedouin populations

Each of the above problems needs to be discussed with a wide range of stakeholders to understand its fundamental drivers and actions required. A relevant diagnostic tool can be used for this purpose. This diagnostic tool is regarded as a self-assessment or an evaluation by external by an independent reviewer to identify and analyze the relevant policy documents to provide a sufficient basis for reviewing how well biodiversity issues are currently being addressed in development decisions. This document review needs to be complemented by engagement with a wide range of involved or affected stakeholders from government departments, NGOs, communities, private sector organisations and so on. Each question includes some suggestions of the kinds of issues to explore at each stage of the diagnosis. This will provide a situation analysis that can be the basis for debating priorities with relevant stakeholders.

At this stage it is important to select the approach to use in a complex issue like Biodiversity. Different approaches are used according to the complexity of the issue. When the issue is not complex and the outcome is clearer, then one way communication suggesting the actions to take is appropriate, e.g. to address prohibition of trade on a certain endangered species. However when planning to engage stakeholders in the re-introduction of large mammals, or the restoration of a forest landscape, then more participatory approaches are appropriate (Figure 15). Therefore

40

When uncertainty and complexity increase, more pilot projects, participatory research and joint innovation and management are required

Figure 15.. Demonstration of the selection of approach to address complex issues like biodiversity ( Les Robinson) http://media.socialchange.net.au/people/les/what’s_best.pdf

3.4. Identify sectors and development goals into which biodiversity

concerns are to be mainstreamed

This section is targeting a particular production sector such as agriculture, forestry or mining; a particular development challenge such as food security or climate change adaptation; or a broader economic development or poverty reduction strategy. It might entail working with government agencies, civil society and private sector organizations Table 6.Entry points for mainstreaming at different levels

Level Planning/policy target

41

3.5. Stakeholders involved in the study area:.

Stakeholders are all sectors that are affected or affect biodiversity. A check list should be carefully prepared to build strategic alliances and potential partners. In light of the social and economic characteristics of the population, the main intended stakeholder beneficiaries comprise the poor

women and men within the following three categories prevailing (i) small and medium farmers; (ii) landless households depending mainly on natural resources for their livelihoods; and (iii) other disadvantaged groups (Box 2).

Each of these groups has little access to facilities that are oriented towards livelihood improvement. Considerable emphasis would be placed on involving a wide range of stakeholders, drawing in agencies, organizations and communities active in conservation. Specifically, at the national level key stakeholder involvement would come from the Ministries of Planning and International Cooperation (MOPIC), Environment (MOE), Agriculture (MOA) and Water Resources (MWRI) and the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (RSCN). Additional national level support would also be expected from university groups, especially from the Departments of “Agricultural Economics” from Jordan University and the Department of Natural Resources and the Environment from Jordan University of Science and Technology. At the local level, stakeholders would include districts, villages and community groups.

Each of the above stakeholders will need a separate tailored way to address biodiversity due to the variability of each stakeholder prejudices and biases. A single message is rarely suitable for all. Therefore, a potential course of action to be deemed viable by a stakeholder or a decision maker must be aligned with their strategic interest. E.g. governmental priorities, strategic

International level Funding Agencies GEF, World Bank, USAID National National Government Poverty reduction strategy, national

development plan, national vision Development assistance agencies UN development assistance , IUCN, Sub-national Local government Mayor of Local communities, rural villages,

city councils Sectoral Ministries Development plans, strategies, policies

and budgets Private sector Investment companies, Public sector NGOs, Forums and eco-clubs

Box 2. Stakeholders Stakeholders are those people or organizations which are vital to the success or failure of an organization or project to reach its goals. Primary stakeholders are: (a.) those needed for permission, approval and financial support and (b.) those who are directly affected by the activities of the organisation or project. Secondary stakeholders are those who are indirectly affected. Tertiary stakeholders are those who are not affected or involved, but who can influence opinions either for or against.

The “forgotten stakeholders” are internal stakeholders. Direct superiors of the CBD focal point and the NBSAP coordinator. Planning staff in one’s own ministry who allocate funds and staff. Colleagues in one’s own ministry responsible for other conven-tons, e.g. Ramsar, UNFCCC, CITES or CBD related issues. CBD tool Kit Section3 How to engage

42

interests, country’s development needs, job creation, poverty alleviation, rural development, ecotourism plans..etc

Change agents would be prepared to answer the three likely questions that stakeholders would ask:

1. Why should investments be allocated to biodiversity conservation?

2. What is the importance of biodiversity conservation in their sectors?

3. What would be the benefits they gain form biodiversity conservation n their sectors?

At this step is it important to Shape a communication strategy. Effective communication is essential for bringing about the changes in policy, norms and behavior that are required for biodiversity mainstreaming. There must be strong communication throughout the mainstreaming stages; it is vital during problem articulation, stakeholder engagement and business case development. It is important to identify who needs to change, what behaviors need to change, and what decisions, methods and instruments best bring about these changes.

3.6. Develop a business case

Biodiversity is often unrecognized, unvalued and considered unimportant in economic and development decisions making process. Therefore, it is critical to prepare a compelling and credible business case to address decision makers. This business case should be formulated to contain the importance and value of biodiversity to society, and a core strong message that catch tangible benefits. This business case should be a short well written document or a short verbal presentation .

