Download 2. REDD+ and safeguards in Tanzania

Environmental and Social Spatial
Data to Support REDD+ Planning
and Safeguards Development in
Tanzania
Synthesis of spatial data on biodiversity, ecosystem services and
social data to support climate change adaptation and mitigation
planning
Project Number: 40000033-40031
Agreement Number:
GF21
DRAFT FINAL REPORT
Submitted to: WWF Tanzania Country Office
Submitted by:
FORCONSULT,
Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation,
Sokoine University of Agriculture
Morogoro
9 September 2014
Environmental and social spatial data to support REDD+
planning and safeguards development in Tanzania
Prepared by
Forestry Consulting Unit at the Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Sokoine University of
Agriculture; the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre
(UNEP-WCMC) and; International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Species
Programme.
Published
September, 2014
Citation
Mbilinyi, B., Zahabu, E., Runsten, L., Ravilious, C., Meng, H., Carr, J., Mant, B., Hicks, C., and Salvaterra, T. 2014.
Environmental and social spatial data to support REDD+ safeguards and planning in Tanzania. SUA, Morogoro,
United Republic of Tanzania; UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK; IUCN Global Species Programme, Cambridge UK.
The Forestry Consulting Unit at the Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Sokoine University of
Agriculture….
The United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the
specialist biodiversity assessment centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the world’s
foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years,
combining scientific research with practical policy advice.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Species Programme….
This publication may be reproduced for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission, provided
acknowledgement to the source is made. Reuse of any figures is subject to permission from the original rights
holders. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose without permission in
writing from UNEP. Applications for permission, with a statement of purpose and extent of reproduction, should be
sent to the Director, UNEP-WCMC, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 0DL, UK.
The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP-WCMC, contributory
organizations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations of material in this report do not imply
the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP-WCMC or contributory organizations, editors or
publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries or the designation of its name, frontiers or boundaries. The mention of a
commercial entity or product in this publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP-WCMC.
1
Acknowledgements
……………………..
I
Contents
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. V
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
2. REDD+ and safeguards in Tanzania .................................................................................................................3
2.1 Progress on REDD+ and safeguards in Tanzania ......................................................................................3
2.2 Development of a Safeguards Information System for Tanzania .......................................................... 4
3. The role of spatial analyses in supporting REDD+ planning .........................................................................7
3.1
The role and utility of spatial analysis in REDD+ planning ................................................................7
3.2. Spatial analyses and the REDD+ Cancun safeguards ............................................................................. 8
4. Maps to support Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards: Gap analysis .................................................................... 9
5. Spatial information relevant to social safeguards to support REDD+ planning ........................................ 13
5.1 Good governance and sustainable natural resources management ...................................................... 13
5.2 Presence of Village Land use plans .......................................................................................................... 14
5.3 Food security for rural communities ....................................................................................................... 16
6. Spatial information relevant to environmental safeguards to support REDD+ planning ........................ 19
6.1 Species ......................................................................................................................................................... 19
6.2 Ecosystems and ecosystem services .........................................................................................................27
7. Potential zones for REDD+ actions to restore forests ................................................................................. 38
8. Conclusions and next steps for an SIS ...........................................................................................................43
Reference List ...................................................................................................................................................... 44
II
List of figures, tables and boxes
Figure 1: Locations of WMAs and PFMs ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 2: Percentage of villages with LUPs in each District ............................................................................ 15
Figure 3: Vulnerability to food insecurity .......................................................................................................... 17
Figure 4: Distribution of ASDP and BRN projects ............................................................................................ 18
Figure 5: Distribution of globally threatened amphibian, bird, mammal, and reptile species in Tanzania.
.............................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 6: Distribution of globally threatened reptile species in Tanzania. .................................................... 21
Figure 7: Distribution of forest-dependent amphibian, bird, mammal and reptile species in Tanzania. ..22
Figure 8: Distribution of forest-dependent reptile species in Tanzania. .......................................................22
Figure 9: Distribution of climate change vulnerable amphibian, bird and reptile species in Tanzania. ... 24
Figure 10: Distribution of climate change vulnerable reptile species in Tanzania. .......................................25
Figure 11: Endemic species richness and above-ground biomass carbon. ..................................................... 26
Figure 12: Forest cover change in Tanzania, 2000-2012 ................................................................................... 28
Figure 13: Forest dependent threatened species richness and forest cover loss, 2000-2012 ........................ 29
Figure 14: Forest dependent endemic species richness and forest cover loss, 2000-2012 ............................ 30
Figure 15: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010, with insets showing the northern coast ................... 32
Figure 16: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010, with inset showing the southern coast .................... 33
Figure 17: Potential above-ground biomass carbon in mangroves and mangrove loss, 1990-2010 ..............34
Figure 18: High-altitude grassland dependent threatened species richness and forest gain, 2000-2012 ... 36
Figure 19: Montane grassland endemic species richness and forest gain, 2000-2012 ................................... 37
Figure 20: Potential for forest restoration in Forest Reserves ........................................................................ 40
Figure 21: Selected forest reserves according to loss of forest area ................................................................. 41
Figure 22: Selected forest reserves, according to proportion of forest cover loss ........................................ 42
Table 1: Gap analysis of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards Standards ............................................................. 10
Table 2: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010 ........................................................................................... 31
Box 1: The Cancun safeguards and the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards. .............................................................5
Box 2: IUCN’s Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Framework .......................................................... 23
III
Acronyms and abbreviations
AA
ASDP
BRN
CBFM
FCPF
FORCONSULT
GDP
GHG
GIS
Ha
IUCN
LUP
MNRT
NAFORMA
NBS
NCMC
NGO
NLUP
NLUPC
NTFPs
PFM
PLUP
REDD+
SEPC
SESA
SUA
TFS
WMA
WWF
UNEP-WCMC
UNFCCC
UN-REDD
USAID
Authorized Association
Agricultural Sector Development Programme
Big Results Now
Community-based forest management
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility
Forest Consulting Unit at the Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, SUA
Gross Domestic Product
Greenhouse gas
Geospatial information systems
Hectare
International Union for Conservation of Nature
Land use plan
Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism
National Forestry Resources Monitoring and Assessment
National Bureau of Statistics
National Carbon Monitoring Centre
Non-government organization
National Land Use Policy
National Land Use Planning Commission
Non–timber forest products
Participatory forest management
Participatory Land Use Planning
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation plus the role of
conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest
carbon stocks
Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria
Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment
Sokoine University of Agriculture
Tanzania Forest Service
Wildlife Management Area
World Wide Fund for Nature
United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
United Nations collaborative initiative on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation
and forest Degradation (REDD) in developing countries.
Unites States Agency for International Development
IV
Executive Summary
This report presents the results of a project carried out by FORCONSULT (Forest Consulting Unit at the
Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Sokoine University of Agriculture), in collaboration with
the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)
and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Species Programme, and in
support of the project “Environmental and Social Safeguards of REDD+: Linking to Scenario of Land and
Climate Change in the Tanzania”, funded by the Government of Norway through the World Wide Fund
for Nature (WWF) Tanzania Country Office. The objective of the project is to identify and meet
environmental and social spatial data needs to support REDD+ 1 planning and safeguards development in
Tanzania.
This report introduces REDD+ in Tanzania and summarizes progress in developing a national approach
to safeguards (section 2), and explains how spatial data is useful for integrating safeguards and multiple
benefits considerations into REDD+ planning and for developing a Safeguards Information System (SIS)
(section 3). It then provides a gap analysis of the spatial information useful for addressing elements of
Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards Standards, outlining how this project can fill some gaps in the spatial data
(section 4). In sections 5 and 6, the report presents a set of new maps made available through this
project. These cover social aspects of ‘The Tanzania REDD+ Social and Environmental Safeguard
Standards’, as well as a range of biodiversity, climate change vulnerability and ecosystem services
information. The report then discusses how these maps can inform climate policy and land-use planning,
particularly for REDD+, and for forest restoration. It concludes with policy recommendations for the
development of Tanzania’s SIS.
The maps developed by the project address national priorities for biodiversity and ecosystem aspects;
socio-economic and livelihoods data; forest cover change and how it relates to priority aspects of
biodiversity and ecosystem services; and potential areas for REDD+ activities that would enhance
biodiversity and ecosystem services while generating alternative livelihoods.
The maps and corresponding GIS datasets are intended to be used by decision makers during the
preparation of Phase II of REDD+ Readiness in Tanzania. These maps are to be included in a safeguards
GIS system at the National Carbon Monitoring Centre (NCMC), to be established at Sokoine University
of Agriculture (SUA). In addition, the maps may provide a baseline and decision support for
determining what information to collect and how when developing the SIS. Further consideration of
environmental and social issues will however likely be needed for effective planning of REDD+ actions
and the development of the SIS, particularly at a subnational level.
1
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation in developing countries, plus the role of conservation,
sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
V
1. Introduction
The United Republic of Tanzania has 3.3 million hectares of forest (montane and lowland forest, and
mangroves), and 44.76 million hectares woodland, covering 4 and 51 percent of the country’s land area,
respectively (NAFORMA 2014). Forests in protected areas, where harvesting is officially not allowed,
hold about half of the woody biomass volume in the country. Around 15.4 million ha of forest are
estimated to be located on lands legally known in Tanzania as ‘village and general land’2 (VicePresident’s Office (VPO) 2013b). The country has an estimated forest loss through deforestation and
forest degradation of around 372,816 ha (0.8%) per year (NAFORMA 2014), through the expansion of
both small-scale and large-scale agriculture, growth of human settlements and industry, fuelwood use
and charcoal production, forest fires and other drivers.
As part of efforts to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, Tanzania began developing policies
and programmes for the implementation of REDD+ in 2008, and is now preparing for the next phase of
REDD+ readiness, including the implementation of ‘The Tanzania REDD+ Social and Environmental
Safeguard Standards’ (VPO 2013a) (referred to in this report as the ‘Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards) and
the development of a Safeguards Information System (SIS).
This report is a result of a consultancy to FORCONSULT (Sokoine University of Agriculture, SUA)
within the broader project “Environmental and Social Safeguards of REDD+: Linking to Scenario of Land
and Climate Change in the Tanzania”, funded by the Government of Norway through the World Wide
Fund for Nature (WWF) Tanzania Country Office. The work was carried out by FORCONSULT, the
United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) and
the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Species Programme.
