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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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