Gender Dynamics in Conservation Agreements: Biodiversity ... · CAs are a form of direct incentives...

GENDER INTEGRATION IN CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS: BIODIVERSITy AND REDMEAT INITIATIVE IN NAMAquAlAND, SOuTh AfRICA

Gender Dynamics in Conservation Agreements: Biodiversity and Redmeat Initiative in Namaqualand, South Africa

Juliette Crepin & Malinda Gardiner, Conservation Stewards Program, Conservation International

CASE STUDY

2 | JulIette CrePIn & MalInda GardInera

| 3 GENDER INTEGRATION IN CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS:

BIODIVERSITy AND REDMEAT INITIATIVE IN NAMAquAlAND, SOuTh AfRICA

SUMMARY1, 2

Conservation South Africa (CSA) is implementing a conservation agreement with members of the Leliefontein community, in the Kamiesberg Municipality of Namaqualand. The strategy centers on negotiated agreements between CSA and individual farmers, with the overall objective of improving livestock and ecosystem management in this fragile environment. The agreements have been used to provide incentives to farmers to reduce the size of their livestock herds (consisting principally of goats and sheep), and to restore and protect important wetlands that are critical to the hydrological system in the area.

The process used by CSA and the farmers to arrive at mutually satisfactory agreements did not explicitly incorporate a gender approach. A critical step in the project was the actual signing of agreements. Once all the terms were established through a process that included both community-level and individual engagement, each individual decided whether or not to sign an agreement and participate. This is in contrast to most conservation agreement projects, in which typically a representative body or leadership signs an agreement on behalf of the entire community. Only a subset of the community chose to sign agreements at first; later additional members elected to join the project after seeing how it functioned and what the implications were for participants. Thus, the signing of agreements provided a clear signal of consent, and the decision to sign was a highly individualized consideration based on each person’s perspectives and comfort level with the available information. Only after the initial set of agreements was signed did implementation activities commence.

1 By Juliette Crepin, Manager, Conservation Stewards Program, Conservation International

2 By Malinda Gardiner, Sustainable Agriculture Coordinator NGED with thanks to the BRI members of the Leliefontein community.


RESEARCh METhoDoloGY

This case study examined the Biodiversity and Red Meat Initiative (BRI) project in Namaqualand, South Africa. The BRI project involves a conservation agreement with farmers from the town of Leliefontein, implemented by Conservation South Africa (CSA) with funding principally from the Conservation Stewards Program (CSP) at Conservation International (CI). The case study was compiled by Juliette Crepin of CSP, and Malinda Gardiner of CI South Africa who had the benefit of familiarity with the project.

The information for this study was gathered during 4 field visits that took place in April and May of 2014 to Leliefontein. These visits had multiple purposes, as they involved not only gathering the data for this report, but also conducting assessments of the implementation of activities. The field information was collected through individual interviews with community representatives. The discussion was guided by a prepared set of questions and topics but remained flexible. Malinda Gardiner led discussion in Afrikaans. The participants in these discussions were: Joseph Cloete, James Stevens, Jan van Neel, Berend Stewe, Katriena Schwartz, Annie Rooi, Sarah Beukes, Katie Beukes, Amerelize Lucas and Molly Beukes. Additional information was gathered through existing documentation. Qualitative analysis of interview notes allowed Juliette Crepin to elaborate this report.

BACkGRoUND

The Conservation Stewards Program (CSP) supports a global portfolio of projects, all of which are structured around the same approach: conservation agreements, or CAs. CAs are a form of direct incentives for conservation, in which conservation investors provide a negotiated benefit package in return for conservation actions by communities. CAs link conservation funders (governments, bilateral agencies, private sector companies, foundations, individuals, etc.) to resource owners whose decisions influence conservation outcomes.

Benefit packages typically include funding for social services like health and education, as well as investment in livelihoods, often in agricultural or fisheries sectors. Examples of conservation commitments in CAs include forgoing forest clearing, adopting particular farming or fishing practices, and participating in patrolling and monitoring activities. Rigorous monitoring is central to the approach to verify compliance that justifies ongoing provision of benefits, and to track both biological and socio-economic impacts. CI has been implementing CAs since 2002, and the current CSP portfolio includes projects in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Pacific, benefitting nearly 35,000 people and protecting nearly 1.5 million hectares of natural habitat.

In South Africa’s Namaqualand region, CSA is implementing a CA in a priority area of 21,000 hectares in the Kamiesberg Municipality. Situated in the Northern Cape province, Namaqualand is known for its grasslands (veld), which provide ideal habitat for unique flora that bloom by the thousands every spring—1,000 of the area’s 3,500 wildflower species are found nowhere else in the world. For the rest of the year, most of Namaqualand is a semi-arid desert where people sustain themselves by livestock farming or working in diamond and heavy-minerals mines on the coast. The region’s biodiversity is supported by the Kamiesberg mountain range which is an important rain catchment surrounded by wetlands. Sporadic rainfall and semi-arid climate make the wetland resources of Namaqualand vital to local people.