The objective of the project was to build on already existing map products created by the UN-REDD
Tanzania Programme3 and Tanzania’s National Forest Resources Monitoring and Assessment project
(NAFORMA) to provide a coherent package of spatial data that can contribute to implementing
Tanzania’s REDD+ safeguards, as well as spatial planning for REDD+. The final map products will be
provided to the National Carbon Monitoring Centre (NCMC) at Sokoine University of Agriculture in
Morogoro to be embedded in an appropriate database. These spatial products are also intended to
inform the design of the SIS.
This project has involved three interrelated work packages, the results of which are presented in this
synthesis report. Under Work Package 1, new biodiversity and climate vulnerability data was created
through conservation assessments (IUCN Red Listing) for Tanzania’s reptile species, and distribution
range mapping for threatened and forest dependent species, and climate change vulnerability
assessments for vertebrate species. Work Package 2 involved the compilation of social data to inform
safeguards development, addressing priority questions for social safeguards such as: where are
community managed land resources? Where are villages with developed land use plans? What is the
status of food security? And where are the programmes to improve food security?
Work Package 3 provided a synthesis of these and developed additional maps to fill gaps on
environmental aspects of Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards. Questions of relevance to the Safeguards were:
what is the distribution of endemic species in Tanzania? What is the current distribution of mangrove
2
See Tanzania Land Act (1999) and Village Land Act (1999) for a description of the land categories of Tanzania.
The UN-REDD Programme is the United Nations collaborative initiative on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation (REDD) in developing countries.
3
1
forest and what mangrove areas have been recently deforested? What are the biomass carbon stocks in
mangroves? Which areas include habitat for threatened and endemic forest species, and which of these
areas have recently been deforested? Which areas include habitat for threatened and endemic montane
grassland species, and which of these areas have experienced forest gains? Work Package 3 also
identified critical yet lacking maps specifically targeting REDD+ planning, including maps showing
forest cover change and spatial potential for forest restoration in Forest Reserves.
This report first introduces REDD+ and summarizes the current progress within Tanzania in developing
a national approach to safeguards (section 2), and explains how spatial data is useful for integrating
safeguards and multiple benefits in REDD+ planning and developing of SIS (section 3). It then presents
the gap analysis of the spatial information useful for addressing elements of Tanzania’s REDD+
Safeguards, outlining what relevant data has been produced by previous projects under the UN-REDD
Programme and NAFORMA, and how this current project can fill some gaps in the spatial data (section
4). The report then presents the new maps made available through this project, utilizing social and
environmental datasets, and discusses how they are useful for climate policy and planning, in particular
REDD+ planning (sections 5 and 6). Finally, the report concludes with a consideration of potential next
steps and policy recommendations for the development of Tanzania’s SIS.
2
2. REDD+ and safeguards in Tanzania
REDD+ is a climate change mitigation solution under the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) that aims to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering
incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from reduced deforestation and forest
degradation. "REDD+" goes beyond deforestation and forest degradation, and includes the role of
conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (UN-REDD
Programme, 2014).
In addition to reducing emissions from the forest sector and so mitigating climate change, actions to
maintain, enhance and sustainably manage forest carbon stocks can also help countries to protect and
enhance the resilience of forest and woodland ecosystems and the ecosystem services that those forests
and woodlands provide to people. However, the implementation of REDD+ initiatives also poses
potential risks, such as the conversion of natural forest and other ecosystems to plantations or
communities losing access to the forest resources that support their livelihoods. Parties to the UNFCCC
have therefore agreed on a set of safeguards to ensure that these risks are avoided and that the multiple
benefits of REDD+ are enhanced (see Box 1). These safeguards are generally referred to as the ‘Cancun
safeguards’ and they constitute general principles that need to be operationalized at the country level.
2.1 Progress on REDD+ and safeguards in Tanzania
The NAFORMA project showed in 2013 that Tanzania’s forest resources are degraded and under severe
and growing pressure, with improved forest management urgently needed (NAFORMA 2013). The
estimated rate of forest loss through deforestation and forest degradation is around 0.8% (372,816 ha) of
the total forest area of 4,809,700 ha per year (NAFORMA 2014). Drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation include the expansion of small-scale agricultural, growth in human settlements and
population, fuelwood use and charcoal production, uncontrolled fires, timber extraction, overgrazing,
the development of infrastructure, industry and mining, and the introduction of large-scale agriculture.
Tanzania has been working for years to address some of these drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation through its participatory forestry management (PFM) programme, and was one of the first
countries to receive large scale funding for a REDD+ readiness process.
In 2008, Tanzania received extensive bilateral funding from the Norwegian International Climate and
Forest Initiative to support REDD pilot activities in the field, research and capacity building, and
national strategy development and implementation. At the same time support was provided from
Finland to the NAFORMA project, and in 2010 the Tanzania UN-REDD National Programme QuickStart Initiative commenced with a range of activities. These initiatives reached their completion in 2013
or early 2014 and Tanzania is now preparing for the next phase in their REDD+ readiness process.
Progress in readiness to date includes, among many other things, the development of a REDD+ Strategy
and Action Plan, completion of a forest inventory and a land use/land cover map, and creation of a
number of maps to support spatial planning and implementation of safeguards under REDD+.
Tanzania has also developed ‘The Tanzania REDD+ Social and Environmental Safeguard Standards’
(VPO 2013a). In the preparation of these Safeguards, the Cancun safeguards were analyzed by a team in
Tanzania together with frameworks to support their interpretation, such as the REDD+ Social and
Environmental Standards (SES), the UN-REDD Programme’s Social and Environmental Principles and
Criteria (SEPC), the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s (FCPF) Strategic Environmental and Social
Assessment (SESA), and approaches being developed in Indonesia and Brazil. Existing national policies,
3
laws, strategies and plans with links to climate change were also reviewed. The resulting Tanzania
REDD+ Safeguards comprise of eight principles, each with a set of criteria and indicators. These in turn
are based on seven objectives (see Box 1).
The Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards state that they shall be applied to “REDD+ programs/activities
developed and executed by the Government, Private Entities, Non Governmental Organizations or Civil
Society Organizations, financed by the government or through market based mechanisms (compulsory
or voluntary) and other financing mechanisms such as global or private sources. The use of these
standards is not restricted to a group or specific sector, rather, is applicable for REDD+ actions that are
conducted by (or in partnership with) local communities, small landowners, civil societies, international
NGOs, private landowners and government.”
These standards were finalized in October 2013. The spatial data developed through this project is
intended to assist REDD+ decision makers in ensuring that future REDD+ activities meet these
standards.
2.2 Development of a Safeguards Information System for Tanzania
Parties to the UNFCCC have agreed that REDD+ countries shall collect and periodically provide
information in National Communications to the UNFCCC on how all Cancun safeguards are addressed
and respected throughout the implementation of the REDD+ activities (UNFCCC 2011). To manage this
process, a Safeguards Information System (SIS) is needed (UN-REDD Programme 2013). According to
the relevant UNFCCC decision (UNFCCC 2011), an SIS should:
(a) Be consistent with the guidance identified in decision 1/CP.16, appendix I, paragraph 1;
(b) Provide transparent and consistent information that is accessible by all relevant stakeholders and
updated on a regular basis;
(c) Be transparent and flexible to allow for improvements over time;
(d) Provide information on how all of the safeguards referred to in appendix I to decision 1/CP.16 (i.e.
the Cancun safeguards, see Box 1) are being addressed and respected;
(e) Be country-driven and implemented at the national level;
(f) Build upon existing systems, as appropriate;
In Annex 4 of Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards, a guide is proposed for establishing, developing and using
the Safeguards. Steps 7 and 8 of this guide propose a process for developing a monitoring plan for
assessing and reporting performance of the REDD+ initiative against the country’s Safeguards, as
outlined below.
4
Box 1: The Cancun safeguards and the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards.
The REDD+ safeguards as agreed at COP16 in Cancun in 2010 are shown in the left column, and the objectives of the
Tanzania REDD+ Social and Environmental Safeguard Standards are shown to the right.
Cancun safeguards for REDD+ identified in
Appendix I of Decision 1/CP.16
Objectives of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards
Standards
When undertaking the activities referred to in
paragraph 70 of this decision, the following
safeguards should be promoted and supported:
There are seven objectives, which form the basis of
the principles, criteria and indicators as key
elements of standards. These objectives are to
ensure that:
(a) That actions complement or are consistent with
the objectives of national forest programmes and
relevant international conventions and agreements;
(b) Transparent and effective national forest
governance structures, taking into account national
legislation and sovereignty;
(c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of
indigenous peoples and members of local
communities, by taking into account relevant
international obligations, national circumstances
and laws, and noting that the United Nations
General Assembly has adopted the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
(d) The full and effective participation of relevant
stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and
local communities, in the actions referred to in
paragraphs 70 and 72 of this decision;
(e) That actions are consistent with the
conservation of natural forests and biological
diversity, ensuring that the actions referred to in
paragraph 70 of this decision are not used for the
conversion of natural forests, but are instead used to
incentivize the protection and conservation of
natural forests and their ecosystem services, and to
enhance other social and environmental benefits;
(f) Actions to address the risks of reversals;
(g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions
1. All REDD+ activities accord with the principles of
justice and environmental sustainability;
2. Peoples’ sovereignty over governance and
management of natural forest resources is accepted
and respected in accordance with existing national
and local laws and policies;
3. REDD+ initiative contributes to good governance
and sustainable management of natural forest
resources;
4. There is effective participation of key
stakeholders including forest dependent
communities in making informed decisions;
5. Benefits generated by the REDD+ initiative are
shared in a timely, transparent and equitable
manner among all relevant stakeholders for
improved livelihoods and well-being of forest
dependent people, the marginalized and vulnerable
groups;
6. Existing complaint/conflict resolution
mechanisms at local, sub-national and national
levels are respected and fully utilized; and
7. Key stakeholders have access to appropriate
information about the REDD+ initiative to enable
them make informed decisions.