Compile facts, figures and real life stories as compelling evidences of biodiversity benefits. Data on threatened and endangered species, endemism, economic importance of native species, rated of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation. Numbers and figures compared to other countries (Box 3).

Box 3. Biodiversity messaging that speaks to key policy priorities of most governments: Biodiversity provides myriad unique benefits that are critical to socioeconomic development, including: •• Service delivery — delivering key ecosystem services through a green, cheaper and low-energy infrastructure, eg pollination and water provisioning. •• Risk reduction — including disaster and climate risk reduction in key sectors eg providing a diverse resource base that offers alternatives if one food crop fails. •• Direct financial value — through certain products and species that may be tradable, eg medicinal plants and animals and species attractive to tourists. •• National economic diversification — through habitat, species and genetic diversity that present options and alternatives, eg in tourism and forestry. •• Intrinsic and cultural value — related to identity, tradition, social cohesion, recreation and spirituality. Source: Entebbe Statement on Biodiversity in Development Planning (2013)

43

Such data compilation will involve both interpretation of existing data in new ways, and collecting and analyzing new data. Social data are also important to be included, e.g. the dependence of poor households on biodiversity for income, the poverty rates..etc. The risks and the cost of inaction is would be a a good approach to justify benefits in investing in biodiversity. Other data may include:

• Values and benefits in relation to national policies, • Trends and changes in Biodiversity over time • Different land use scenarios and its relation to GDP • Costs of biodiversity loss under different development scenarios • Cost-benefit analysis

It is important in this step to identify elements of biodiversity to be mainstreamed. This depends on the problems identified which might concern particular species (endangered species, endemic species, invasive species, ) populations (medicinal plants), habitats (rangelands), ecosystems (drylands) and ecosystem services (provisional and supporting) , and/or genetic diversity. Any of these might be damaged by current development, and/or present potentials which are being ignored by development policy and activities. The following Table (Table 7) is a summary of the data to be included in the business case

Information on biodiversity issues, benefits and values

Impact assessments on biodiversity, strategic analysis, sustainability appraisals Spatial analysis of the past and present conditions with comparisons Monitoring and assessments tools that are relevant to on-going practices

Planning and organization Proposed plans e.g. protected areas, rotational grazing, organic farming etc. Sustainable land use planning Legislations and legal tools and guidelines National Sectoral Plans and Policies Relevant to SLM – Jordan (Appendix II) Policy analysis Corporate sustainability reports and appraisals

Deliberations and engagement

Participation by: • Stakeholders meetings (formal and informal) • Conferences and awareness workshops • Public/private partnerships • Multi-stakeholder consultations

Biodiversity management control

• Conflict management resolutions • Integrated environmental management • Indicators and bench marking • Eco-labeling of biodiversity products

44

• Business supply chains

Voluntary and indigenous biodiversity approach

• Local knowledge • Analysis of internal regulations

3.7. Identify enabling factors for mainstreaming Existing enabling factors that need to be worked with might include: • Political will and leadership • Media and public perception and awareness of values • Inter-sectoral coordination • Lobbying by interest groups • Transparent, accountable and inclusive governance • Stakeholder participation, and • Availability of funding.

3.8. Develop a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system for biodiversity Mainstreaming A proper M&E system needs to be in place to guide the mainstreaming process and assess its success. M&E should focus on the approach, enabling factors and outcomes. The lessons learnt through the M&E process can help fuel a process of continuous improvement and provide valuable experience to share with others. It is good practice to get your plans for mainstreaming peer reviewed by people who are doing the same thing in another government ministry or in another country. They will be able to share what has worked well or not so well for them (www.iied.org/nbsaps). The main items of the Monitoring and evaluation are summarized in Table 8

Table 8. Monitoring and Evaluation questions

Relevance Does the mainstreaming process meet the needs the stakeholders? To what extent the mainstreaming goals were in line with the priority of the stakeholders?

Efficiency Do the methods of communication used lead to engagement of stakeholders? Which of the communication method used was appropriate to which stakeholder?

Effectiveness To what extent the does mainstreaming lead to increased community support for action to tackle biodiversity loss? To what extent did the engagement method encourage

45

Encourage stakeholders to infuse biodiversity in their polices and plans?

Outcome To what extent has the mainstreaming led to sustainable biodiversity concern? What are the positive and negative outcomes of mainstreaming biodiversity?

Sustainability To what extent did the process of mainstreaming led to a long-term change?

The next step is to identify what information is need to answer the above questions. Monitoring questions (indicators) and where this information will come from (data sources). It is important to consider data collection, in terms of the type of data and quality. Data sources could be stakeholders themselves

46

References

Al-Eisawi, D. (1998). Wild Flora of Jordan and Neighbouring Countries. Amman, Jordan. Commercial Press, Jordan Press Foundation.

Al-Eisawi, D.M.& Takruri, H.R. (1989). A checklist of wild edible plants in Jordan. Arab Gulf J. Sci. Res. Agric. Biol. Sci.,B7:79-102.

Amr, Z. S. & Disi, A. (2011). Systematics, distribution and ecology of the snakes of Jordan. Vertebrate Zoology, 61:179-266.

