Humans evolved in Africa and have inhabited its landscapes for hundreds of thousands of years. Their power to change these landscapes has grown through the successive discoveries of fire, agriculture, technology, trade and fossil fuels. The use of fire in East Africa dates back at least 60,000 years and the ability to smelt iron at least 2,000 years. Charcoal layers and earthenware have been discovered in the soils under good canopy forest in East Usambaras (Rodgers 1998). But it has been the ability of humans to tap the energy locked up in fossil fuels that has most transformed the planet. The population growth that this has enabled means that nearly all conservation problems today involve people and their needs and that socioeconomic considerations must be part of the solutions.
In both Tanzania and Kenya, the institutional frameworks that structure the interactions of people and forests are largely an inheritance from the colonial governments. Both countries have a Civil Service structure that includes ministries, permanent secretaries and national institutions (divisions, departments) dealing with different sectors of society and the economy. In Tanzania, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT) oversees four divisions (Wildlife (WD), Forest and Beekeeping (FBD), Fisheries and Tourism) and supervises five parastatal wildlife organizations including Tanzania National Parks Authority (TANAPA), Tanzania Forestry Research Institute (TAFORI) and the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TAWIRI). An important function of TAWIRI is to issue research permits for all ecological and biological field work in the country. In Zanzibar, the Zanzibar Department of Commercial Crops, Fruits and Forestry (DCCFF), under the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Natural Resources, administers forest resources and the area proposed to become the Jozani-Chwaka Bay National Park. Research permits to work in Zanzibar and Pemba have to go through the Zanzibar authorities.
In Kenya the forests are mostly under the Forest Department, within the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. Other forest stakeholder institutions include the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI) and the National Museums of Kenya (NMK). In addition there are a large number of NGOs with interests in environment and conservation in the hotspot.
Government Institutional Framework for Forestry in Tanzania
In Tanzania, the FBD is accountable to the permanent secretary in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT) and is responsible for the protection of forests and the productive use of forest lands to meet demands for wood products. Until relatively recently, protection focused on watersheds rather than biodiversity and production involved harvesting of indigenous hardwoods and the establishment of industrial plantations of pine and cypress. Now there is official recognition of the biodiversity values of the indigenous forest reserves within FBD and the harvesting of indigenous hardwoods has been banned in conservation areas, including the Eastern Arc and Coastal Forests. The Government Catchment Forests (mainly in the Uluguru and East Usambara Mountains) and the nature reserves have remained under government control, administered by an FBD staff of eight forest officers and 57 assistant forest officers (GEF 2002). Because of a national policy of decentralization, most of the remaining forests are managed at the district level under a variety of regimes. There are at least six categories of management status: Forest Reserves, Local Authority Forest Reserves, Monuments, Village Forest Reserves, Private Forest Reserves and Public Lands/Public Forest (WWF-EARPO 2002b).
There are three additional management categories in the Eastern Arc Mountains, which are outside the FBD/District level framework for forests: National Parks, Game Reserves and Nature Reserves. There are two national parks (Udzungwa Mountains National Park and Mikumi National Park) managed by the Tanzanian National Park Authority based in Arusha. There are two game reserves (Selous and Mkomazi) and one nature reserve (Amani) managed by the Wildlife Division and the Tanzanian Wildlife Research Institute (TAWIRI). Nature Reserves enjoy a higher level of protection than Forest Reserves.
A number of problems have been identified with the administrative framework of FBD, some of which are exacerbated by the decentralized structure for forest management in Tanzania (GEF 2002). These include:
- emphasis on regulation and enforcement rather than on service delivery;
- weak oversight on forest management, poor accountability and supervision;
- ineffective fiscal procedures in terms of meeting objectives and delivering services;
- poor revenue collection;
- no institutional mechanisms for biodiversity conservation;
- no scope for the public financing of biodiversity conservation;
- no institutional recognition of the needs of local communities; and
- diverse and complex tenure systems.
These and other institutional problems are being addressed by major reforms in the Tanzanian forest sector. A proposed $62.2 million dollar project (Forest Conservation and Management Project) funded by GEF, World Bank and the IDA would implement the reforms. A major output of this project would be the establishment of the Tanzania Forest Service (TFS), which would be responsible for the implementation of the National Forest Programme (see below).