Step 7 outlines the process for reporting on the performance of the REDD+ programme against the
indicators of the National REDD+ Safeguards. It proposes that a consultant and a facilitation team
should prepare a monitoring plan that defines what specific information will be collected, where it is
found, how it will be gathered and analyzed and who will be responsible. Not all information may be
relevant to all assessment periods, so the facilitation team and the Standards Committee should agree
on which indicators should be assessed at each assessment period. It proposes that the first monitoring
plan should focus on indicators that can be monitored at the current stage of the REDD+ initiative (e.g.
which may only include certain actions and locations), thereby potentially reducing the number of
indicators needed at that stage.
After the plan has been developed, Step 7 proposes that the REDD+ activities should be assessed
according to this plan, and that both the monitoring plan and assessment should be made publicly
available. Consultations will then be organized to facilitate stakeholder review of the report to enhance
5
quality and credibility. After approval by the Standards Committee, the full report of performance
against the indicators will also be made publicly available and further consultations organized. The
resulting report should provide a fair and accurate assessment of the performance of the REDD+
programme against the indicators of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards that can be used to communicate
to national and international stakeholders and to encourage improved performance.
Step 8 of the guide concerns collecting and assessing monitoring information. The facilitation team is to
organize information collection and compilation of the draft report. For credibility, information should
be collected from a sample of sites of different types and geographic locations. The facilitation team and
the consultant should try to collect primary data, provided this can be done “properly and effectively”.
Where reliable sources already exist, these should be used in the interests of cost effectiveness.
A key objective of a second phase of the UN-REDD National Programme in Tanzania is that “a system of
information on social and environmental safeguards has been established and agreed among all
stakeholders” (Government of Tanzania/FCPF 2014). One of the next steps for Tanzania in developing an
SIS is thus to investigate what kind of data can be collected during the implementation of REDD+,
which can provide information on how the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards are respected. Appropriate
indicators and approaches for collecting data depend on several factors, including the types of activities
undertaken, at what scale they are implemented and if there is existing data collection which can be
drawn upon.
It is thus useful to know what data is already available that can illustrate the current spatial extent of the
elements that the Safeguards intend to protect. To support this objective as well as broader spatial
planning for REDD+, the current project has built on earlier efforts by UN-REDD and NAFORMA to put
together a registry of available spatial data relevant to the Safeguards and REDD+ planning more
broadly. A gap analysis of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards Standards document was subsequently
performed to evaluate which relevant maps have already been created by UN-REDD and NAFORMA
(Runsten et al. 2013), and which elements have not yet been mapped (see section 4).
6
3. The role of spatial analyses in
supporting REDD+ planning
Spatial analyses can make a substantial contribution to effective land-use planning for climate change
mitigation, including REDD+, at both the national and sub-national level. This section of the report
outlines the role and utility of spatial analyses, in particular its role supporting REDD+ planning that
addresses safeguards and seeks to enhance the multiple benefits of REDD+ while reducing potential
risks.
3.1
The role and utility of spatial analysis in REDD+ planning
Maps can be used to inform REDD+ planning in a variety of ways, from tools for awareness raising and
consultation processes, to providing integral elements in identifying priority locations for REDD+
initiatives. Spatial planning is one of a range of processes that can assist REDD+ planning and
implementation. Additionally, the utility of spatial planning depends on access to accurate and recent
data of sufficient resolution, which can be used to produce maps which are viewed as accurate and
legitimate by the relevant stakeholders. Spatial planning therefore will often be most useful when used
in combination with other strategies and tools for REDD+ planning and implementation, such as
stakeholder consultations, cost-benefits analyses, and potentially field work to collect new data if it is
needed.
Spatial information can assist planners and stakeholders to understand existing conditions within an
area (for example, current forest cover and land use, current/planned infrastructure development or
population distribution), and therefore help in assessing which activities are most suitable in different
areas, including REDD+ actions. Depending on what spatial information is included, maps can also play
a particularly valuable role in identifying areas where REDD+ actions may achieve additional social and
environmental benefits, and in minimizing potential risks.
Just as the suitability or feasibility of REDD+ actions can differ according to location, the multiple
benefits and risks of REDD+ also vary across the landscape. REDD+ has the potential to deliver a range
of benefits in addition to protecting or enhancing carbon stocks. These include both social and
environmental benefits, such as the protection or enhancement of ecosystem services, improvement of
livelihoods, promotion of biodiversity conservation or improvement of natural resources governance.
Spatial information can also help to highlight potential risks from REDD+ actions, such as the
conversion of natural forest, displacement of deforestation pressures, or conflicts over land. For example,
spatial information can show potentially conflicting claims to land by mapping current land tenure or
ownership in relation to land concessions for agriculture, plantations or other economic activities, as
well as in relation to planned forestry interventions, including REDD+ actions.
A number of types of spatial information can contribute to exploring potential risks and benefits of
REDD+. For example, mapping the distribution of endemic and threatened species can help to identify
areas important for biodiversity conservation, as well as areas where the implementation of REDD needs
to minimize harm to biodiversity (e.g. wetland or grassland dependent species). Mapping the location of
poor communities and community forestry areas may help to identify potential REDD+ actions and
priority locations that can improve livelihoods for local communities, or to avoid areas where actions
might represent a risk to their livelihoods (e.g. establishing protected areas that reduces sustainable use
of forest resources by local communities). Ultimately, this information may be combined and provide
7
insights for decision makers on how the selection of REDD+ actions and their locations can contribute
to enhancing multiple benefits.
3.2. Spatial analyses and the REDD+ Cancun safeguards
One of the other REDD+ planning processes which it can be useful to consider when carrying out spatial
planning and spatial analysis is the national approach to the REDD+ safeguards. Agreed to by the parties
to the UNFCCC, the Cancun safeguards aim to guard against harm from implementing REDD+ and
enhance its benefits (see Box 1 in section 2 for more information). Spatial analysis can support the
development of a country approach to safeguards (e.g. by highlighting issues or trends in the forest and
other sectors that may be relevant for inclusion as indicators in a country approach to safeguards), and
help to ensure that particular safeguards are considered and addressed. Some examples of how spatial
information can be used in relation to certain elements of the Cancun Safeguards are as follows:

Safeguard (a) states that REDD+ actions should complement or be consistent with the objectives
of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements - spatial
data such as the distribution of forest management categories can help align REDD+ actions with
forestry programmes, and mapping the locations of areas linked to commitments under
international conventions, such as Ramsar sites, can assist in ensuring REDD+ actions
complement, rather than harm, these areas.

Safeguard (c) calls for REDD+ actions to respect the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples
and members of local communities – mapping the location of indigenous people and forestdependent communities can assist in selecting REDD+ actions and locations that respect the
knowledge and rights of local people.

Safeguard (e) states that actions should be consistent with the conservation of natural forests and
biological diversity, and not used for the conversion of natural forests, but are instead used to
incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services, and to
enhance other social and environmental benefits – mapping the distribution of natural forests and
other ecosystems can help to ensure that REDD+ actions do not lead to the conversion of these
areas, while spatial data showing the distribution of areas important for biodiversity and the
provision of ecosystem services can inform the development of REDD+ actions that enhance social
and environmental benefits.
Spatial information can also play a role in the development and operation of SIS. Countries need to
provide information through their SIS on how the REDD+ safeguards are being addressed and respected.
To this end, it can be useful to have baseline information to understand what changes have occurred in
relation to issues addressed by REDD+ initiatives (e.g. forest cover, natural forest, biodiversity, poverty).
Spatial information can assist in focusing survey design, for example change in natural forest only needs
to be identified in areas of existing natural forest.
8
4. Maps to support Tanzania’s REDD+
Safeguards: Gap analysis
A gap analysis of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards was carried out to identify key spatially explicit
elements that have not yet been addressed by spatial data collection and mapping efforts in the first
Tanzania REDD+ readiness process. The gap analysis examined each principle, criteria and indicator in
the Safeguards, identifying spatially related themes and subsequently issues or questions that decision
makers might raise when designing REDD+ actions to ensure that the Safeguards are respected. Next,
consideration was given to what appropriate maps may illustrate those issues or answer the questions,
and the spatial data required for the maps were identified.
A range of maps have already been produced through previous work by UN-REDD and NAFORMA
(Runsten et al. 2013) including: the distribution of biomass carbon stocks; the extent of natural forest;
the distribution of overall species richness as well as threatened animal and tree species; wildlife
corridors; points where NAFORMA observed non-timber forest products (NTFPs); the importance of
forests for limiting soil erosion; land designations; various drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation including oil and gas exploration, population pressure, charcoal making and fires.
Despite the number of useful maps that have already been produced, the gap analysis for this study
identified several themes for which information was still lacking at a national level, and would help
facilitate consideration of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards in planning of REDD+ actions. Table 1
summarizes the principles, criteria and indicators identified as feasible to illustrate with spatial data, as
well as the maps produced by this project to fill the identified gaps.
Sections 5 and 6 presents the maps developed to address the needs identified in the gap analysis. In
addition to filling such gaps, this project has also considered several more factors. First, forest
dependent species can be considered particularly important for REDD+ to pay attention to, and their
distribution have been addressed in dedicated maps. Second, should afforestation activities be
considered as REDD+ actions, it is important to be aware that species dependent on grasslands would be
negatively affected by afforestation in these ecosystems. Dedicated maps have thus been created related
to montane grassland dependent species. Section 7 of this report also provides a further illustration on
how information relevant to the safeguards can be combined with other data to assess the spatial
potential for a particular REDD+ action (forest restoration).
There are still a number of questions remaining relevant to REDD+ planning that could be answered
with spatial information products, but sufficient data was not accessible at the time of this project to
address them all, and should be kept in mind for the future. Table 1 includes also some of these
questions.
9
Table 1: Gap analysis of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards Standards. The analysis focused on themes that have not yet been mapped to facilitate respecting the Safeguards in
REDD+ planning.
Themes identified within the Tanzania
REDD+ Safeguards (VPO 2013a)
Good governance and sustainable natural
resources management
Issues or Questions which the maps should
address
 Where are community managed land
resources (WMA + PFM)?
Indicator 1.3.2: “All relevant stakeholders
including forest dependent communities,
including the marginalized and vulnerable
groups, access to justice promoted and
respected.”