Amr, Z. S. (2012). Mammals of Jordan. 2nd Edition. Al Rai Press. Amr, Z. S., Kalishaw, G., Yosef, M., Chilcot, B, J. & Al-Budari, A. (1996). Carnivores of Dana

Nature Reserve (Carnivora: Canidae, Hyaenidae and Felidae), Jordan. Zoology in the Middle East, 13:5-16.

Amr, Z.S. & Al-Oran, R. (1994). Systematics and distribution of scorpions (Arachnida, Scorpionida) in Jordan. Bollettino di Zoologia, 61:185-190.

Amr, Z.S., Hamidan, N. & Quatrameez, M. (2004). Nature conservation in Jordan.Denisia, 14: 467-477.

Andrews, I. J. (1995).The Birds of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Andrews, Musselburgh.

Atallah, S.I. (1978). Mammals of the Eastern Mediterranean: their ecology, systematics and zoogeographical relationships. Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen, 26:1-50.

Atiksson, A 2010. The sustainability Transfomations (pub. ) EarthScan . London Washington DC. ISBN 978-1-84971-244-6.

Baierle, H-U. (1993).Vegetation und Flora im Siidwestlichen Jordanien. J. Cramer, Berlin & Stuttgart. Published Ph.D. Thesis.

Benda, P., Lučan, R. K., Obuch, J., Reiter, A., Andreas, M., Bačkor, P., Bohnenstengel, T., Eid, E. K., Ševčík, M., Vallo, P. & Amr, Z.S. (2010). Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Part 8. Bats of Jordan: fauna, ecology, echolocation, ectoparasites. Acta Societas Zoologicae Bohemicae, 74:185–353.

Disi, A.M., Modry, D., Necas, P. & Rifai, L.(2001). Amphibians and Reptiles of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan: An Atlas and Field Guide. Chimaira, 408pp.

Disi, A. M. & Amr, Z. S. (2010). Morphometrics, distribution and ecology of the amphibians in Jordan. Vertebrate Zoology, 60:147-162.

Disi, A. M. & Hatough-Bouran, A. (1999). Biodiversity of the terrestrial vertebrate fauna of Petra (Jordan). Časopis Náradního muzea Řada přírodovĕdná, 168 (1-4):83-98.

47

El-Oran, R. M., Al-Melhem, W. N. & Amr, Z. S. (1994). Snakes of southern Jordan. Bollettino di Zoologia,61(4):359-367.

Fall, P.L. (1990). Deforestation in southern Jordan: Evidence from fossil Hyrax middens In:Bottema, S., Entjes-Nieborg, G. & Van Zeist, W., eds., Man's Role in the Shaping of the Eastern Mediterranean Landscape: Balkema, Rotterdam, p. 271-281.

Hollom, P. A. D. (1959). Notes from Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Antioch. Ibis 101: 183-200.

Jonathan Davies, Lene Poulsen, Björn Schulte-Herbrüggen, Kathy Mackinnon, Nigel Crawhall, William D. Henwood, Nigel Dudley, Jessica Smith, Masumi Gudka, 2012 . “Conserving drylands Biodiversity “ International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, United Nations , Environment Programme- World Conservation Monitoring Programme (UNEP-WCMC), and United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). http://www.unccd.int/Lists/SiteDocumentLibrary/Publications/drylands_bk_2.pdf Khoury, F. (1998b). The breeding birds of the Sharra Highland Plateau, Jordan. Sandgrouse 20

(1): 22-29.

Mountfort, G. (1965). Portrait of a desert. Collins, London.

Oran and Al-Eisawi, 1994 . Quoted in the project document “Mainstreaming Biodiversity in the Sylvo-pastoral and rangeland landscapes in the Al Sharah Agricultiral Development Region of Southern Jordan”. GEF medium Sized Project. November 2010

Oran, S. A. (1994a). Vascular plants of Shawabak Province (Jordan). Bull. Soc. Sc. nat. Tunisie, 24: 95-125.

Qudah, B. (2000): Soils of Jordan . Draft Report, unpublished quoted in Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profiles FAO report 2006 by Mahmoud Abusetta Al-Jaloudy

Qumsiyeh, M. B., Disi, A. M. & Amr, Z. S. (1992). Systematics and distribution of the bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of Jordan. Dirasat, 19(2):101-118.

RSCN, (1994). Baseline study on the flora of Dana Nature Reserve. Ruben, I. & Disi, A.M. (2006). Field Guide to the Plants and Animals of Petra. Petra National

Trust, 224 Pages.

The Fifth National Report on theImplementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2014 .). http://www.iucn.org/about/union/secretariat/offices/rowa/?18371/FIFTH-NATIONAL-REPORT-ON-BIODIVERSITY-IN-JORDAN

Wallace, R.E. (1984). Patterns and timing of late quaternary faulting in the Great Basin province and relation to some regional tectonic features. Journal of Geophysical Research 89: doi: 10.1029/JB089iB07p05763. issn: 0148-0227

Wittenberg, J. (1987). Zur Vogel-Fauna einer semi-ariden Gebirgsregion in Süd-Jordanien (Petra und Umgebung) (Aves). Verh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg, 29:5-49.

48

Yousef, M. & Amr, Z. (2005). Altitudinal stratification and habitat selection of rodents in Dana Nature Reserve, Jordan. Zoology in the Middle East, 34:13-18.