Government Institutional Framework for Forestry in Kenya
In Kenya, there is a great deal of overlap in the institutional planning, implementation, management and monitoring of environmental policies and legislation. In 1992, the National Biodiversity Unit included no less than 38 government ministries, departments and parastatal institutions dealing with biodiversity issues. There are four government institutions that are directly involved in forest management and conservation: the Forest Department, KWS, the Kenya Forestry Research Institute and the National Museums of Kenya. At a few sites, all four are represented in multi-institutional management teams (e.g. the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest Management Team at Arabuko-Sokoke Forest).
The Forest Department has the major mandate. It falls under the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MENR) and is responsible for:
- formulation of policies for management and conservation of forests;
- preparation and implementation of management plans;
- management and protection of Kenya's gazetted forests;
- establishment and management of forest plantations;
- promotion of on-farm forestry; and
- promotion of environmental awareness.
The Forest Department operates some 160 forest stations, reporting to 65 District Forest Offices which in turn report to eight Provincial Forest Offices. In the past the department has concentrated on industrial forestry, but is now giving greater attention to afforestation on smallholder farm land and the conservation of natural forests. The department has many of the same problems as the FBD in Tanzania, although its administration does not suffer from the fragmentary effects of decentralization. Resources are limited and staffing levels are inadequate for keeping the department fully operational. A high percentage of the department's total budget goes to salaries and allowances. There are plans for transforming the department into a new body called the Kenya Forest Service. These plans are less advanced than those in Tanzania but they have the same goals.
The KWS is a parastatal and is responsible for the protection of the nation's wildlife. On December 5
th 1991, the directors of KWS and the Forest Department signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU), covering the management of selected indigenous forest reserves. Within this MoU, the major responsibilities of KWS are the management of tourism, problem animals and wildlife protection.
The National Museums of Kenya (NMK) was subsequently included in the MoU under an addendum that recognized its role in cataloguing, researching and conserving forest biodiversity. NMK has also been responsible for the surveying and gazetting of sacred coastal forests as national monuments, through the Coastal Forest Conservation Unit (CFCU).
The Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI) was established in 1986. Its mission is to enhance the social and economic welfare of Kenyans through user-oriented research for sustainable development of forests and allied natural resources. In 2002, it had 94 university graduate research scientists at PhD, MSc and BSc level, in 17 research centres in various ecological zones of Kenya. The Gede Regional Research Centre is responsible for research in the coastal forests.
Nongovernmental Organizations
East Africa has a plethora of environmental and conservation NGOs, many of which have been or are involved in forestry-related activities in the hotspot. It is impossible to do much more than list them in the present context and to highlight a few issues of particular importance. Their interventions have complemented on-going government conservation and development initiatives in the hotspot and have greatly assisted the Forest Department and FBD during periods when donor funding was difficult to get for government departments.
NGOs can provide significant complementarity to government institutions:
- They are able to speak out without adhering to governmental policies and to lobby the government on environmental policies and decisions.
- They have demonstrated accountability to donors because they need to be accountable to survive.
- They can quickly raise and access funding, take decisions and act in response to emergencies or changing circumstances.
- They are often closer to the grassroots and have a stronger relationship with communities.
- Their members are often motivated by strong convictions and are therefore highly committed.
- They are increasingly part of a supportive international network, which can quickly share knowledge and experience on environmental issues and which has a global voice.
They have one fundamental disadvantage: they do not have the national mandates to manage forests and wildlife areas and while they can contribute to park, forest or wildlife management they do not have ultimate authority. This means that their ability to solve problems on the ground in forest reserves or national parks is limited. NGO project management is often challenging and it requires technical, managerial, political and interpersonal skills. High turnover in project managers is not uncommon.
International environmental and conservation NGOs working in East Africa include African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), African Conservation Centre (ACC), BirdLife International, CARE International and CARE Tanzania, Environmental Liaison Centre International, Friends of Conservation (FoC), the IUCN East Africa Regional Office (IUCN-EARO), TRAFFIC and WWF-EARPO. IUCN, WWF, TRAFFIC, BirdLife International and CARE International are global organizations with regional and national offices in Dar es Salaam and/or Nairobi. AWF, ACC and FoC operate throughout Africa, but are linked with parent institutions abroad. All of these well-known organizations have carried out significant activities within the hotspot. WWF-EARPO is spearheading the Eastern Africa Coastal Forest Programme in Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique.