(Community participation in the management
of forestry through PFM and wildlife resources
through Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs)
provides the institutional framework for
strengthening natural resource management
and governance at local level).
Indicator 1.4.1: “REDD+ initiatives are well
integrated in the forestry and other relevant
sectors.”
Indicator 1.7.1: “The REDD+ initiatives
contribute to socio-economic and sustainable
diversification of the use of natural forest
resources.”
Presence of Village Land use plans (LUPs)
Indicator 1.7.2: “The REDD+ initiatives
support land use planning to enhance
effective and sustainable management of
natural forest resources.”
Indicator 2.1.4: “Land use plans including
forest management plans in areas included in
the REDD+ implemented activities recognize
and respect customary and statutory rights of
forest dependent communities specifically
women and other marginalized/vulnerable
social groups that contribute to sustainable
forest management.”
Food security for rural communities
Indicator 3.4.1: “Programs to improve food
Maps created in current project
Map 1: Updated WMAs and PFM
Maps created by UNREDD/NAFORMA in 2013
Land use designations: reserved
land by the Tanzanian government
(forest reserves and protected areas)
and location of PFM activities
Potential zones for REDD+ actions
to extend areas of Community Based
Forest
Management (CBFM) to enhance
sustainable management of forests
Other relevant questions for future efforts:
 What is the distribution of/proportion of
marginalized/vulnerable groups in areas
targeted for REDD+ actions?
NTFPs observed in the plots of the
NAFORMA biophysical survey
Potential zones for REDD+ action to
enhance sustainable management of
forest in production forest reserves
 Where are villages with developed land
use plans to date?
Map 2: Status of land use planning in
Tanzania, i.e. percentage of villages
with LUP in each District
Other relevant questions for future efforts:
 Where are current land uses providing
sufficient land for the communities in
villages (in relation to standard demands)?
 Where are community managed land
resources, e.g. WMA, in association with the
developed village land use plans?
 What is spatial distribution of Land Parcel
ownership –those with customary title deeds
or statutory title deeds in relation to forest
resources targeted for REDD+?
 What is the status of food security in the
country?
 Where are the programmes to improve
Map 3: Districts identified for Big
Results Now (BRN) and Agricultural
Sector Development Programme
Plots where the NAFORMA field
inventory has observed impact on
the land from charcoal production
10
security are introduced, promoted,
sustainably implemented, monitored and
evaluated.”
food security?
 Where are the suitable lands for
improved food security?
Indicator 3.4.2: “Programs to improve energy
security are introduced, promoted,
sustainably implemented, monitored and
evaluated.”
Other relevant questions for future efforts:

Where are communities who are energy
secure/insecure?

Where are communities who are likely to
become energy insecure due to REDD+
activities? Or are already energy insecure
due to REDD+ activities?

What is land suitability for main crops,
along with other factors related to
improved food security (e.g. road access)?
Indicator 3.4.3: “Programs for land use and
master plan are emphasized and
implemented.”
Species
Indicator 7.2.2: “Species that are rare,
endemic or threatened with extinction are
identified, protected, restored and
monitored.”
 What is the distribution of endemic
species in Tanzania?
 What is the distribution of threatened
amphibian, bird, mammal and reptile
species species in Tanzania?
 What is the distribution of climate
change vulnerable amphibian, bird and
reptile species in Tanzania?
 What is the distribution of forestdependent threatened amphibian, bird,
mammal and reptile species in Tanzania?
(ASDP) projects
Map 4: Vulnerability to food
insecurity
Map 5: Distribution of globally
threatened amphibian, bird,
mammal, and reptile species
Map 6: Distribution of globally
threatened reptile species
Map 7: Distribution of forestdependent amphibian, bird, mammal
and reptile species
Map 8: Distribution of forestdependent reptile species
Map 9: Distribution of climate
change vulnerable amphibian, bird
and reptile species
Average tree species richness in
NAFORMA plots
Observed threatened tree species in
the NAFORMA inventory
Animal species (mammals, birds,
amphibians, threatened and total)
richness in relation to above ground
biomass carbon
Important wildlife corridors in
relation to protected areas, natural
forest and woody biomass carbon
stocks
Map 10: Distribution of climate
change vulnerable reptile species
Ecosystems and ecosystem services
Principle 7: “The REDD+ initiative maintains,
promotes and enhances sustainable
 What is the distribution of ecosystems
which provide important ecosystem
services such as mangroves?
Map 11: Endemic species richness and
above-ground biomass carbon
Map 12: Forest cover change in
Tanzania, 2000-2012
Estimations of extent of natural
forest according to different
relevant definitions, using the
11
conservation of the country’s natural forests
for their biodiversity and all ecosystem
services (co-benefits) while meeting the
needs of forest dependent communities.”
Indicator 7.2.2: “Species that are rare,
endemic or threatened with extinction are
identified, protected, restored and
monitored.”
Indicator 7.2.3: “REDD+ activities are
designed in a participatory manner to
maintain and enhance biodiversity and all
ecosystem services while considering the
sustainable use of forest resources by forest
dependent communities.”
Criteria 7.3: “The REDD+ initiatives protect
natural forests from degradation and
conversion to other land uses including forest
plantations.”
Indicator 7.3.3: “REDD+ activities are
designed to maintain and enhance
sustainable conservation and protection of
natural forests.”
 What is the current distribution of
mangrove forest and what mangrove
areas have been recently deforested?
 What are the biomass carbon stocks in
mangroves?
 Which areas include habitat for
threatened and endemic forest species,
and which of these areas have recently
been deforested?
 Which areas include habitat for
threatened and endemic montane
grassland species, and which of these
areas have experienced forest gains?
Other relevant questions for future efforts:
 What is the distribution of the smallest/
most critical ecosystems in Tanzania?
 What are the areas where nature or culture
based tourism is occurring and coinciding
with forest resources? What is the potential
for extending tourism activities to other
areas?
 What forests in water catchment areas may
be particularly important for regulating
water supply and so in supporting multiple
benefits from a REDD+ perspective?
Map 13: Forest dependent threatened
species richness and forest cover loss,
2000-2012
Map 14: Forest dependent endemic
species richness and forest cover loss,
2000-2012
Map 15: Mangrove forest cover
change, 1990-2010
Map 16: Potential above-ground
biomass carbon in mangroves and
mangrove loss, 1990-2010
NAFORMA LULC map
Woody biomass carbon stocks,
natural forest and protected areas
Non-timber forest products
observed in the plots of the
NAFORMA biophysical survey.
Importance of forests for limiting
soil erosion
Potential zones for REDD+ action to
rehabilitate forests
Map 17: Montane grassland
dependent threatened species
richness and forest gain, 2000-2012
Map 18: Montane grassland endemic
species richness and forest gain,
2000-2012
Criteria 7.4: “The REDD+ initiative ensure
restoration of degraded areas using available
indigenous or alternative compatible
species.”
Land Policy Statement 4.2.10 - Mechanisms
for protecting sensitive areas will be created.
Sensitive area means:
Catchment area
Area with high biodiversity
Mangrove area
12
5. Spatial information relevant to social
safeguards to support REDD+ planning
The following section of the report presents spatial information relevant to addressing and respecting
social safeguards and enhancing the benefits of REDD+ to improved governance, land-use planning,
food security and livelihoods in rural communities.
5.1 Good governance and sustainable natural resources
management
Community participation is a key factor for ensuring good governance and sustainable management of
natural resources. In Tanzania, it is implemented through community involvement in Participatory
Forest Management (PFM) and Wildlife Management Areas (WMA).
PFM was introduced by the Forest Act of 2002, which provides a clear legal basis for communities,
groups or individuals to own, manage or co-manage forests under a wide range of conditions. PFM
includes Joint Forest Management (JFM) and Community Based Forest Management (CBFM). JFM takes
place on land that is owned and managed by either central or local government (reserved land).
Villagers enter into management agreements to share responsibilities for the management with the
forest owner. CBFM takes place on village or private land, and the trees are owned and managed
(including the costs and benefits relating to management and utilization) by a village council, a group,
or an individual. According to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT 2006), the total
area covered by PFM is 3,672,854 ha (i.e. 2,060,608 ha under CBFM and 1,612,246 ha under JFM,
involving 1,821 villages). Communities involved in PFM report improvements in livelihoods through
increased forest revenues and secure supply of subsistence forest products, improved forest quality
including factors such as improved water flow and reduced illegal activities, through sustainable
management practices.
WMAs were legally established through the WMA Regulations of 2002 (revised 2005) and are now
established in the Wildlife Conservation Act of 2009 to strengthen involvement of communities in
wildlife management. WMAs are also governed by, among other laws, the Wildlife Conservation Act of
1974, the Village Land Act of 1999, and the Local Government Act (District Authorities) of 1982.
Community-based organizations called Authorized Associations (AA) carry out the day-to-day
management of the WMAs, including land-use planning and implementing income-generating
activities on behalf of their communities.
The WMA mechanism provides a way for local communities to plan, manage and benefit from their
own land. Communities can make a substantial amount of money from businesses within WMAs, and
the presence of WMAs may make communities more attractive to businesses. In addition, WMAs make
an important contribution to conservation in Tanzania by providing buffer zones around the parks,
linking corridors used by migrating animals, and conserving special areas important to specific species.
Although substantial information and spatial data for the PFMs and WMAs are already available from
previous studies, the information is scattered and not easily accessible, making it difficult for planners
to obtain complete information. Maps on existing WMAs and PFM can inform the process of
developing REDD+ safeguards in Tanzania. Specifically, the maps produced in this project provide
13
information relevant to Principle 1 of the Tanzania REDD+ safeguards: “The REDD+ initiative
contributes to good governance and sustainable natural resources management such as land, forest,
water, wildlife and minerals” (see Table 1 for more information). When combined with other
information, such as the location of protected areas, settlements existing land use-land cover and local
knowledge, the maps may help identify potential areas for the establishment of new WMAs and PFM.
Figure 1 shows the locations of WMAs (both with AA and other statuses) and PFMs (both CBFM and
JFM).