Appendix 1. (Produced by Atiksson 2010)

AMOEBA is a toolkit within the ISIS Accelerator whose purpose is to teach the principles of “change” in a sustainability context, and to support change agents in planning for the successful introduction and adoption of sustainability ideas, programs, and initiatives.

The primary purpose of Amoeba is to empower Sustainability Change Agents, by helping them to understand the role they are playing, the roles played by others in their communities and organizations, and the dynamics affecting the innovation and change process. Amoeba helps Change Agents plan more effectively for the introduction of new ideas. By packaging several useful concepts regarding cultural change process together in one place, simplifying them, and making it easier to pass on this knowledge, Amoeba also empowers Change Agents to empower other Change Agents, to achieve greater multiplier effects. AMOEBA stands for:

A = Adapt the Innovation

M = Motivate the Change Agents

O = Organize the Transformers

E = Easy Does It for the Mainstreamers

B = Build the Momentum

A = Avoid the Reactionaries

First it is important to understand what makes any innovation (in this case biodiversity mainstreaming) more or less likely to be adopted by people (in this case developers and decision makers). It is demonstrated here in this Figure:

Starting Point: "The process starts here, with an Innovator, often a single individual or an organization who has a new idea or invention and want to spread out to implementation." [Point to lower left corner of chart.] Members of such organization are the adopters of the idea, or transformers

• Take-Off: "Once the Transformers have starts informal communication about the innovation (in this case biodiversity mainstreaming) , it starts to hit Take-Off mode. At this point -- after about

49

5-15% of the culture has adopted the innovation -- the diffusion process has a life of its own. Information about the innovation travels by word of mouth or the force of marketing and advertising (use the mainstreaming tool). It becomes a trend, or a fad, or perhaps even a whole new paradigm or way of life. At this point, even the Innovator probably couldn't stop the process, because so many other people have gotten involved."

• Saturation: "Eventually the Mainstream catches on, more and more people adopt the innovation, and finally it reaches a saturation level, where virtually everyone who is going to adopt the innovation has done so."

• Key Lesson: "The moral of the story is this: you don’t have to change the whole world all at once. The key is to get a good innovation, and to get it to Take-Off. Then the diffusion process does the work."

• Innovator: "The Innovator lives on the edge, nd is the source of new ideas. Innovators are often obsessed with their ideas, or passionate about keeping them pure. For these reasons, they are often not very good at promoting their own ideas. (in this case biodiversity conservationalists) That's why they need Change Agents."

• Change Agents: "Change Agents translate the Innovator's ideas in a form that can sell. They move outside the mainstream, but they know how to communicate with the mainstream. The classic model of a Change Agent is a consultant, or volunteers working in protected areas who studies the works of new thinkers, and translates them into a form that the client can digest. Change Agents are concerned with promotional strategy. But to succeed, they need to connect with Transformers."

• Transformers: "Transformers are the early adopters in the mainstream. They are open to new ideas, and they want to promote positive change. But they also do not want to sacrifice their own credibility or their position of influence if they have one. They adopt those innovations they think the Mainstream will ultimately adopt. They serve as gatekeepers into the mainstream. Transformers work to “install” the idea so that it becomes part of the system ... and transforms it. When Transformers adopt a new idea, others are likely to follow them. In this case they are the managers of NGOs who manage volunteers or a civil society representative member who have passion to nature, or the senior executive in a particular ministry who hires the consultant, and with an eye toward whether the ideas the consultant brings will both improve and enhance her or his own reputation."

50

• Mainstreamers: "These are members of the majority, busy with the basic essentials of routine work. Mainstreamers only adopt a change when the incentives are right, and when the people around them are also adopting it . Mainstreamers are neither for ,nor against the change, in principle. In fact, they are often unconscious that change is happening. They adopt the innovation when they see that 'everybody else is doing it.'" In this case they are the members of the NGO or the employers in a certain ministry that have an impact on biodiversity.

• Laggards: "Laggards are basically Mainstreamers who don't like change in general. They're the opposite of the Transformers. They are happy and comfortable with the status quo. Laggards delay adopting a change as long as possible. They find the current way of doing things comfortable and familiar and switch to a new way only when they have to. They are not really against new ideas; they just like the old ideas better Diffusion theorists call them 'late adopters.' They basically change when they can no longer avoid it, because the Mainstream has already changed." In this case they are the employers or staff (usually the old aged ones) in a ministry or governmental agency who is deeply involved in their work in a bureaucratic way

• Reactionary: "Reactionaries react powerfully against change, because they believe it will harm their work procedures -- or harm them personally. Reactionaries believe that if the change occurs, they will lose something valuable. ‘Something valuable’ could include money, power, or a psychological value (for example, their feeling of being an authority on the old way). Reactionaries generally are perceived as having a vested interest in keeping things as they are, or in moving things in the opposite direction. They actively resist the adoption of the innovation, by any means in their power -- sometimes very cleverly. They often have an economic or power interest in the status quo; or have their sense of identity or core values invested in it. They go along with the change only if it is unavoidable, and then very late in the process." In this case they are investors of private firms in industry, mining, or even landlords who practice intensive agricultural practices and overgrazing.