The East African Wild Life Society (EAWLS) and the East Africa Natural History Society (EANHS) operate only in East Africa, although their membership is international. The EANHS is composed of two partner NGOs: Nature Kenya (NK) and Nature Uganda (NU), both of which are the national partners of BirdLife International in Kenya and Uganda. NK was one of the implementers for BirdLife's IBA project and it published the IBA book for Kenya (Bennun & Njoroge 1999). It has been particularly active in Arabuko-Sokoke Forest. The EAWLS is host to the Kenya Forests Working Group (KFWG), which is a coalition of NGOs and of anyone interested in forests and which has been an extremely important focus for civil society action against government policies that have threatened Kenyan forests. The EAWLS has also been very active in the Taita Hills.
National NGOs in Kenya include A Rocha Kenya (ARK) in Watamu and the Forest Action Network (FAN) in Nairobi. In Tanzania, national NGOs include TFCG; Frontier-Tanzania; Journalist Environmental Association of Tanzania (JET); the Lawyers Environmental Association of Tanzania (LEAT); and Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST). FAN has been particularly active on policy matters in Kenya and in stimulating networking on Participatory Forest Management. ARK is a Christian conservation organization that is active in bird monitoring and conservation education on the north coast of Kenya. Frontier-Tanzania has been responsible for much of the scientific research in the Eastern Arc Mountains, working together with the University of Dar es Salaam and visiting scientists. The TFCG has a considerable track record of conservation initiatives on the Tanzanian side of the hotspot, particularly in working with local communities and in participatory forest management. The WCST is the BirdLife national partner for Tanzania and has produced the Tanzanian IBA book (Baker & Baker, 2002). LEAT provides important legal support on conservation issues in Tanzania, while JET is invaluable in awareness raising and advocacy.
Among the community-based organizations are the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest-Adjacent Dwellers Association; the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest Guides Association; and the Shimba Hills Support Group. In Tanzania these organizations include the Korogwe Development Environmental Protection Association; Morogoro Environmental Conservation Action Group; Sigi River Conservation Society - Tanga and Usambara Environment Conservation Organization - Lushoto. Many of these are relatively new and need testing and capacity building, but they have the virtues of being on-site and being rooted mostly in the local communities, where support is badly needed.
Policy and Legislation
Both Kenya and Tanzania have recently updated, or are in the process of updating, their policies and legislation on forests and the environment. In both countries, this is opening up new opportunities for conservation interventions.
Kenya Policy
An updated Kenya Forest Policy has been developed and is in the process of being officially approved. Kenya's Forest Policy has evolved from the Kenya Forestry Master Plan (Forest Department 1994), which was a joint venture of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MENR) and FINNIDA. The policy contains seven major objectives:
- Increase the forest and tree cover of the country, in order to ensure an increasing supply of forest products and services, for meeting the basic needs of the present and future generations and for enhancing the role of forestry in socioeconomic development.
- Conserve the remaining natural habitats and the wildlife therein, rehabilitate them and conserve their biodiversity.
- Contribute to sustainable agriculture by conserving the soil and water resources by tree planting and appropriate forest management.
- Support the government policy of alleviating poverty and promoting rural development, by income based on forest and tree resources, by providing employment and by promoting equity and participation by local communities.
- Fulfil the agreed national obligations under international environmental and other forestry related conventions and principles.
- Manage the forest resource, assigned for productive use, efficiently for the maximum sustainable benefit, taking into account all direct and indirect economic and environmental impacts and including a review of the ways in which forest and trees are valued, in order to facilitate management decisions
- Recognize and maximize the benefits of a viable and efficient forest industry for the national economy and development.
The proposed forest policy on indigenous forest states: “All gazetted indigenous forests; woodlands, bushlands and mangroves should remain reserved. They will be managed by state-approved agencies which will allocate them primarily for: (1) regulated multi-purpose forestry, using zoning concepts which do not endanger the conservation functions of the forest; (2) preservation of biodiversity; (3) conservation of soil and water; and (4) providing products and services mainly locally on a subsistence basis, by community participation where appropriate.”
In the general management principles, the policy states: “The rationale of forest management depends on local conditions set by climate, soil and tree species and on the actual forest related needs of the people, which incorporate both social and cultural aspects. In all circumstances, the forest resources will be managed in a sustainable manner with due regard to environmental conservation. Reliable information on forest resources and their utilisation should be ensured. This information should include forest-health monitoring.”