Figure 1: Locations of WMAs and PFMs
This map shows the locations of WMAs, including both those with AAs and other statuses, and PFMs, including
both CBFM and JFM (Source: MNRT and WWF Country Office, Tanzania) (2012).
5.2 Presence of Village Land use plans
Land use planning is a key element in effective natural resource management. It helps to balance
ecological, economic and social objectives, thereby facilitating implementation of REDD+, as well as
preventing land use conflicts. The importance of land use planning in REDD+ planning is also
recognized by various legislations, policies and documents in Tanzania. For example Tanzania’s REDD+
Safeguards provides specific indicators related to land use planning. These include, for example,
Indicator 1.7.2: “The REDD+ program supports land use planning to enhance effective and sustainable
management of natural resources”.
14
The existing National Land Use Policy (NLUP) and National Land Use Planning Commission (NLUPC)
provide safeguards to support REDD+ implementation in Tanzania. While NLUP provides planning
recommendations for different sectors such as forestry, NLUPC produced guidelines for Participatory
Land Use Planning (PLUP), and has carried out land use planning activities at the village level in many
locales. The participatory approach is central to the whole process of PLUP whereby villagers are fully
involved in the creation, implementation and revision of village land-use plans. This is in line with
Principle 4 of Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards: “Key stakeholders participate fully and effectively in the
design, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of REDD+ program”.
In order to explore the status of land use planning at district level in Tanzania, this study mapped the
percentage of villages with land use plans in each district (Figure 2). The study used data set provided
by NLUPC showing the number of villages with land use plans in each district and census data from
2002, obtained from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Figure 2: Percentage of villages with LUPs in each District
The map reveals an uneven distribution of land use planning activities over the country. Most of the activities have
been concentrated in villages in Bariadi and Itilima Districts in Simiyu Region, Babati District in Manyara Region,
Mkinga District in Tanga Region, and Kilwa District in Lindi Region. This could be due to the fact that most of
these activities rely on funding from donors such as WWF and the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID), which have interests in specific locations.
15
5.3 Food security for rural communities
Agriculture (including raising livestock) is the dominant sector in the Tanzanian economy, providing
livelihoods, income and employment to over 80% of the population. It accounts for 27% of the
country’s GDP, 30% of export earnings, and provides 65% of raw material for domestic industries.
The agricultural sector is, however, linked to one of the key drivers of deforestation in Tanzania. Forests
are annexed for agricultural use because either the current area under agriculture is not enough to
support population pressures, or land under agriculture use becomes unproductive due to poor
agricultural practices. As a result people have to find virgin land that is temporarily fertile, or practice
shifting cultivation.
In order to ensure that proposed REDD+ initiatives contribute to the adaptation and mitigation of
climate change, while also contributing to food security for improved livelihoods, the Tanzania REDD+
Safeguards propose that programmes to improve food security are introduced and implemented. Figure
3 maps vulnerability to food security in different districts of Tanzania, based on analysis of food crop
production forecast from the last six seasons (i.e. 2007/08, 2008/09, 2009/2010, 2010/11, 2011/12, and
2012/13). In addition, the study has mapped those districts where some of the financed or planned
national agricultural programmes are or will be contributing to the improvement of agricultural
productivity in Tanzania (Figure 4). These programmes are the Agricultural Sector Development
Programme (ASDP4) and Big Results Now (BRN5).
It is envisaged that the upcoming REDD+ initiatives will use this information as an input during
planning for agricultural programmes. Currently, the two maps suggest that conditions related to food
insecurity do not align well with the implementation of the two agricultural programmes. The maps
show that most of the BRN and ASDP projects are not directed to areas prone to food insecurity. This
could be because of other factors, such as land suitability (soils, rainfall, etc).
4
The objective of the ASDP is to enable farmers to have better access to and use of agricultural knowledge, technologies,
marketing systems and infrastructure, all of which contribute to higher productivity. (URT, 2006).
5 The BRN initiative aims to adapt new methods of working under a specified timeframe for delivery of the change
required. For the agriculture sector, there are to be by 2015, 25 commercial farming schemes dealing with paddy and
sugarcane, 78 collective rice irrigation and marketing schemes, and 275 collective warehouse-based marketing schemes
(URT 2013).
16
Figure 3: Vulnerability to food insecurity
This map indicates districts where food shortages are likely/not likely to occur based of the average food crop
production forecast in the last six seasons. (Source: Crop Monitoring and Early Warning National Food Security
Division, Ministry of Agriculture Food Security and Cooperatives).
17
Figure 4: Distribution of ASDP and BRN projects
This map shows the distribution of two of the large agricultural programmes in Tanzania, which aims to enhance
food productivity and hence improve food security and allow communities to better adapt to climate change. These
improvements are also foreseen to reduce lateral expansion of agriculture, and thus reduce deforestation.
18
6. Spatial information relevant to
environmental safeguards to support
REDD+ planning
The following section of the report explores spatial information that is relevant to addressing and
respecting environmental safeguards and enhancing the benefits of REDD+ to Tanzania's biodiversity,
ecosystems and ecosystem services. All the maps in this section have been developed to provide basis
for decision making and assessment on various elements of the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards.
Collectively however, and together with the maps developed by Runsten et al. (2013), they can all
contribute to Safeguards Criteria 7.1 which say that the “REDD+ initiatives [shall] analyze the possible
impacts on biodiversity and all ecosystem services when considering options for REDD+ actions”.
6.1 Species
The species-related biodiversity information and analyses presented below draw substantially on a
study prepared by the IUCN Global Species Programme for this project on “Identifying potential
biodiversity co-benefits available through the implementation of REDD+ in Tanzania” (Carr et al. 2014).
This study presents climate change vulnerability assessment results for Tanzania’s reptile, amphibian
and bird species, as well as the distribution of threatened and forest-dependent species (amphibians,
birds, mammals and reptiles).
Maps on species can provide a range of information relevant for REDD+ planning purposes. For
example, this information can assist in addressing Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards, which include specific
indicators related to biodiversity conservation, particular for endemic, threatened species, such as
Indicator 7.2.2: “Species that are rare, endemic or threatened with extinction are identified, protected,
restored and monitored” (VPO 2013a). Areas with high biodiversity are also considered ‘sensitive areas’6,
and are thus prioritised in the Land Policy Statement and Tanzania Forestry Act. Protecting and/or
improving the management of areas where these threatened and endemic species occur, especially by
addressing encroachment in protected areas and improving management and protection in buffer zones
and wildlife corridors can help address this safeguard. Enhanced conditions for threatened species
would then be a benefit additional to reduced emissions. Mapping the richness of globally threatened,
climate change vulnerable, endemic and/or forest dependant species may thus inform the selection of
priority areas for conservation through REDD+ actions. The following analyses show that the areas of
the Eastern Arc Mountains stand out in particular as supporting the highest numbers of threatened,
climate change vulnerable and forest-dependent species.
Distribution of threatened amphibian, bird, mammal and reptile species
Figure 5 shows the concentrations and proportions of threatened (Critically Endangered, Endangered,
Vulnerable) terrestrial vertebrate species (amphibians, birds, mammals and reptiles) in Tanzania.
Understanding the distribution of high concentrations of threatened species, or high proportions of
species threatened, is highly relevant for REDD+ in a number of ways. These locations may indicate
where REDD+ actions can bring co-benefits in terms of conservation of species of global conservation
importance (through conservation or restoration of forest habitat) and respect Safeguards indicator
6
Sensitive areas include water catchment areas, small islands, forests, national heritage and areas of biodiversity.
19
7.2.2, as well as in minimize the risk that REDD+ actions (e.g. afforestation) result in conversion of
other types of habitats important to the preservation of threatened species.
Figure 5 (left) shows that the greatest concentrations of total numbers of threatened species (up to 61
species per grid cell) are found in the Eastern Arc Mountains, the eastern African coastal forests and
areas around the Mahali Mountains. Similarly, these areas feature as important locations in terms of
proportions of threatened species. At some locations, up to 7.3% of species are threatened.
Figure 5: Distribution of globally threatened amphibian, bird, mammal, and reptile species in Tanzania.
Maps show total numbers of species (left-hand side) and total proportions of species (right-hand side) (per 10
minute grid cell) known to be threatened (Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered) according to the
IUCN Red List of threatened species (IUCN 2014).
Figure 6 provides the concentrations and proportions of threatened reptile species, showing that these
species have a more limited coverage of the country. When considering both the total numbers and
proportions of threatened reptile species, again similar locations such as the Eastern Arc Mountains and
eastern African coastal forests are identified as important. The greatest concentrations (up to 16 species
per grid cell) are in the regions of Tanga and Morogoro, as are the highest percentages, where up to 25%
of species are considered threatened. Elsewhere, in regions such as Kilimanjaro, Iringa and northern
Morogoro, numbers of threatened reptile species can reach up to eight per grid cell (though more
typically three to five) and proportions of threatened species up to 10-20%.
20
Figure 6: Distribution of globally threatened reptile species in Tanzania.
Maps show total numbers of species (left-hand side) and total proportions of species (right-hand side) (per 10
minute grid cell) known to be threatened (Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered) according to the
IUCN Red List of threatened species (IUCN 2014).
Distribution of forest-dependent amphibian, bird, mammal and reptile species
Considering the distribution of forest-dependent species across the country is another way to explore
potential co-benefits from the implementation of REDD+ initiatives. Figure 7 show the concentrations
and proportions of forest-dependent7 terrestrial vertebrate species (amphibians, birds, mammals and
reptiles) in Tanzania. Similar to the results for threatened species, for the total numbers of forestdependent species, the greatest concentrations (up to 182 species per grid cell) again occur in the
Eastern Arc Mountains. Similar areas are also important for forest dependent species in terms of
proportions. Large expanses containing high proportions (12-17%) of species with dependence on forests
are found in the southeast of the country, as well as along the western borderline of the country. The
regions of northwestern Kagera, northern Tanga, northern Morogoro and eastern Iringa bordering
Morogoro support the highest proportions of forest-dependent species (up to 22% at some locations).