Namaqualand farmers produce some of the finest quality meat in South Africa, but are challenged by water scarcity and land degradation. Erosion, overgrazing of the veld, and plowing of wetlands - the most desirable area for cropping – are undermining the long-term supply of vital ecosystem services. Degradation and poor land-use practices undermine the ability of the region’s farmers to adapt to increased temperatures and aridity anticipated under future scenarios of climate change. Furthermore, the area’s mining industry is scaling down and mine workers are returning to livestock farming, which further increases pressure on the land.

CI-South Africa (which since has become Conservation South Africa, or CSA), began working in the Kamiesberg Municipality in the second half of 2008. The priority area it identified includes 8,300 hectares comprised of communal lands used by the Tweerivier and Leliefontein communities, as well as 12,700 hectares that are under private ownership. The area is the catchment for two rivers, the Groen and the Buffels, with numerous wetlands that hold water and release it in the dry summer months. The area is home to one endemic vegetation type (Kamiesberg Granite Renosterveld), one near-endemic vegetation type (Namaqualand Granite Fynbos), 59 endemic plant species and numerous endemic insect species. The area is also habitat to the Cape leopard. Key services provided by this ecosystem include grazing to small stock farmers (the biggest economic activity in the area), supplies of firewood, building materials and medicine, and of course fresh water, which is of great importance in this arid region.

The main threat to biodiversity in communal areas is overgrazing by small stock (sheep and goats), whereas the main threat on privately owned land is plowing in sensitive areas. Other threats to ecosystems in both communal and private areas include uncontrolled burning, indiscriminate predator control, and invasive alien species, especially introduced trees that consume large amounts of water.

CI-South Africa (now CSA), developed a strategy using CAs with farmers on communal land to reduce stocks and thereby reduce grazing pressure, and with private farmers to develop land management plans and restore degraded wetlands. The overall project also includes training programs on fire management and alternative predator control methods. Every individual who signs a CA becomes a member of the Biodiversiteit and Rooivleis Inisiatief (BRI, which translates to Biodiversity and Red meat Initiative).

Currently, the BRI project includes CAs with 49 farmers from the Leliefontein community, covering about 7,600 hectares.3 This feature of the BRI project sets it apart from most other projects in the CSP portfolio, as the majority of CAs are signed with communities as collective wholes, rather than with individual community members. A primary goal of the agreements has been to remove a total of 2,000 breeding stock from the priority area as per carrying capacity guidelines established by the Department of Agriculture, and the CAs have incorporated a stock reduction scheme to this end. When BRI members sell breeding stock to regional wholesale purchaser NAMMEAT, CSA connects the farmers with the market, offers a premium on top of the regular sale price, and arranges for special sale days during which Nammeat’s truck comes up to Leliefontein to buy however many animals over 8 months of age the farmers want to sell. Each BRI member decided for themselves how many stock units to reduce initially, with a minimum of 5 units.

3 This case study will concentrate on the Leliefontein community and disregard the part of the overall initiative concerning the private farmers in the area.


In addition to the stock reduction scheme, the CAs specify several other commitments and benefits. Important commitments include compliance with Kamiesberg Municipal Grazing Regulations and Biodiversity Management Guidelines; contributing to the development and implementation of a management plan for communal grazing areas, including adherence to land use zoning; developing and applying fire management guidelines; and cooperating in alien plant and tree removal and wetland restoration.

Benefits to be provided in return for adherence to these commitments, in addition to the stock premium mentioned above, include provision of demonstrations and skill training relevant to the various guidelines and regulations (Holistic Management, Fire Management, Wetland Restoration, Wildlife Conflict Management, etc.), and facilitating access to expertise and other kinds of support for implementing them. CI also committed funding toward rehabilitation of water infrastructure, and training and hiring of community members as BRI monitoring officers.