• Controllers: The decision makers that set the rules for works, and what its purpose is. If the innovation appears to affect the work s guiding purpose, or to change its basic rules, a Controller can ‘awaken’ – and become a ‘Super-Transformer’ or ‘Super-Reactionary’. For most change efforts, it is best to avoid Controllers. But one must be prepared for to meet them, with good answers to tough questions.

• Iconoclast: "The Iconoclast is the person who identifies the problem that the Innovator is trying to solve. The word means 'attacker of cherished beliefs.' Iconoclasts attack the status quo. Where the Innovator and Change Agent is trying to pull the amoeba in a new direction, the Iconoclast is kicking it from behind. A critic of the way things are, who sees problems, calls attention to them, and critiques those who are perceived to be the cause of the problem.Iconoclasts are generally skeptical, and often angry. They attack Reactionaries ... but they sometimes also attack Change Agents. Change Agents need to avoid negative attention from them, and use them strategically. A classic example is the private journalist or Media, who attacks the powers that be and exposes the problems in a society.

• "Wild Card" Roles: "In addition, there are two other roles - the Recluse and the Curmudgeon - that operate within the amoeba of culture. They usually don't actively engage with the change

51

process, but they can still affect it, often in unpredictable ways.". Curmudgeons believe a change will never be adopted ... or, if it is adopted, that it won’t work ... or that it might make things worse instead of better. They are fundamentally pessimistic about change. Curmudgeons can ‘infect’ a change effort with ‘negative energy’. Most Curmudgeons are actually Innovators and Change Agents who failed in the past.)

Recluse: "The Recluse is something like a monk, (in this case the sheikh in a mosque, poet, or peace activist, who is more preoccupied with the quest for a great truth than with something so mundane as changing the world." Recluse have an influence on people’s trend. And Curmudgeon: "Curmudgeons are cynical grouches in the community For them, nothing will ever change, and if it does, it probably won't be for the better. Their motto is, “Why bother?” They've seen it all -- perhaps they even used to be idealistic dreamers themselves -- but now they mostly complain. They act as wet blankets in any change process.

For the mainstreaming purpose all the above characters have to be identified. Their roles be set out and practiced in a systematic way. The following need to be considered for predicting how if the mainstreaming procedure does or does not work. Robert Gilman has developed an "equation" to explain this "Gilman Equation". (Source: Robert Gilman, cited in AtKisson, Believing Cassandra (1999 and 2010)

It says that in order mainstream an innovation, the following must be true:

The Perceived Value of the Old Way

minus The Perceived Value of the New Way

must be greater than

The Perceived Cost of Change

Here's a short way to write it:

N – O > CC

The Gilman Equation suggests that there are three basic strategies to pursue, to make an innovation more likely to be adopted. In this case:

1. Increasing "N" -- Promote the Perceived Value of biodiversity . This is commonly known as marketing, which focuses on communicating the benefits of the biodiversity conservation to the target organization.

2. Decreasing "O" -- Critique the Perceived Value of ignoring the values of biodiversity in polices and plans. This is done by highlighting the problems, shortfalls, and failings associated such policies, or things that the This is what Iconoclasts do.

3. Decreasing "CC" -- Reduce the Perceived Cost of Change. This can be done by making it easier for organizations to switch to biodiversity conservation, through different practices, subsidies, step-by-step guides, etc.

52

Map out who -- or what -- might be playing each role in the context of mainstreaming biodiversity, and what strategic approaches would be taken to empower Change Agents, enroll Transformers, or neutralize Reactionaries, respectively.

The Sustainability Transformation: How to Accelerate Positive Change in Challenging Times (Earthscan 2010) by Alan AtKisson. For the complete book visit www.earthscan.co.uk/atkisson

53

Appendix II. NATIONAL SECTORAL PLANS AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT (SLM )- JORDAN

Policy

Issued by

Year

Integration of SLM Principles/Key Points National Environmental Strategy

(NES)

Ministry of Municipal, Rural Affairs and Environment

1992 Catalogued environmental pressures and problems. Contained more than 400 specific recommendations and suggested actions in the field of environmental protection and conservation. Identified legal and institutional strengthening in environmental sector as key priorities. Focused on cross-sectoral priorities such as water resources management. Linkages with other national policies and strategies remains weak indicating limited cross-sectoral integration of environmental principles.

Jordan was first country in the Middle East to complete NES, which included recommendations for strengthening environmental protection in the following strategic areas:

• Constructing a legal framework for environmental management, which would include a National Environmental Policy, strengthening the Ministry of Environment, and the creation of an environmental impact assessment process;

• Setting up an institutional framework for environmental protection and conservation (Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature);

• Expanding the role for protected areas through the creation of new nature reserves and increasing the environmental and conservation scope of existing

54

National Environmental Action

Plan (NEAP)

Ministry of Planning/ Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs and the Environment

1996 Identified 41 environmental priority needs, which included those for cross-sectoral environmental management capacity building and 37 sectoral environmental actions. Three priorities were directly related to SLM: (1) development of national land use planning system; (2) preservation of forested land; and, (3) urban and regional land use planning.