Up to the end of 2002, the new forest policy had not been implemented on the ground. In 2001 the Government gazetted the excision of 67,185 ha of forest reserves, mainly for settlement, further decreasing the country's forest cover. There was strong protest from civil society against these excisions. Two court cases were brought against the government's action and these cases are ongoing. The replanting of harvested plantations, which was also recommended under the new policy, had fallen years behind, but was revived in 2002. On the positive side, joint management of certain forests with communities and environmental NGOs was undertaken on a pilot basis. Since the new government took office at the end of 2002, official statements have indicated that the new forest policy and legislation will soon be approved and put into effect and that the issue of the 2001 excisions will be revisited.
Legislation
The Forestry Department operates through the Forest Act Cap 385 of the Laws of Kenya. However the act is outdated and does not address the current issues, realities and expectations. To address this, a new Forest Bill 2000 was prepared. The bill has gone through all stages of development, but is awaiting tabling in Parliament to become law. The bill is much more comprehensive than the act it will replace and covers issues of community participation and multiple stakeholders in forestry. The bill proposes the establishment of a corporate body called the Kenya Forest Service. Among its responsibilities, this body will:
- formulate policies for the management, conservation and utilization of all types of forest;
- manage the use and conservation of all indigenous state forests;
- monitor and enforce compliance with the provisions of this act in respect of all forests in Kenya; and
- advise the government on all matters pertaining to the establishment, development, conservation and utilization of forests in Kenya.
In addition to the Forest Act, there are about 77 statutes that deal with environmental legislation. Until 1999, there was no environmental legislation framework. Parliament passed the Environmental Management and Coordination Bill, 1999, into law on 15 December 1999. The Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) came into force on 14
th January 2000 and takes priority over all pre-existing legislation. The EMCA establishes national environmental principles and provides guidance and coherence to good environmental management. It also deals with cross-sectional issues such as overall environmental policy formulation, environmental planning, protection and conservation of the environment, environmental impact assessment, environmental audit and monitoring, environmental quality standards, environmental protection orders, institutional coordination and conflict resolution. Owing to financial and bureaucratic constraints, the act has taken several years to become operational. Once fully operational, the act will have impacts on other legislation dealing with environment such as land tenure and land use legislation, forestry legislation, wildlife legislation, water laws and agriculture legislation. The act provides a good avenue for environmental protection and the establishment of an operational framework under the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA).
Tanzania Policy
The Forest Policy of Tanzania (United Republic of Tanzania 1998) gives the responsibility of managing forest resources to the forest sector in collaboration with key stakeholders. Among the main features of the policy are participatory forest management, decentralization and privatization. These are radical divergences from the earlier policy and legislation, which restricted management to the state authorities and had a different approach to preservation and controlled utilization. These reforms are a result of emerging macroeconomic policies and local and global environmental management trends. They also recognize the rights of the communities and roles of the private sector in managing these resources. The overall goal and objectives are presented in Box 1.
The Forest Policy is implemented through the National Forest Programme (Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, 2001). The key challenges for this program are ensuring sustainable utilization of forest produce and meeting the national demand for forest produce such as wood fuel, sawn timber, non-timber forest products and other forest produce. The dependence on forest products by the majority of the rural communities for their livelihoods enables forests to contribute to poverty reduction.
The program aims to reduce poverty through: (1) increased employment in forest industry and related activities by 25 percent by 2010; and (2) increased income generation from forest resources and services to local communities by 20 percent by 2010. The anticipated major benefits resulting from increased community and private sector participation in the management and sustainable utilization of forests are:
- better recognition of the needs and aspirations of local communities as stakeholders and joint forest owners in natural and plantation forests where land pressure is an issue (e.g., Kilimanjaro, Tanga, Morogoro and Iringa Districts);
- poverty reduction through increased income generation in the most deprived areas (i.e., Lindi, Kigoma and Coast Regions); and
- greater certainty of tenure and supply of forest products and services to encourage investment in forestry and forest industries.
