Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya ...

concentrate on synergistic and direct linkages between people and biodiversity conservation.There is a rich field here for interventions and the piloting of new approaches, while building onprevious conservation efforts in the hotspot. There are opportunities to promote agriculturalpractices that improve production and enhance biodiversity. These practices include both old andnew techniques. They have been brought together under the umbrella term “ecoagriculture” byMcNeely and Scherr (2003). There are also opportunities to exploit synergies between differentinvestment priorities. The following investment priorities were identified under this strategicdirection.1.1 Evaluate community-based forest management initiatives in the hotspot to determine bestpractices. Community-based conservation initiatives include efforts to involve and capacitatelocal communities in the management of biodiversity sites (mainly forests) in the hotspot. Bothin Kenya and Tanzania, new policies are promoting various forms of community participation inforest management (joint forest management, community-based forest management andparticipatory forest management). There are at least 32 such initiatives in the hotspot. Underthese arrangements, community user rights are negotiated in return for responsibilities such asself-policing, with extraction rates based on estimates of sustainability. The effects oncommunity livelihoods, law enforcement and biodiversity protection are all routinely expected tobe positive, but a scientific consensus on this expectation is yet to be reached. Strong opinionsare much commoner than hard data. Scientific testing of participatory management strategies inthe hotspot is badly needed. CEPF will prioritize research and analysis rather than financingapplied projects under this investment priority.1.2 Promote nature-based businesses that benefit local populations. Experience within thehotspot has shown that nature-based businesses that benefit local populations can buildsignificant constituencies for conservation. Because of extreme poverty, even small incomesfrom such businesses can make real differences in local attitudes towards conservation, providedthat the linkage between revenue and the continued existence of the biodiversity resource isdirect and obvious. It follows that revenues must be reasonably reliable and that any resource usemust be sustainable. Examples include beekeeping, tourism, butterfly farming (Gordon &Ayiemba 2003), cultivation for essential oil extraction and domestication of medicinal plants.1.3 Explore possibilities for direct payments and easements (conservation concessions) forbiodiversity conservation in the hotspot and support where appropriate. Recent reviews (e.g.,Ferraro & Kiss 2002) argue that direct payments for conservation are more cost-effective andprovide more benefits to biodiversity than community-based interventions such as IntegratedConservation and Development Projects. Under direct payments and easements,communities/land owners are paid directly for the right to manage the site for conservationpurposes under leasehold or alternative arrangements. This eliminates the expenditures that sooften inflate project costs to no good end and the net benefits that reach the communities arecommensurably greater. Running costs become the responsibility of theorganization/corporation/individual that makes the payments. Direct payments and easements arerelatively untried in Africa, so any attempt at their implementation would need to be on a pilotbasis. CEPF could facilitate advice on the appropriateness of this approach in this hotspot andfund training and assistance for local organisations to act as honest brokers in the negotiation ofany such arrangement, but could not provide the resources for the direct payments. These56