NEAP’s purpose was to guide the government’s environmental policy and investment decisions and to define the priority actions (19 in total) for dealing with the major environmental issues (as determined through an intensive workshop). The main recommendations were:

• Expand the protected areas network and allow RSCN to manage the planned 12 nature reserves;

• Develop reserve management plans to support habitat conservation;

• Promote local community involvement in the

National Water Strategy (NWS)

Ministry of Water & Irrigation

1998 The strategy stressed the need for improved water resources management with particular emphasis on the sustainability of present and future uses. Special emphasis was given to protect Jordan’s water resources against pollution, quality degradation, and depletion.

The MWI would adopt a dual approach of demand management and supply management, with advanced technology being increasingly used to enhance resource management capabilities. Water and wastewater projects associated with regional peace processes, including the scheme for the development of the Jordan Rift Valley, would be accorded special attention and due respect would be given to the provisions of international law as

55

National Poverty Reduction Strategy (NPRS)

Ministry of Social Development

2001 Policy objectives included improving social safety net for the poorest sections, improving employment opportunities, providing greater access to education and ensuring access to healthcare. The Poverty Reduction Strategy does not reflect a clear understanding and appreciation of the “sustainable livelihoods” concept and linkages between poverty eradication and natural resources management.

National Rangeland Strategy (NRS)

Ministry of Agriculture (National Rangeland Strategy Committee)

2001 Six key policy proposals set out in the NRS as follows:

• Participation needed of those using rangelands in policy formation, strategy development and implementation;

• The rangeland tenure system needs to be changed so that users have a long-term stake in sustainable use;

• The management of change and uncertainty in rangeland conditions needs to be properly undertaken;

• The sustainable use of groundwater and the harvesting of surface water is required;

• Proposals for the rangelands need to fit with agricultural and macro-economic policies; and,

• Government support is needed for rangeland user groups.

The underlying assumption in each element of the strategy is that there must be sustainable management and use of the rangelands. Subsequently, more detailed proposals emerged from seminar discussions, that were part of the NRS preparation, as follows:

56

National Agenda 21

(NA 21)

The General Corporation for the

Environment Protection (now MOE)

2002

National Agenda 21 provided a framework document that stressed combating desertification as a national priority. Proposed its integration into national policy and called for involvement of all stakeholders in the implementation of programmes and actions. Introduced ‘integrated resource management’ by linking sectors of water resource management, land resource management, agricultural resources, energy resources and mineral resources.

The outline of the NA 21 failed to integrate biodiversity issues within the ‘integrated resource management’ section, and placed biodiversity under ‘natural and cultural heritage’ providing few linkages with natural resource management.

NA21 outlined several key areas related directly to natural resources and dryland issues and promoted a participatory approach to ensure sustainability. It outlined an integrated approach to environment and development that incorporated objectives of poverty alleviation and sustainable human development. NA21 provided a framework for combating desertification as a national priority and promoted its integration into national policy. It proposed programmes and actions for rangeland resources; combating desertification; conserving forested areas; water conservation; conserving biodiversity; research for sustainable agriculture; data gathering and networking; and land use policy, legislation and enforcement.

NA 21 also placed concerns for human welfare at the centre of national efforts to combating desertification with linkages between desertification, poverty and food security, migration and demographic factors.

57

National Strategy for Agricultural Development

Higher Socio-economic Council

2002

The NSAD (2000-2010) placed a stress on sustainable agriculture and protection of natural resources. Comprehensive and covered most issues of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in addition to combating desertification. Proposed the following:

• Conservation of land, water and natural vegetation through sustainable activities that ensured long-term agricultural production;

• Conservation of Jordan’s biodiversity in conjunction with sustainable agricultural development;

• Improvement of the technical and managerial capabilities of the agricultural sector to cope with climate and environmental changes and adapt to their consequences;

• Halting unplanned expansion of urban areas on agricultural land which contravene current legislation of prohibiting building on agricultural land (through denial of services to these buildings);

• Combating desertification and protecting the environment, agro- biodiversity and agricultural resources, in order to secure sustained development; and,

• Conservation of agricultural land by controlling soil erosion in steep mountainous areas, through improved agricultural practices and water conservation measures.

National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

Ministry of Environment

2002

Proposed projects come under the five following categories which have strong linkages with SLM principles:

• Protection and sustainable use of biological resources; • Reducing the impact of mining on biodiversity; • Promoting integration of land use planning and water

resources; • Development within the existing land tenure system;

and, • Working towards a biodiversity-oriented society.

The NBSAP was formulated in response to the obligations of UN Convention on Biodiversity and was developed as a guide to the implementation of national biodiversity conservation. The strategic goals of NBSAP were:

58

• To conserve biodiversity and use biological resources in a sustainable manner;

• To improve the understanding of ecosystems and increase resource management capability;

• To manage natural resources and distribute responsibilities across agencies;

• To maintain or develop incentives and legislation that supports the sustainable use of biological resources; and

• To share biodiversity conservation knowledge with other countries.

National Population Strategy

Higher Council for Population

2002

The National Population Strategy included seven strategic sections with one section focusing on ‘Population, the environment and natural resources’. Main objectives of this section included:

• Reducing the imbalance between water supply and demand;

• Reducing the imbalance between the local demand for and the local supply of food products;

• Increasing the level of efficiency in the utilization of local energy resources;

• Achieving a better balance between population size and environmental conditions, where the population in the arid zone is characterized by a high birth rate; and,

• Achieving a better balance in the geographical distribution of the population between urban and rural areas.