Legislation
Existing legislation pertaining to forest management in Tanzania is the Forest Ordinance CAP 389 of 1957, which was operational from 1959. Basically, this ordinance focuses on restrictive use and, more so, on preservation of forests. The ordinance, to a large extent, has excluded local communities from involvement in management of these resources and recognises them only as beneficiaries. This law governs conservation and management of forests and forest produce. This ordinance, like many others developed during the colonial era, focused on preservation of natural forests. This classical conservation was based on the belief that proper management could be implemented through protection from human interference and exclusion from human use. This exclusion did not, of course, apply to the Government Forestry and Bee-keeping Division and a great deal of natural forest destruction and replacement by plantations, continued under licence after independence.
The main focus in the ordinance is gazettement of forests as reserves. For instance, Part II, Sections 5 to 9 of the ordinance provide for the declaration of central government forest reserves and restrictions over the use of and/or occupation of such areas. The ordinance further provides for the declaration of local authority forest reserves. The requirements for such declarations include: (1) recording of rights preceding such declarations; (2) restrictions on the creation of new rights subsequent to declaration, in respect of unreserved land, of “reserved trees”; and (3) the granting of licenses for any of the purposes of the ordinance.
There was clearly great inconsistency between the ordinance and the new National Forest Policy. Taking account of the weaknesses in the existing ordinance, a Forest Bill, which revised the outdated Forests Ordinance CAP 389 of 1957, was developed to correspond with the National Forest Policy. The bill sought to address the inadequacies of the Forests Ordinance and provided a legal framework to enable the new National Forest Policy to be effectively implemented. The revised Forest Act bestows management rights under respective instruments, including:
- development of collaborative forest management arrangements and management plans for National and Local Authority, Community, Village and Private Forests; and
- development of by-laws and other local instruments to facilitate forest development at the local level.
The Forest Act (approved by the Parliament in April 2002) recognizes such initiatives and the roles of different stakeholders are acknowledged and supported, including allocation of management responsibilities, rights and duties. The act also addresses compliance with international initiatives toward sustainable forest management, including support for bioprospecting that benefits indigenous communities. Development of the Forest Act also recognizes related legislation, which include the Land Act (United Republic of Tanzania 1999a), Village Land Act (United Republic of Tanzania 1999b).
National Forest Programme
In January 2000, the Forestry and Beekeeping Division began developing a National Forest Programme (NFP). The objective of the NFP is to: (1) enhance the contribution of the forest and beekeeping sector to sustainable development of Tanzania; and (2) to enhance the conservation of natural resources for the benefit of present and future generations. The NFP was formulated as an instrument for implementation of the National Forest Policy (United Republic of Tanzania 1998). The NFP is also meant to improve the design and implementation of forest management interventions. This includes streamlining financing in the sector and fostering implementation of international processes towards Sustainable Forest Management (SFM).
The formulation of the NFP included identification of issues through reviews and consultations at national and local levels, their prioritization based on scope, resources and capacity requirements for their implementation. Strategies for implementation were identified and development programmes designed.
In May 2001, the draft NFP was submitted to the government for endorsement. The NFP has four development programmes, namely:
- Forest Resources Conservation and Management Programme that focuses on promoting stakeholders' participation in the management of natural and plantation forests, ecosystems/biodiversity conservation and sustainable utilization of forest resources.
- Institutions and Human Resources Development Programme that addresses strengthening institutional set up, coordination of forest management, establishing sustainable forest sector funding, improvement in research, extension services and capacity building.
- Legal and Regulatory Framework Programme that focuses on development of regulatory frameworks that include Forest Act, rules, regulations and guidelines to facilitate, among other things, operations of the private sector and participatory management.
- Forestry Based Industries and Products Programme that attempts to enhance forest industry development, through promoting private sector investment and improving productivity and efficiency.
Program formulation was completed in June 2001. Implementation arrangements are now being developed through partnerships with the main stakeholders, including local communities, the private sector and local governments.
Economic Situation
National Statistics
Both Kenya and Tanzania are grouped among the poorest nations in the world. Three of the major economic indicators from 2001 for these two countries deserve particular attention: the low per capita incomes ($271 in Kenya, $260 in Tanzania); the percentages of the populations earning less than one dollar a day (43 percent in Kenya, 50 percent in Tanzania) and; the economic growth rates (1.2 percent in Kenya, 5.6 percent in Tanzania). The post-independence histories of the economies in these two countries have been quite different.