The distributions of forest-dependent reptiles in Tanzania are shown in Figure 8, which suggests that
northern Tanga and the Eastern Arc Mountains are highly important for these species as well (in
comparison to Figure 7). These locations support the highest numbers (up to 24 species per grid cell),
while in terms of proportions, the greatest percentages (27-34%) are also found along the border of
Iringa and Morogoro, and on Lake Victoria. The high proportions shown on Lake Victoria, however, are
likely the result of the low (relative to other parts of the country) number of reptile species found there.
Throughout much of the country 8-15% of reptile species are considered forest-dependent, although in
the southeast, areas with higher proportions (15-28%) are quite common, while in the north, areas with
lower proportions (3-8%) are more common.
7
Forest-dependence was inferred as follows: As part of the species Red Listing process, information on the habitats that
each species may be found in, as well of the respective importance of each habitat to that species. To infer forestdependence in a given species, at least one of the following two criteria needed to be met: 1) The species is known to
occur exclusively in forest habitats (i.e. IUCN habitat classification: category 1, Forest), and/or; 2) The species occurs in
more than one habitat type, of which at least one is classified as forest and is deemed by experts to be of ‘major
importance’ to the species.
21
Figure 7: Distribution of forest-dependent amphibian, bird, mammal and reptile species in Tanzania.
Figure 8: Distribution of forest-dependent reptile species in Tanzania.
Maps show total numbers of species (left-hand side) and proportions of all species (right-hand side) (per 10 minute
grid cell) which, according to the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2014) occur exclusively in forest habitat(s), or for which
forest habitat(s) are of known major importance.
Distribution of climate change vulnerable amphibian, bird and reptile species
Another way of identifying threatened species (as prioritized for protection, restoration and monitoring
in Tanzania’s Safeguards Standards) is to consider species vulnerable to climate change, which is likely
to become a more significant threat to biodiversity in the country as climate change impacts increase in
future decades. The study by IUCN’s Global Species Programme also examines the distribution of
22
climate change vulnerable amphibians, birds, and reptile species 8 in Tanzania, applying IUCN’s Climate
Change Vulnerability Assessment Framework (see Box 2 below). Trait data for amphibians and birds
were made available by Foden et al. (2013), while for reptiles, data was newly collated concurrently with
Red Listing work at a species assessment workshop in February 2014 in Tanzania, as well as through
remote consultations with species experts. For detailed information on the methodology employed in
the study, please see the report produced (Carr et al. 2014).
Box 2: IUCN’s Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Framework
IUCN has developed an approach to assessing species’ vulnerability to climate change that
incorporates the biological and ecological traits that may increase or decrease climate change
impacts on species. Known as the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Framework, it provides
a series of ‘rules’ that are used to classify species according to three dimensions of climate change
vulnerability: exposure, sensitivity and low adaptability. Guided by these trait groups, taxonspecific biological, ecological, physiological and environmental traits are then selected.
Species are assigned scores of ‘unknown’, ‘low’ or ‘high’ for each trait, based on a broad range of
information sources. While in some cases, thresholds of risk are clear (e.g. ‘occurs only on
mountain tops’), in many cases there is no priori basis for setting a particular extinction risk
threshold. For such traits (e.g. tolerance of exposure to projected temperature changes), an
arbitrary threshold of the 25% most severely affected species within the group, and categorize them
as ‘high’ for this element.
Exposure is assessed by overlaying projected changes in taxon-relevant climatic variables on refined
range maps to obtain simple measures of climatic change to which each species will be exposed.
Once again, species are scored as ‘unknown’, ‘low’ or ‘high’. Because thresholds for exposure to
climatic changes have seldom been established, scores are typically derived by ranking species and
selecting the worst affected species as those with highest exposure.
Sensitivity, Low Adaptability and Exposure scores for each species are then assembled and overall
vulnerability scores calculated according to two steps: species are assigned a high score under each
dimension if they have any contributing trait (e.g. considered sensitive due to being a habitat
specialist). They are considered highly vulnerable overall, however, only if they scored as ‘high’
under all three criteria.
Since many of the trait thresholds are relative cut-offs for continuous variables (e.g. 25% of species
of greatest exposure to changes in mean temperatures), rather than empirically tested thresholds of
vulnerability, this approach provides a relative, not absolute, measure of climate change
vulnerability. The actual numbers and percentages of species emerging as vulnerable through this
approach represent only the degree of overlap between the three vulnerability dimensions rather
than a measure of vulnerability overall. Species identified as vulnerable to climate change should be
regarded as estimates of the most vulnerable species, noting that in some taxonomic groups, all
species may be at risk from climate change impacts while in others, far fewer than the most
vulnerable species we identify may actually be seriously negatively affected.
(Carr et al., 2014)
Understanding the distribution of climate change vulnerable species provides opportunity for planners
of climate change mitigation and adaptation activities, including for broader climate planning and
REDD+, to facilitate biodiversity conservation. For some species that possess traits relating to particular
forest habitats and climate change (e.g. breeding or feeding grounds are located in forest habitats), the
protection of forests through REDD+ actions could help to promote the resilience to climate change
8
The IUCN assessments aimed to cover all known species occurring in the country and presently accepted to be
taxonomically valid within each of the groups described above. In some cases, however, it was necessary to exclude certain
species from the assessment, typically due to a current lack of taxonomic clarity. These omissions are detailed in Carr et al,
2014.
23
impacts of these habitats by simply maintaining greater numbers of them, and thus reducing the overall
negative impacts of climate change. Forest-dependent species that are believed to possess a low
tolerance to changes in temperature and/or precipitation could benefit from the conservation of forest
habitats, as these habitats themselves can act as buffers to such changes in climate (i.e. through the
mediation of local temperature and evaporation patterns by the forest canopy).
Figure 9 shows the concentrations and proportions of climate change vulnerable amphibian and bird
species by 2050 and reptile species by 2055 throughout Tanzania. When considering total numbers of
vulnerable species, the greatest concentrations (up to 76 species per grid cell) are in northwestern
Kagera, a large area surrounding the borderline between Arusha and Kilimanjaro, and the Eastern Arc
Mountains in Northern Tanga; with the exception of Tanga, these areas differ from those identified in
the previous maps as hosting the greater concentrations and proportions of threatened and forest
dependent species. However, nearly half of northeastern Tanzania as well as some areas in central and
southern Kagera, eastern Iringa and northern Morogoro have between 40 and 53 climate change
vulnerable species per grid cell. In terms of proportions of climate change vulnerable species, the
assessments suggest that by 2055 the greatest impacts could occur in the area around Lake Victoria and
on the island of Pemba, where, at some locations, up to 20% of species are assessed as climate change
vulnerable. Elsewhere, similar to total numbers, northern Tanzania clearly has a much higher
proportion of climate change vulnerable species (7-20%) than the southern region of the country (< 7%),
except the coastal area of Pwani, Lindi and Mtwara (7-8%).
Figure 10 shows the concentrations and proportions of climate change vulnerable reptile species
throughout Tanzania by 2055. When considering total numbers of vulnerable species, the greatest
concentrations (up to 18 species per grid cell) are also in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanga, while in
terms of proportions, by 2055 the greatest impacts could occur in northern Kagera and on the island of
Pemba, where, at some locations, up to 36% of reptile species are assessed as climate change vulnerable.
In surrounding areas, including in much of Kilimanjaro, the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanga and
coastal Pwani and Dar es Salaam, between 10 and 13 climate change vulnerable reptiles per grid cell can
be found. In these areas, between 15 and 25% of reptiles in a given grid cell are considered vulnerable to
climate change.
Figure 9: Distribution of climate change vulnerable amphibian, bird and reptile species in Tanzania.
24
Figure 10: Distribution of climate change vulnerable reptile species in Tanzania.
Maps show total numbers of species (left-hand side) and total proportions of all species (right-hand side) (per 10
minute grid cell) believed to be vulnerable to climate change impacts, using exposure measures by 2050, based on
the SRES A1B emissions scenario and an optimistic assumption for all unknown data values.
Information such as the spatial analyses related to species presented here can also form useful layers, in
further analysis in combination with other data, to inform REDD+ planning. For example, Figure 11
below shows the relationship between endemic species richness and above-ground biomass carbon.
REDD+ aims to decrease GHG emissions from the forest sector through the reduction of deforestation
and forest degradation and the protection and enhancement of carbon stocks; the highest emissions
occur where there are the highest carbon stocks. By considering locations where there is congruence
between forest carbon stocks and biodiversity, such analysis can assist in the identification of locations
where the emission reduction objectives of REDD+, as well as multiple benefits for biodiversity
conservation, can be achieved. Areas where both carbon stocks and biodiversity are under threat are
potentially areas where REDD+ implementation can bring the greatest benefits for both these priorities.
25
Figure 11: Endemic species richness and above-ground biomass carbon.
26
6.2 Ecosystems and ecosystem services
Spatial information can also be used to explore the distribution of ecosystems, habitats and ecosystem
services across the landscape, such as areas important for the provision of ecosystem services and their
access or use. Such information can help to determine locations where interventions, such as REDD+
initiatives can protect or enhance ecosystems, habitats and ecosystem services. Ecosystem services are
the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems (MA 2005) and are often categorized as:
 Provisioning services, such as food, fresh water, fuel and timber;
 Regulating services, such as climate and hydrological regulation, water purification and disease
prevention;
 Supporting services, such as nutrient cycling, habitat provision and primary productivity; and
 Cultural services, such as aesthetic and spiritual values, and tourism and recreation.
Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards Standards directs that the REDD+ programme in the country “maintains,
promotes and enhances sustainable conservation of the country’s natural forests for their biodiversity
and all ecosystem services (co-benefits) while meeting the needs of forest dependent
communities”(VPO 2013a). It also specifies indicators related to ecosystems and ecosystem services,
including: 7.2.3: REDD+ activities are designed to maintain and enhance biodiversity, ecosystem
services and forest dependent community needs. Importantly, the maintenance and enhancement of
ecosystem services through REDD+ initiatives can also assist in the delivery of other benefits, such as
increasing resilience to climate change, and in addressing other types of safeguards, such meeting the
needs of forest dependent communities.
The following maps examine the distribution of selected habitat types and ecosystem services across
Tanzania, particularly in relation to threats to these areas, such as forest cover change, and relevance to
the Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards Standards and other aspects of REDD+ planning.