59

National Tourism Strategy (NTS)

Ministry of Tourism

2004

The NTS set out a mission that "Jordan will develop a sustainable tourism economy through a partnership of government, the private sector and civil society to expand employment, entrepreneurial opportunity, social benefits, industry profits and state revenue". The strategy stated that tourism development will be sustainable and characterized by:

• Preserving the environment and adopting ecologically sound policies;

• Respecting the lifestyles and cultures of the people and communities; and,

• Balancing the principles of profits with the need for socially responsible business practices.

The strategy does not take into consideration some basic sustainable tourism principles such as carrying capacity, conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, developing guidelines for management of natural heritage sites, and considering ecotourism sites as assets.

The NTS for 2004‐2010 relied on private‐sector initiatives to develop tourism into a major income‐generating sector. Whilst the NTS placed an emphasis on ecotourism it did not address the need to monitor or measure the impact of tourism on biodiversity, for example. The strategy did highlight the importance that community-based tourism would play.

National Youth Strategy (NYS)

Higher Council for Youth

2004

The NYS included nine themes including one on ‘youth and environment’. Key strategic objectives of this theme included:

• Enhancing environmental knowledge between youth and its accessibility to educational needs with a special focus on early stages of education;

• Increasing the impact of youth in developing and implementing national environmental policies and programmes; and,

• Maximizing the role of youth in sustainable use of environmental resources for socio-economic development.

60

National Energy Strategies

The Royal commission and the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources

2006 and 2007

The 2006 National Energy Strategy focused on the development of renewable and sustainable energy sources and linkages between environmental protection and the transition to sustainable energy. It did not include issues of climate change and the opportunities for both environmental protection and sustainable energy through the Kyoto Protocol. However, the strategy is considered to provide a suitable road map for sustainable energy production and consumption.

The main goals of the energy strategy were to:

• Diversify local energy resources; • Increase the potential contribution of local energy

resources to national demand; • Reduce dependency on oil imports; and, • Enhance environmental protection.

An updated Master Strategy of Energy Sector for the period 2007-2020 was prepared in 2007 by The Royal Commission. Whilst not directly linked to climate change obligations, the following proposals were related to GHG mitigations and some adaptation measures: • Alternatives to crude oil and oil byproducts supply; • Proceed with a renewable energy law to stimulate the

private sector to increase its investments in this field; • Implement wind energy projects for electricity

generation; • Complete necessary studies for thermal solar energy

projects; • Focus studies on biogas fuel for the industrial and

transport sector; • Create a fund to aid renewable energy projects; and, • Implement Energy Consumption Efficiency

Programmes.

National Agenda

National Agenda Steering Committee

2006 The National Agenda was a comprehensive political and socio-economic reform plan, which sought to achieve a consistent and consensual basis for broad-ranging policies for the period 2006-2015. Sustainable national development was the aim, although there were ambitious targets to reach GDP of 7-8% by 2012 and 2017 (from 5%

61

in 2004), greatly reducing the rate of poverty, a slashing of public debt and unemployment, and significant increases in spending on health care and education.

A number of initiatives were outlined to address ‘Environmental protection and Sustainability’ as follows:

• Strengthening the regulatory and institutional framework to support environmental sustainability;

• Improving waste management policies; • Strengthening measures to improve air pollution; and, • Improving the effective management of nature

reserves.

It contained a specific section on environmental sustainability including arid/desertified zones and focused on six issues including desertification and sustainable land management. In this respect policy and proposals for sustainable land management and desertification were:

• Survey and define criteria for desertification hazards and map these accordingly;

• Establish a desertification monitoring system; • Conduct socio-economic surveys in drought-

threatened areas; • Establish alternative livelihood measures that could

provide incomes in drought prone areas; and, • Document traditional knowledge on soil protection

measures and combating desertification.

National Strategy and Action Plan for Drought Mitigation

Ministry of Agriculture

2007

Established a high committee headed by the Prime Minister to follow-up on drought mitigation measures with emphasis on training and capacity building of members.

The aim of this strategy is to supervise the effects of drought occurrence and establishing standards for declaring drought. Training programmes on drought issues and drought mitigation and capacity building were included in this strategy. However, there was little progress on the activation of early warning systems and identification of regional and national networks for monitoring/assessing

62

drought.

National Capacity Self Assessment for Global Environmental Management (NCSA)

Ministry of Environment

2007 The NCSA was developed within the framework of a GEF initiative in order to assess capacity constraints for implementing the three international environmental conventions on biodiversity, climate change and desertification. It included suggested strategic programmes and actions evolving from the analysis of national capacity constraints. The NCSA action plan covers six programmes for cross-cutting capacity constraints:

• Knowledge management, outreach and networking; • Technical training and technology transfer; • Developing and maintaining a national coordination

mechanism; • Using research for policy making; • Resource mobilization; and, • Local community empowerment.

A total of 20 suggested projects were developed. Those that related to desertification (that covered the requirements of the three international environmental conventions) were:

• An integrated knowledge management system; • A comprehensive outreach and networking

programme; • An integrated public awareness and education

programme; • A technology needs assessment; • A comprehensive training programme on priority

technical concepts; • A sustainable coordination mechanism between

implementing institutions; • Technical directives for biodiversity, desertification and

rehabilitation of degraded lands as part of the EIA

63

process; • National assessments for adaptation measures to

climate change for biodiversity and desertification; • Market-based economic tools for environmental

management for biodiversity, desertification and climate change; and,

• Comprehensive capacity building and innovation programmes for community management of natural resources based on traditional knowledge.