After independence, Kenya built up a strong economic lead over its neighbours in Eastern Africa through the encouragement of market-oriented policies, smallholder agricultural production, public investment, tourism and incentives for private industrial investment. Over a 10-year period from 1963-1973, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew by an average of 6.6 percent a year (US State Department Country Reports, 2002a). By 1997 it had dropped to 2.3 percent, then to 1.8 percent in 1999 and became negative (0.4 percent) in 2000 (USAID 2000). A variety of factors were responsible for the long decline. These included unfavourable terms of trade (increased oil prices, decreased tea and coffee prices), government invasion of the private sector, declining tourism, political uncertainties, corruption and sheer bad governance (leading to the suspension of bilateral and multilateral aid in 1991) (USAID 2000). Were it not for vigorous growth in the cut flower and horticultural export industries and the entrepreneurial skills of its people, Kenya would have been in a much worse situation by 2000. A new government was democratically elected at the end of 2002 and there are considerable expectations that the economy will improve.
Tanzania was a one-party state with a socialist mode of development from independence in 1961 until the mid-1980s. Despite a substantial influx of foreign aid, the economy did not prosper. Beginning in 1986, the government began to liberalize its control of the economy and to encourage participation in the private sector. In 1996, a three-year Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility was agreed between the IMF and the Tanzanian Government. Over the next four years, economic growth averaged around 4 percent, rising to 4.9 percent in 2000 and to 5.6 percent in 2001 (USAID 2002). Economic growth is most evident in Dar es Salaam. Although the figures look good, Tanzania's economy is overwhelmingly donor-dependent, with the external debt at more than $8 billion and debt servicing absorbing 40 percent of government expenditure (USAID 2002b).
Economic Activities on the Coast
The economic situation on the Kenyan and Tanzanian coasts has worsened during the last decade because of declines in the tourism, textiles and cashew nut industries. Coast tourism is going through particularly bad times, having suffered successive blows from health scares, gulf wars, competition with other tourist destinations (especially South Africa), ethnic clashes (in Kenya) and terrorist activities (both Kenya and Tanzania). Currently there is severe over-capacity in the hotel and tourism service industry. In June 2003, hotel staff in Kenya received reduced pay following the suspension of British Airways flights because of terrorist threats.
In the early 1990s, textile manufacturing was the leading industrial category in coastal Kenya in terms of the numbers of registered companies (24 out of 159: UNEP 1998). Several of these firms have since collapsed as a result of massive importation of cheap second hand clothing (mitimbu). The cashew nut industry, which used to be a significant contributor to rural livelihoods, has also suffered severely from competition with India and from internal problems. A cashew nut processing factory at Kilifi, on the north coast of Kenya, finally closed down in the late 1990s after years of problems. As a result of the declines in the tourism, textiles and cashew nut industries, many people have lost jobs and livelihoods, with significant effects to the local economy. Some of the strain has been borne by the forests, which play an important role in mitigating poverty. For example, more than 40 percent of household consumption in the Eastern Arc Mountains is forest-derived (GEF 2002).
Other industrial activities, many of them based on the coast because of maritime access to imports and exports, have been more robust. These include: cement, lime and quarrying; steel rolling mills and iron smelting; oil refining; manufacture of paints, plastics, rubber, chemical and metal products; wood processing (paper, pulp, board and timber); light processing for export of agricultural crops (coffee, groundnuts, cotton and sisal); and food and beverage industries. As elsewhere in the world there has been considerable growth in information technology-based services, although these have been constrained by poor landline facilities, high telephone charges and poor connectivity. There has also been increasing South African investment in the coastal economy, particularly in Tanzania.
Industries outside the major cities and towns are mostly based on mineral resources, especially sand, salt and limestone. Sand for building is mined in many localities along the coast, notably at Mazeras near Mombasa. Silica sand for glass manufacture was formerly mined in Arabuko-Sokoke Forest. (Ironically, the old sand quarries have since become a distinctive biodiversity site within the forest, especially for frogs and birds). Extensive salt works have been established at various sites (e.g. in Tanga District in Tanzania and at Ngomeni, Gongoni and Kurawa in Kenya), where they have been responsible for local destruction of mangrove forests. Limestone deposits are abundant along the coast. They form a 4-8 km band, parallel to the coast and about 70 m thick from across the Kenya-Tanzanian border north to Malindi. All along the coast, coral limestone is quarried as building blocks, but there is local variation in limestone quality, affecting its potential use. In Tiwi on the south Kenyan coast it is used for lime manufacture. In the Bamburi area just north of Mombasa, limestone is quarried on a large scale for cement manufacture by a subsidiary of La Farge, a French-based multinational. This site at Bamburi has become famous for its ecological restoration of quarries and La Farge has recently entered into a partnership agreement with WWF (WWF-EARPO 2002).