The first agreements were signed in November of 2009. Each year since, they have been evaluated, refined, and renegotiated, such that commitments and benefits have evolved over time although they generally continue to conform to the above characterization. The number of community members who signed CAs with CSA has fluctuated over time, from an initial 22 members in 2009 to 50 in 2010, and now 49 in total. NATIoNAl AND loCAl GENDER CoNTExT

South Africa is a very diverse country, with a large number of different ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups. According to 2011 data from Statistics South Africa, 79% of the population is categorized as African, 9% Colored, 2.5 as Indian/Asian and 9% as White. Until 1994, the country was ruled by a white minority government who enforced apartheid, a system of racial segregation in virtually all areas of life that severely restricted the civil, political and economic rights of the non-White population. Nelson Mandela became the country’s first Black president in 1994, and since then, successful democratic elections have been held four times. The end of Apartheid (in 1994) and the African majority’s rise to power have led to the introduction of legislation that supports African women. The Constitution protects women’s right to equality and prohibits discrimination. Yet while traditional institutions are subject to principles of the Constitution, civil law is often ineffective in replacing the prevailing customary law, particularly in rural areas. Discriminatory practices, social norms and persistent gender stereotypes continue to determine women’s and men’s opportunities and interactions. In particular, the 2010 report to the Committee on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) notes that aggressive forms of masculinity and “macho-ism” continue to present a barrier to the effective implementation of CEDAW and the general pursuit of women’s rights and gender equality. South Africa ratified CEDAW in 1995 and the Optional Protocol in 2005. South Africa ratified the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa in 2005. South Africa’s score in the 2011 Human Development Index is 0.619, placing it in 123rd place (out of a total of 187 countries). The country’s Gender Inequality Index score is 0.490 that places South Africa at 94 out of 146 countries. In the Global Gender Gap Index for 2011, South Africa is ranked in 14th place (out of 135 countries), with a score of 0.7478 (where 1 denotes equality and 0 denotes inequality).



South African women are entitled to the same legal ownership rights as men and the law guarantees them equality in the purchase, sale and management of property. According to the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act of 1998, men and women have equal legal status in regard to ownership of land and property other than land, with joint common ownership assumed unless a contract has been drawn up specifying an alternative arrangement. The government is taking steps to ensure that women are active participants in and beneficiaries of ongoing land reform and restitution initiatives. However, according to a 2011 report by the Commission on Gender Equality, women’s access to land is very limited. The Commission found that the land restitution program has benefited about 91% males and 9% females during the 2005/6 to 2008/9 financial years.

The Kamiesberg Municipality covers 11,737 km2, and has a population of around 11,000 people. Despite low population density, the municipality struggles to provide services due to long distances and complex socioeconomic dynamics, leaving rural communities like Leliefontein significantly marginalized. For instance, the nearest hospital to Leliefontein is 60 km away in the town of Garies. Throughout the municipality education levels are low and unemployment is high.

Leliefontein has a population of nearly 1,000 people in about 210 households; about 46% of the population is under the age of 20. Historically, Leliefontein was one of six communal areas set aside in Namaqualand for the exclusive use of ‘colored’ people by the apartheid regime.

People’s incomes are derived mainly from livestock farming, government grants (e.g. support grants for children, elderly, disabled, or veterans, or other types of social support) and salaries from jobs mostly in the government sector. About half of the population owns at least one unit of livestock, such that livestock raising is the principal livelihood in the area. This is the only community in the region that continues to practice transhumant livestock management, with seasonal movements of herds between pastures. Men use the most natural resources in the form of grazing for their livestock. Women use less, mainly wood for firewood for home purposes (cooking, heating) and medicinal plants. There is a very real and very sharp division in labor between men and women. With the exception of one young female stock owner and farmer, all the women indicated that they, and by far the majority of other women in the community, do “women’s work” – when asked to list tasks, they indicated raising children, cooking, and housekeeping. Men are in charge of farming – caring for the livestock, fixing infrastructure and planting fodder in winter. Together with this division in labor, all respondents indicated that the men have the final word in the household. “The man is the boss” is how one women respondent put it. At a community level women are the most active and participate the most, so it is ironic that while final decisions around household issues are always left to the men, it is the women, in fact, who determine the route for the wider community! Interviews (6 women and 4 men) indicated that community meetings are where important decisions that affect the whole community are considered and serve as the mechanism for internal decision making. The most active participants in these meetings are women. Reasons given for this are: a) the men are busy with farming; b) the men are not interested in going to the meetings; c) men think the meetings are a waste of time; d) women want to see the community make progress. At the same time it seems that although women participate the most in these community meetings, a small number of women tend to dominate the discussions at meetings.


The topics of gender equality or women’s empowerment have rarely been a focus in the community. Apart from the Stewardship Program and the government Working for Wetlands Program, nothing has ever been done with women’s empowerment as a focus in the community. All the women said that the Stewardship Program is a program in which they feel there is equality, that their voices are heard equally as much as that of the men, and that CA benefits get distributed fairly. The Working for Wetlands Program was noted as it has a quota for women employees, which means that more women than men get work in the wetland rehabilitation programs.

UNDERSTANDING GENDER IN ThE CA

As previously mentioned, the design of the conservation agreements did not take into account gender considerations. The design process mainly focused on reducing livestock overgrazing. However the Biodiversity and Red Meat Cooperative is the management structure and it has a management committee – more than 50% of the management are women and the chair person is also a woman. Men and women interviewed indicated that women’s knowledge about resources is taken into account thoroughly throughout the whole CA process.