Forest cover change
In the process of identifying where REDD+ actions can have the most impact, it is necessary to know
where the frontiers of deforestation are, where the various drivers have the most severe effect and how
they interact with carbon stocks and elements that could potentially benefit from REDD+ actions.
In 2013, UN-REDD and NAFORMA mapped a number of indicators of drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation: oil and gas concessions, population pressure, fires, road network and charcoal activities.
However, a dataset recording areas of recent deforestation was missing. A global dataset recently made
available by Hansen et al. (2013) shows areas of tree cover loss and tree cover gain at 30 × 30 meter
resolution. Figure 12 uses this dataset to show areas of tree cover loss and gain between the years 2000
and 2012. The map shows that deforestation detectable at 30 m resolution occurs in many parts of the
country, but that concentrated deforestation is limited to a smaller number of areas. It also shows that
the boundaries of some reserved (government) land are well enforced, with little deforestation taking
place inside the borders, while others, usually smaller reserved areas, have been heavily affected. See the
inset maps in Figure 12 for examples of this in the centre of the country.
It is important to note that tree loss does not have to be the loss of natural forest, but can also be felling
of tree plantations or perennial crops. Foresters attending a working session of the project in Morogoro
in April 2014 suggested that this could be the case for some of the areas of tree loss in Mtwara, the
south-eastern corner of Tanzania. Similarly, tree gain could be natural regeneration of forest, or new
timber plantations or perennial crops.
27
Maps showing forest cover change can be useful for REDD+ planners to select areas to be studied more
closely to understand what the local drivers of deforestation are and whether or not REDD+ can take
action to reduce pressures on the forest. Areas of recent deforestation can sometimes indicate a frontier,
with more deforestation likely to occur nearby. Further investigation is also needed to understand the
underlying drivers of deforestation and degradation. If the cause of deforestation is the establishment of
permanent agricultural areas, for example, different actions may be appropriate than if the cause is
forest fire. Action can also be taken to reverse deforestation, such as by restoring recently deforested
land. (See section 7 of this report for further discussion on the potential for forest restoration under
REDD+ in Tanzania).
Figure 12: Forest cover change in Tanzania, 2000-2012
Figures 13 and 14 build on this analysis by showing two indications of the distribution of biodiversity of
conservation importance in relation to forest loss. The maps show the species richness of forest
dependent, threatened species and the species richness of forest dependent, endemic species. Wildlife
species dependent on forest habitat for their survival are particularly vulnerable to forest disturbance,
and may particularly benefit from REDD+ actions which maintain, protect or enhance forest where
these species are concentrated. For example, the maps show that the Eastern Arc Mountains are
especially rich in forest-dependent endemic and threatened species are also experiencing forest loss in
some locations, while forest loss has also been significant in parts of Tabora, Kigoma and Pwani. As the
28
protection, restoration and monitoring of rare, threatened and endemic species is prioritized in the
Tanzania REDD+ Safeguards Standards, these maps can help to locate and design REDD+ actions that
address and respect this safeguard.
Figure 13: Forest dependent threatened species richness and forest cover loss, 2000-2012
29
Figure 14: Forest dependent endemic species richness and forest cover loss, 2000-2012
30
The following maps in Figures 15-17 examine the distribution of mangrove forests in Tanzania, as well as
changes in mangrove cover between 1990 and 2010, and estimates of biomass carbon stored in
mangroves. Tanzania’s mangrove forests provide a range of important ecosystem services, including:
providing shelter, feeding and breeding grounds for numerous species of fish and shellfish; preventing
siltation and pollution in nearby coral reefs (by trapping sediments and pollutants); facilitating the
build up coastal land through silt accumulation; stabilising the coastline and protecting it from coastal
erosion; providing NTFPs for local communities; and contributing to tourism, e.g. through protecting
the reefs and coastline. Mangroves also make a significant contribution to carbon sequestration and
storage.
While the extent of Tanzania’s mangrove forests is small in comparison to woodlands, they are, as with
montane and lowland forests, of concern for forest management and potentially REDD+. This is due to
their potential to contribute to emissions reduction – mangroves are among the most carbon-rich
forests in the tropics (Donato et al. 2011), the risk of deforestation and degradation posed to them, and
their importance for biodiversity conservation and the provision of ecosystem services and livelihoods.
Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards also include several elements highly relevant to the preservation of the
country’s mangrove forests, including: Criteria 7.3: “The REDD+ initiatives protect natural forests from
degradation and conversion to other land uses including forest plantations”; and Indicator 7.3.3:
“REDD+ activities are designed to maintain and enhance sustainable conservation and protection of
natural forests”. In addition, mangrove forests are considered ‘sensitive areas’ prioritized for protection
under the Forest Act.
Tanzania had a total of 944.1 km2 of mangrove forests in 2010, compared to 980.2 km2 in 1990, according
to the data presented in Table 2 below (based on Giri et al. 2011). This indicates a net loss of 36.1 km 2
over that decade. The map in Figure 15 shows mangrove areas are concentrated along the northern
coastal areas opposite the islands of Pemba and Zanzibar. These coastal areas have experienced overall
mangrove loss, while the maps suggest that there have been some gains on the islands. In Figure 16,
there have also been losses in the mangrove areas on the southern coast of Tanzania, particularly on the
inland fringes of the Rufiji Delta, while in a similar pattern, there have been some gains in mangrove
cover on Mafia Island.
Table 2: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010
Total area in 1990
980.2 km2
Gain
237.5 km2
Loss
273.6 km2
No change
706.6 km2
Total area in 2010
944.1 km2
31
Figure 15: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010, with insets showing the northern coast
32
Figure 16: Mangrove forest cover change, 1990-2010, with inset showing the southern coast
Figure 17 shows the potential above-ground biomass carbon of mangrove forests9 in Tanzania, in
relation to mangrove cover change during 1990-2010. These maps show that the areas with the highest
potential carbon storage are located in patches along the northern coast and Rufiji Delta and the islands
of Pemba, Zanzibar and Mafia. These areas on the North Coast and Rufiji Delta have also experienced
the highest losses on mangrove cover, indicating that they are contributing to GHG emissions from the
country’s forest sector and can be considered priority areas for further investigations related to the
implementation of REDD+. It is important to note that soil carbon is not considered in this map due to
lack of data, but soil carbon can make up 49–98% of carbon storage in mangrove ecosystems (Donato et
al. 2011).
9
The data represent potential rather than existing biomass; values of above-ground biomass are based on a climate-based
model and the mangrove map developed by Spalding et al. (2010; cited in Hutchinson et al. 2013) and do not take into
account anthropogenic changes or degradation and activities which will affect biomass.
33
Figure 17: Potential above-ground biomass carbon in mangroves and mangrove loss, 1990-2010
34
Figures 18 and 19 show the distribution of montane grassland dependent10 threatened and endemic
species in Tanzania, in relation to gains in forest cover. The maps show that areas such as Arusha, Mara
and Simiyu in the north of the country, and scattered patches in Morogoro, Njombe and other parts of
the country host higher densities of threatened species that occur in montane grasslands. In terms of
endemic montane grassland dependent species, these areas are even more restricted, concentrated in
small patches in the Eastern Arc Mountains. Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards prioritize the protection of
rare, endemic and threatened species and ecosystems; the country’s grasslands are home to biodiversity
of national and international conservation importance and face a number of threats to their existence,
including the expansion of industrial tree plantations, such as pine and eucalyptus. For example, the
maps highlight the areas where forest gains overlap and/or border with areas important for montane
grassland species. This is of particular significance to REDD+ implementation, as to align with the
Cancun safeguards and Tanzania’s safeguards policies, REDD+ actions should not include or encourage
the conversion of non-forest ecosystems, such as grasslands, to forest.
10
The maps show areas where montane grassland dependent species occur; not all of these areas are necessarily montane
or high altitude grasslands, as the same species may still occur in other grassland or habitat types.
35
Figure 18: High-altitude grassland dependent threatened species richness and forest gain, 2000-2012
36
Figure 19: Montane grassland endemic species richness and forest gain, 2000-2012
37
7. Potential zones for REDD+ actions to
restore forests
The individual map layers in this report are useful to REDD+ decision makers for consideration of
particular areas and topics, and how different forest and biodiversity elements overlap. In order to
identify which REDD+ actions are the most critical, and which parts of the country should be
considered in more detail for the implementation of those actions, it can be even more helpful to
combine data on drivers of forest cover change with socio-economic and biophysical information to
answer specific questions relating to the spatial planning and design of a particular REDD+ action. In
this section we explore the combination of data on forest cover change together with other map layers
to identify the spatial potential for forest restoration.
Enhancement of carbon stocks through forest restoration has the potential to offer multiple benefits,
both social and environmental. In addition to contributing to climate change mitigation, forest
restoration could bring enhanced habitat for biodiversity, increased provisioning of ecosystem services
such as water regulation and soil erosion prevention, improved livelihood opportunities from timber
and NTFPs, and increased resilience to the impacts of climate change for both communities and wildlife.
There is great potential for forest restoration in Tanzania’s large areas of degraded land. Tanzania’s
REDD+ Strategy (VPO 2013b) notes that the active involvement of local communities through PFM,
supported by forestry legislation and programmes, is the most promising option for restoration through
natural regeneration. As shown in Figs 1 and 2 in section 5, there is already relative wide coverage across
the country of PFM, although the number of villages with land-use plans (a requirement for PFM)
remains limited.
There is also, as was indicated in Figure 12 in section 6, substantial deforestation taking place in and
around forest reserves in Tanzania. In Forest Reserves dedicated to timber production this is most likely
due to planned logging, and in the case of protection Forest Reserves, encroachment for various
purposes could be a cause. Clearly demarcating the boundaries of the Forest Reserves can be one step to
addressing encroachment problems, as well as providing more resources for forest reserve management
in the Tanzania Forest Service (TFS). Fig 20 on the following page looks more closely at potential areas
for forest restoration in forest reserves. It identifies the top 10 forest reserves that have experienced the
most tree loss between 2000 and 2012, counted both in total area (black numbers) and in terms of
percentage of forest loss (red numbers).