Other coastal mineral resources of minor local importance include barites, galena, iron ore, gypsum and rubies. However all of these may be dwarfed by the development of titanium mining in Kenya. There are vast titanium reserves in the Magarini Sands belt, which stretches from Shimoni in the south coast to Mambrui in the north. Titanium has traditionally been used to make a white pigment for paint, plastic and paper, but is increasingly in demand for applications in the armaments and space industries. Since 1995, a Canadian-based company (Tiomin Resources Inc.) has been negotiating an agreement with the Kenyan government to mine titanium. Tiomin hopes to start its activities in the Kwale District and expects to generate around $47 million in annual cash flow.
For the vast majority of people in the rural areas the major economic activity is subsistence farming, supplemented by tree crops and fishing. There are large sisal plantations (e.g. Vipingo in Kenya) and tea estates (e.g. in Iringa and Kagera in Tanzania), which provide limited and poorly paid jobs, but employment opportunities are few and the landless are in desperate straits. Cassava is the major agricultural crop, followed by maize, citrus, coconuts, mangoes and bananas (UNEP 1998). Cassava and maize are the staples everywhere and coconuts yield a variety of products from roofing material to palm wine. Other crops are locally important (e.g. coffee in Kwale District in Kenya). The fishing industry is constrained by the small area of the continental shelf next to the East African coast, the Southeast Monsoon (which restricts the activities of small canoes) and low productivity due to nutrient deficient currents (UNEP 1998). Food security is not a problem within and around the high rainfall areas in the Eastern Arc Mountains, but farmers to the north and north-west of Mombasa need emergency food supplies whenever the rainfall is poor. Complaints of declining soil fertility are widespread.
Other minor but widespread livelihoods are earned from artisan activities (wood carving, furniture making, boat building and handicrafts), service provision (e.g. kiosks for small scale trading, sewing, electronic and other repairs) and the informal jua kali (Kiswahili for "fierce sun") sector, which includes tin smiths, second hand clothing and cobblers.
There are two large cities within the hotspot, each of which has grown around an important and ancient deep-water seaport on the Indian Ocean. Mombasa is Kenya's second largest city, with a population of more than 700,000. Despite deteriorating equipment and problems with inefficiency and corruption, it remains one of the most modern ports in Africa. It has 21 berths, two bulk oil jetties and dry bulk wharves and handles all sizes of ships and cargo. It also has large warehousing (including bonded warehousing) and cold storage facilities. It is connected to Nairobi and thence inland to the land locked countries of Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo by both road and rail. In the mid-to-late 1990s, the Mombasa-Nairobi road was in a very poor state but it is now mostly in good condition. Other roads from Mombasa, south to the border and north past Malindi are paved but have rough stretches. The railway connects Mombasa to Nairobi and to Kisumu on Lake Victoria, but it has suffered from poor maintenance. There is an excellent international airport in Mombasa (Moi International Airport) and domestic air services to Malindi on the north coast and Diani on the south coast.
Dar es Salaam is the largest city of Tanzania with a population of around three million. It is increasingly competitive with Mombasa as the most important seaport in the region. It has eight deep-water berths for general cargo, three berths for container vessels, eight anchorages, a grain terminal, an oil jetty and onshore mooring for supertankers. It underwent major rehabilitation starting in 1997 at a cost of about $24 million. In addition to Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo, it also serves Malawi and Zambia. Freight is largely carried by trains and heavy-duty vehicles. Most primary roads (e.g. from Dar north to Tanga and inland to Dodoma, Arusha and Morogoro) are in good condition, but rural and feeder roads are bad and can be impassable in the rains. Major road development and the construction of a bridge over the Rufiji are ongoing and will open up access from Dar es Salaam to the South. The Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority maintains good rail links between Dar es Salaam and Zambia. There are also train services to Tanga on the north coast and to Arusha via Moshi and Mwanza via Morogoro. The Dar es Salaam International Airport has daily flights to national, regional and international destinations. In addition there are daily ferryboats to Zanzibar and sea transport to other destinations on the Tanzanian coast (Mtwara, Tanga, Kilwa, Lindi and Mafia Island).