Hashemite Fund for Development of Jordan Badia Master Plan

The Hashemite Fund for Development of Jordan Badia

2008

The plan highlighted the socio-economic challenges in the Badia and their integration to natural resources management with a focus on water and rangeland resources. Proposed diversification of sources of income and exploring alternative income earning possibilities in the Badia to reduce dependence on livestock keeping. This will reduce some pressures on the rangelands and help to ease land degradation from overgrazing. It included nine specific themes including one theme on ‘youth and environment’.

State of the Environment Report (SOER)

Ministry of Environment

2008 Jordan’s first SOER that complies with Article 4 of the Environment Protection Law No. 52 (2006) and adopts the United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) latest methodology ‘Drivers-Pressures-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR)’. The principal objectives of the SOER were: to present key information on the State of the Environment in Jordan for 2006; to raise environmental awareness; and, finally to contribute towards a State of the Art Environmental Data Base.

The final section outlined some ‘suggested policies’ that would form part of the Executive Strategic Plan, prepared by the MOE for 2007-2010. This included seven strategic objectives that covered improvements to air quality (mainly by reducing unleaded gasoline), water quality, waste management (solid, hazardous, medical and chemical), nature and biodiversity conservation, measures to combat desertification, promote clean industry and green production, enhance environmental management and

64

establish the Environmental Protection Fund.

National Strategy for Agricultural Development (NSAD)

Ministry of Agriculture

2009 The NSAD (2009-2014) focused on the role of agricultural development in conserving biodiversity, protecting water and soil resources and combating desertification. To this end policies were oriented towards the protection of agricultural resources, increasing grain and fodder production, intensifying water harvesting/maintaining water resources to face drought conditions, improving family food security and limiting rural poverty, enhancing agricultural research (especially into plant protection) and supporting programmes initiated by the Agricultural Credit Corporation (for micro-credit financing). Projects were also identified to protect forests, including reforestation schemes, and to expand and rehabilitate grazing lands in arid areas, as the development of water harvesting techniques and reducing water loss/enhancing irrigation channels. Agriculture was seen to be able to renew and sustain the environmental balance. To this end it was recognised that the growth of organic farming could play a role in reducing chemical usage and its negative effects on biodiversity and the environmental balance.

The MOA and the National Center for Agricultural Research and Guidance would have prime responsibility for implementing the projects and programmes. The Agricultural Credit Corporation (ACC) would receive funding to support micro-credit financing. The private sector was seen to play an increasingly important role in

65

agricultural development within the NSAD, including in water resource development.

National Water Master Plans and Strategies

Ministry of Water and Irrigation/Jordan Water Authority

2004 and 2009

Three national water master plans strategies have been produced since the first in 1998. In 2004 the National Water Master Plan was prepared which provided more of a focus on environmental impact than before. Subsequently, the Jordan Water Authority produced a strategic plan for 2008-2012, which focused on operational efficiency.

In 2008 a new national water plan, ‘Water for Life 2008-2022’, incorporated climate change obligations into its strategy and policies, especially the prospect for reduced water resources in future.

Protected Areas Policy Framework

Ministry of Environment

2010 The policy framework relates to country’s designated Protected Areas (PA) system. The key principles behind the policy framework are as follows:

1. The protection of the country’s major ecosystems is of the highest national development priority;

2. Conservation of the areas of natural heritage and biological diversity play an essential role in global responsibility towards the nature conservation;

3. Protection of cultural heritage is a critical contribution towards maintaining cultural identity and tourism development;

4. The conservation and management of natural and cultural resources must include the participation of local communities; and,

5. It is critical that citizens are educated about ecosystems and their cultural heritage so that the local population can benefit from them.

Some of the key policies were as follows:

66

• Private and community managed areas could be officially recognised as part of the PAs system;

• Climate change sensitive environmental and socio economic monitoring and evaluation systems needs to be put in place parallel to PAs planning;

• Were tourism is a primary PA activity, then the site should be managed using ecotourism and sustainable tourism principles;

• PAs will demonstrate a commitment to increasing environmental awareness;

• A participative management plan will be prepared for each JPA.

Environmental Strategy Implementation Plan (ESIP)

Ministry of Environment

2007 and 2011

The ESIP constitutes a new NEAP to replace that originally prepared in 1996. The first ESIP was produced in 2007 for the period 2007-2010 and the second updated version covered 2011-2013.

The ESIP has been tied in with climate change issues and had outlined seven strategic objectives: (1) contribute to the achievement of sustainable development; (2) develop and implement policies and legislation; (3) enhance monitoring and inspection and enforcement of legislation; (4) develop and implement information management programmes; (5) raise public awareness and education; (6) promoting national, regional and international cooperation; and (7) develop and strengthen the capacity of the MOE.

The second ESIP made the link between climate change and desertification by proposing to protect ecosystems and the conservation of biodiversity, combat desertification and promote sustainable land management. More specifically the ESIP proposed a project in the Zarqa River Basin as part of its adaptation to climate change and to meet the MDGs.

67

68