Reserves with higher total area loss could be efficient choices for restoration efforts by allowing
restoration of a larger area in one place. On the other hand, the forest reserves that have lost the
greatest proportion of forest may be in urgent need of restoration in order to avoid critical loss of
habitat for species in the area. Several of the smaller reserves that have lost a great proportion of tree
cover are located in the Eastern Arc, East Usambaras and coastal forest ecosystems (including mangrove
forests, as shown in Figures 15 and 16) where threatened species are concentrated. Forest cover change,
however, may also provide information on costs associated with implementing forest restoration in
these areas; recent forest cover loss may indicate high demand for land and thus higher opportunity
costs. The inset maps show the top ten forest reserves by area and proportion at a higher resolution,
highlighting forest loss, forest change on Landsat images, and the richness of threatened forest species
in and around the reserves. These maps indicate that restoration of several of these forest reserves could
also contribute to the survival of threatened species.
38
Other potential benefits could also be weighed into the decision. For example, catchment forest
reserves are often located at high elevation and particularly important for hydrological regulation and
water supply to surrounding areas. Forest restoration in catchment forests may therefore be a priority.
Restoration in jointly managed forest reserves with the potential to contribute to livelihoods through
the provision of timber and NTFPs may also be a priority, in terms of enhancing social benefits from the
action. These locations could be further prioritized through consideration of the food insecure areas
shown in Figure 4. The selection of priority areas for forest restoration can be supported by maps
showing the potential for multiple benefits from forest restoration, and if REDD+ decision makers
consider restoration efforts, additional maps could be created if needed to support their decision, based
on the criteria they identify as important.
Different approaches to forest restoration may be needed depending on how degraded the land is and
what are the priority benefits to be achieved by the action. If current forest coverage is very low,
restoration efforts may need to complement natural restoration with planting of seedlings. If
biodiversity conservation is a goal, this may influence the choice of species used and the location of
restoration efforts (e.g. in areas considered critical for threatened and/or endemic species). The
selection of restoration methods should also address Tanzania’s Safeguards Standards Criteria 7.4: The
REDD+ initiatives ensure restoration of degraded areas using available indigenous or alternative
compatible species (VPO 2013a). Looking for alternative incomes and fuel sources for surrounding
communities could be part of the plan, including providing seedlings to communities, schools and
other institutions and increasing agricultural yields. Resource assessment and management plans are
other important steps that should include conversations with surrounding villages to raise management
support.
39
Figure 20: Potential for forest restoration in Forest Reserves
40
Figure 21: Selected forest reserves according to loss of forest area
The inset maps show examples of selected forest reserves that are among the top ten according to forest loss by
area, including satellite images showing forest cover loss and the bottom maps showing reserves that are also
located in areas of high threatened and endemic forest-dependent species richness.
41
Figure 22: Selected forest reserves, according to proportion of forest cover loss
The inset maps show examples of selected forest reserves that are among the top ten according to forest loss by
area, including satellite images showing forest cover loss and the bottom maps showing reserves that are also
located in areas of high threatened and endemic forest-dependent species richness.
42
8. Conclusions and next steps for an SIS
The purpose of the current project and report is to examine more closely what spatial data can help
ensure that Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards Standards are respected in the next phase of the REDD+
readiness process, and also to assess how this information can support the development of the SIS. The
final package of maps presented in this report is intended to be included in a safeguards GIS system at
the NCMC when this Centre is operational, and so contribute to the SIS. The intention is that they will
be made available and brought to the attention of REDD+ decision makers in the preparation for Phase
II of REDD+ readiness in Tanzania, so that when actions are planned; their location, design and
implementation can take the Safeguards into account. In addition, when the country is developing its
SIS, it may use the maps to inform decisions about what information to collect and how.
Prior to this project, social safeguards for REDD+ had not been evaluated in Tanzania from a spatial
planning perspective. The spatial information in section 5 of this report can provide information related
to addressing the social aspects for the safeguards. For example, in order to assess whether, as required
for Indicator 1.7.2, that REDD+ initiatives support land use planning to enhance effective and
sustainable management of natural forest resources, it can be useful to know what locations already
have land use plans (Figure 1). Additionally, for Indicator 3.4.1, that programs to improve food security
are introduced, promoted, sustainably implemented, monitored and evaluated, spatial information on
which areas are at greatest risk of food insecurity can be used to focus collection of information on
whether food security is being improved (Figure 4).
Principle 7 of the Safeguards Standards state that the “REDD+ initiative maintains, promotes and
enhances sustainable conservation of the country’s natural forests for their biodiversity and all
ecosystem services (co-benefits) while meeting the needs of forest dependent communities”. Indicator
7.2.2 specifies further that “species that are rare, endemic or threatened with extinction are identified,
protected, restored and monitored”. Section 6 and the complementing technical report (Carr et al. 2014)
show the distribution of vertebrate species that are threatened in general, and highlights also the
habitat of those species that are particularly threatened by land-use change and climate change across
Tanzania, and the species that are forest dependent and may therefore be particularly affected by
REDD+ actions. Spatial information that helps to identify the locations of rare, endemic and threatened
species can also help identify where these species need to be monitored as per the indicator
requirements (e.g. Figures 5-11, 13, 14).
When Phase II of REDD+ in Tanzania progresses, further collaboration efforts with other government
institutions could perhaps allow access to additional important spatial data for REDD+ planning.
Further, once specific areas for implementation of certain actions have been identified, local level maps
to address relevant questions regarding Tanzania’s REDD+ Safeguards can be developed. It is possible
that more data can be made available at the local level in some areas, than at the national level. In
addition to the questions covered by the maps in this report, further considerations to environmental
and social issues are likely to be necessary by REDD+ decision makers for planning of actions and
development of an SIS. For future considerations, the additional questions in the gap analysis
summarized in Table 1 of this report can provide a starting point.
As this report highlights, spatial information can support Tanzania to move forward with REDD+
planning in line with its national REDD+ Safeguards. Together, the maps developed by the project cover
biodiversity and ecosystem aspects that are of national priority; socio-economic and livelihoods data;
forest cover change and how it relates to priority aspects of biodiversity and ecosystem services; and the
spatial potential for REDD+ activities to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services while generating
alternative livelihoods.
43
Reference List
Carr, J., Meng, H., Bowles, P., and Cox, N. (2014) Identifying potential biodiversity co-benefits available through the
implementation of REDD+ in Tanzania. Final draft report for WWF Tanzania and Government of Norway. IUCN
Global Species Programme, Cambridge, UK.
Donato, D. C. et al. (2011) “Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics”. Nature Geosciences 4,
293–297
Foden, W. B, Butchart, S.H.M., Stuart, S.N., Vié, J., Akçakaya, H.R., Angulo, A., DeVantier, L.M., Gutsche, A., Turak,
E., Cao, L., Donner, S.D., Katariya, V., Bernard, R., Holland, R.A., Hughes, A.F., O’Hanlon, S.E., Garnett, S.T.,
Şekercioğlu, Ç.H., Mace, G.M. 2013. Identifying the world's most climate change vulnerable species: a systematic
trait-based assessment of all birds, amphibians and corals. PLoS ONE 8:e65427.
Giri, G., Ochieng, E., Tieszen, L.L., Zhu, Z., Singh, A., Loveland, T., Masek, J., and Duke, N. (2011) Status and
distribution of mangrove forests of the world using Earth observation satellite data. Global Ecology and
Biogeography 20(1): 154-159.
Government of Tanzania / FCPF (2014) “FCPF REDD Readiness progress fact sheet, April 2014”.
http://forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2014/May/Tanzania%20%20FCPF%20Fact%20Sheet%20April%202014.pdf. Accessed August 2014.
Hansen, M.C., Potapov, P.V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S.A., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S.V.,
Goetz, S.J., Loveland, T.R., Kommareddy, A., Egorov, A., Chini, L., Justice, C.O., and Townshend, J.R.G. (2013)
“High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change”. Science 342(6160):850-853.
Hutchison, J., Manica, A., Swetnam, R., Balmford, A., and Spalding, M. (2013)”Predicting global patterns in
mangrove forest biomass”. Conservation Letters 1-8 (2013).
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press,
Washington, D.C.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT) 2006. Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania – Facts
and Figures. Forest and Beekeeping Division, Dar es Salaam.
NAFORMA (2014). NAFORMA Draft Final Report, August 2014. Tanzania Forest Service Agency, Tanzania
Runsten, L., Ravilious, C., Kashindye, A., Giliba, R., Hailakwahi, V., Kashaga, L.R.A., Khalid, S., Mbilinyi, B.,
Mwampashi, Y., Pastory, M., Mant, R., Osti, M., Crete, P., Pekkarinen, A., Leppanen, M., Miles, L. (2013) Using
spatial information to support decisions on safeguards and multiple benefits for REDD+ in Tanzania. Prepared by
UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK; published by Ministry of Natural Resources & Tourism, Dar es Salaam, United
Republic of Tanzania. Available at: http://www.un-redd.org/tabid/5954/Default.aspx
UNFCCC (2011) Decision 12/CP.17 FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.2. Available at:
https://unfccc.int/meetings/durban_nov_2011/session/6294/php/view/decisions.php (accessed August 2014)
UNFCCC (2010) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to
10 December 2010 ; Addendum; Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its sixteenth session.
Available at: https://unfccc.int/meetings/cancun_nov_2010/session/6254/php/view/reports.php (accessed August
2014)
UN-REDD Programme (2014) “About REDD+”. http://www.un-redd.org/AboutREDD/tabid/102614/Default.aspx
(accessed August 2014).
UN-REDD Programme. 2013. UN-REDD framework for supporting the development of country approaches to
safeguards. Available at:
http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=10177&Itemid=53 (accessed
August 2014)
United Republic of Tanzania (URT), 2006. Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP): Guidelines for
District Agricultural Development Planning and Implementation
44
URT, 2013. Big Results Now. Presentation to PER Annual Review Meeting 4th October 2013. Julius Nyerere
International Convention Centre, Dar es Salaam.
Vice President’s Office (VPO) (2013a) The Tanzania REDD+ social and environmental safeguard standards, Final
Draft, October 2013. Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania.
VPO (2013b) National strategy for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+). March
2013. Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania.
WWF Tanzania Country Office. 2012 Consultancy Report on Maps of Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) in
Tanzania.. WWF, Dar es Salaam
45