Both cities and most of the larger towns in the hotspot have unreliable water supplies and electricity services, but most villages have neither piped water nor electricity, unless they are on the main roads. In Kenya, more than 65 percent of the population depend on pit latrines or the bush (UNEP 1998). Because of a heavy investment in coastal tourism, there are a large number of comfortable hotels along the coast in Kenya and a smaller number on the Tanzanian coast. Good private hospitals are available in Mombasa and Dar es Salaam, but are expensive. Government hospitals and clinics are severely under-resourced. Telephone landlines in Tanzania and Kenya are unreliable, but new mobile phone networks have hugely improved communication in both countries.
Demography and Social Trends
The demographic and social trends in Tanzania and Kenya are similar. The annual population growth rate has slowed down in both countries, but remains high at 2.8 percent in Tanzania (Mariki et al. 2003) and 2.7 percent in Kenya (Bennun & Njoroge 1999). At these rates populations will double over the next 25 years. Total populations are about 37.4 million in Tanzania and 30.7 million in Kenya (World Bank 2001). Average population densities are 40 (Tanzania) and 53 (Kenya) persons per km² (calculated from data in USAID 2002a, b), with most people concentrated in areas of high rainfall and good soils. For example, an estimated four million people live within 10 km of one of the Eastern Arc Mountain ranges (GEF 2002). In Kenya, only 18 percent of the land is arable, with another 9 percent marginal and the rest arid or semi-arid (NRI 1996).
Social services in both countries are rudimentary, especially in the rural areas. Only 74 percent (Tanzania) and 73 percent (Kenya) of children attend primary school (USAID 2002a, b). In Kenya in 2003, the incoming government made primary education free of charge, but it is not yet clear whether it will be able to provide the extra resources required by this new policy. The major health problems are malaria and HIV/AIDS. Largely because of the latter, life expectancies have dropped to 50 years (Tanzania) and 49 years (Kenya) and infant mortality rates have increased to 115 (Kenya) and 98 (Tanzania) per 1,000 births (USAID 2002a, b).
The major social trend in both countries is urbanization. Africa's cities are growing faster with lower economic growth than any other region of the world (USAID 2000). Between 1975 and 2000, the percentage of the population living in urban areas in Tanzania increased from 15 percent to 25 percent (Mariki et al. 2003). In Kenya this percentage was estimated at 33 percent in 2000 and is projected to reach 48 percent in 2020 (USAID 2000). The population of Nairobi has grown by 600 percent since 1950 and is currently around 4.5 million although it was originally designed for a population of 1 million (USAID 2000). Poor immigrants to the city are forced to live in slum areas, where there is little sanitation or fresh water and where rents are absurdly high for the quality of accommodation that is provided. The fact that urbanisation is nonetheless proceeding at such a high rate indicates that people (particularly the younger generation) see little future for themselves in the rural areas. A major social consequence of urbanisation is the weakening of traditional customs and obligations, including those associated with the extended family. City life also leads to later marriages and less traditional lifestyles among the youth.
Religion is extremely important in the lives of both urban and rural Kenyans and Tanzanians. In Tanzania 45 percent are Muslims and 45 percent are Christians, with 10 percent having indigenous beliefs. In Kenya, the majority (40 percent) are Protestant, 30 percent are Catholic, 20 percent are Muslim and an estimated 10 percent hold indigenous beliefs (USAID 2002a, b). In both countries the proportion of Muslims is much higher on the coast. Even in recent times, there has been tolerance between faiths and the few religious clashes that are reported arise from intra-denominational struggles.
Both Kenya and Tanzania are ethnically diverse with more than 120 different local languages in Tanzania and more than 40 in Kenya (USAID 2002a, b). Ethnic differences have played a large role in Kenyan political and economic alliances, but this has not been the case in Tanzania. This is mainly because of a more even spread of ethnic origins in Tanzania, which prevented any one tribe from dominating national affairs. In both countries, ethnic differences are less important to the younger than the older generations. The official language is Kiswahili in Tanzania and English in Kenya, but both languages are widely understood in both countries. In Kenya, Kiswahili is the predominant language of the coast. Literacy rates for the official languages are 67 percent (Tanzania) and 59 percent (Kenya) (USAIDa, b).
Previous: Conservation Outcomes / Next: Synopsis of Current Threats