When asked about the conservation agreement’s impact on men and women, some indicated that the rules do not really impact them. Other men noted impacts around the use of wetlands, saying that they have less access to grazing now that they are allowed to only graze there during certain times. Women said they can pick fewer reeds now for the weaving of the traditional huts. However, all respondents mentioned that these impacts are not significant or of such a nature that it really affects them.

When asked about benefitting (equally) from the CA’s benefits, two respondents, both older women, indicated that they would like more opportunities for women. When asked what kind of opportunities they would like to see, they indicated projects that are “more suitable for women”. When asked to list examples they mentioned projects like a bakery, sewing groups, etc. – activities that are traditionally seen as the women’s domain, which can be ascribed to the division of labor that prevails in Leliefontein. The rest of the respondents felt that women are benefitting equally, but three people emphasized that this status quo, where women have equal status and equal opportunities, especially when it comes to work opportunities, should be carefully maintained and it should always be made clear that all opportunities are for both women and men. One respondent said that when job opportunities are advertised it should prominently state that both men and women can apply and another stated that 50% of all jobs should go to women. Another respondent repeated the need to state that job opportunities are for men and women and added that this should be done even when it is work traditionally perceived as “men’s jobs” – such as eco-rangers, laborers or any work in the outdoors.

When asked about how CA information is communicated all respondents indicated that regular meetings are held, that they have access to the information and that they understand how the CA works.

CSA’s stewardship staff are all from the region and therefore understand the gender dynamics of the region very well. Women and men are not identified separately, but the questionnaire yielded some interesting insights in this regard that will be considered in the future. Both male and female staff work on the program. Although gender equality has never been mentioned explicitly, CSA’s staff working on the program have always encouraged both men and women to participate and have always treated all



members as equally valued CA members, whether they are women or men. It was an eye opener to hear how little has been done with regard to women’s empowerment specifically in the community over so many years, and heartening to hear that the CA is one of two instances where women felt that they are being treated equally and benefitting equally. oppoRTUNITIES, ChAllENGES AND RECoMMENDATIoNS

CI has been working in Namaqualand since 2000, and began exploring stewardship approaches in 2005. The feasibility assessment work for CAs in the Kamiesberg took place from May to December of 2008, and refinements to the feasibility assessment continued through April 2009. The motivation for choosing CSP’s CA model as the mechanism for catalyzing stewardship was the desire to lend a sense of formality to the conservation commitments asked of farmers, make sure all participants were clear about their responsibilities, and establish a clear framework for measuring outcomes.

Gender dynamics have not been taken into account with the development or with the management of this CA – not consciously, but actual implementation naturally progressed to a program where gender equality happened. The process used by CI and the Leliefontein community to design the CAs yielded several positive outcomes. None of the respondents felt that either one or the other gender does not have the opportunity to participate fully. They all felt that the CA is a gender equal program. Nevertheless, given the sad record of women’s empowerment in Leliefontein, that CSA feels it should address gender issues more actively.

Another recommendation emphasized by both the community members and CI staff is to create more awareness on gender equality issues. This can be done through CSA’s newspaper, The Stock Post, which is printed, distributed and widely read in the community three to four times a year. Another channel for programs focusing on gender equality is CSA’s weekly slot on the local radio station, Namaqua FM.

BIBlIoGRAphY

De Raad, L. 2010. “In-depth Assessment: Conservation agreements Kamiesberg, South Africa.” Conservation International.

Gardiner, M., A. Marsh, L. Steyn, A. Meyer, S. Susman, and C. Hutchinson. 2009. “Three Peaks Conservancy Feasibility Analysis.” Conservation International.

http://www.wikigender.org/index.php/Gender_Equality_in_South_Africa


ABoUT ThE CoNSERvATIoN STEwARDS pRoGRAM:

the Conservation Stewards Program (CSP) bridges conservation and development through innovative conservation agreements developed in partnership with communities and others who own or rely on natural resources.

We work together with local resource users who agree to protect priority habitats and ecosystem services in exchange for a steady stream of structured compensation from conservationists or other investors. a negotiated agreement produces visible and measurable conservation outcomes that result from the actions of resource users, and fosters improved human well-being by directing compensation to investments identified by resource users as most beneficial to them.

CSP offsets the costs to communities of doing conservation, and works to ensure financial and social sustainability in its conservation agreements, providing the opportunity for these communities to make a living out of conserving the planet and make their lives better.

Cover photo © CI/photo by rod Mast

Gender Dynamics in Conservation Agreements: Biodiversity ... · CAs are a form of direct incentives...

Documents

Transcript of Gender Dynamics in Conservation Agreements: Biodiversity ... · CAs are a form of direct incentives...