1 | P a g e

Figure 1: Shared Resources and Joint Solutions Model for Conservation and Sustainable Development: Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation into Development Planning, Policy and Practice (DPPP)

Conservation and Sustainable Development: Pathways for Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation into Development Planning, Policy and Practice (PPP)

Shared Resources and Joint Solutions (SRJS) Approach to Addressing Threats from new Oil & Gas Developments to Biodiversity Conservation in the Albertine Rift Region of Uganda

By Pauline Nantongo Kalunda, Executive Director, Environmental Conservation Trust of Uganda (ECOTRUST)

Abstract:

This paper presents a Shared Resources-Joint Solutions Model for Conservation and Sustainable Development – linking development Planning, Policy and Practice. It proposes that all development planning must be guided by the concept of shared resources – humans being just stewards. In seeking to share resources between nature and development – we must establish the Total Economic value of our ecosystem goods and services and ensure that development program designs are based on the sustainable management of the ecosystems that support life. Understanding total economic value will enable policy makers to design policy guidelines and laws that ensure responsible investments. Currently there remains a tendency to treat the environment as an institutional and economic externality. Integrating biodiversity conservation and development concerns will enable improvements in productivity, resilience and adaptability of livelihoods and economies. Although this simple fact is now well accepted, achieving sustainable development remains elusive in Practice. Influence, power, money suppress transparency and accountability leading to intentional lack of compliance to set targets and standards; and poor enforcement of set policies and regulations. The model proposes designing joint solutions in the realm of practice that link planning, policy, and practice to a set of conservation outcomes and milestones segregated to different implementing partners. The paper points out that influencing policy and practice is about influencing people – establishing biodiversity champions at every operational level. The SRJS project presents a variety of innovative ways that have been used to influence planning, policy, and practice in the Oil and Gas exploration and production in the biodiversity rich Albertine Rift of Uganda. These include community pressure groups, conservation champions in the form of elected and unelected leaders, evidence-based advocacy at the levels of national parliament and line Government of Uganda Ministries, as well as, community empowerment and conservation partnerships that involve the operating private sector companies. The discovery of oil and gas in Uganda need not be detrimental to the ecological integrity and tourism potential of the Albertine Rift and its diverse protected areas. Environmental concerns do not have to displace development priorities, but to achieve these win-wins it is necessary to rethink the way environment and development are planned, regulated, and implemented.

2 | P a g e

1.0 Background Biodiversity, and the benefits it provides, is fundamental to human well-being and a healthy planet (CBD, 2020). The false dichotomy, between environment and development, contributes to the environmental challenges that the world currently faces, including mass species extinction in the face of human activities ((Clayton et al, 2009). There remains a tendency to treat the environment as an institutional and economic externality. Integrating environmental and development concerns can enable improvements in productivity, resilience and adaptability of livelihoods and economies. While nature has contributed to improving billions of lives, development has simultaneously damaged the ecosystems on which it depends, and this degradation is increasing (MA, 2005). Development programs must be based on sustainable management of the ecosystems that support life. Although this simple fact is well accepted, achieving sustainable development in practice has proved elusive. In most cases – the actual people who hold the answers for policy-makers – the farmers, pastoralists and other natural resource users - are not consulted; or lack the skills and opportunities to make their cases; and share their experiences. There are genuine opportunities to achieve positive development and environment outcomes together. Environmental concerns do not have to displace development priorities, but to achieve these win-wins it is necessary to rethink the way environment and development are planned. Translating locally proven good practices into nationally supported policies and investments requires strong partnerships at different levels to improve communication and evaluation of experiences, and to identify policies that really work. To influence both policy and practice effectively it is necessary to have strong partnerships with a wide array of actors. Communities need to be involved to enrich the policy process with their experiences and knowledge from the ground. Their participation in policy and planning is vital to ensure their ownership and participation in policy implementation. Government at different levels must be involved to ensure legitimacy and public support, and to ensure cohesion between different sectors that impact on natural resources. Leaders, traditional and elected, need to be engaged in policy and planning to ensure wider respect for the process and wider understanding of the outcomes of policy. Understanding and harnessing the different roles will greatly strengthen planning policy formulation and

implementation processes; and will contribute to more effective and sustainable development in the long-term. 2.0 Planning: Shared Resources Businesses rely on natural resources to operate, which can create impacts and risks as well as opportunities and benefits. In order to ensure the sustainable use of these natural assets, there must be a balance between economic, environmental and social values. This calls for adopting a “Shared approach” whereby the interests of the various stakeholders in a specific landscape are aligned with, and in balance with, the capacity of the natural environment (IUCN, 2020). Local communities and conservationists, usually represented by CSOs, are not always involved in decision-making processes regarding their landscapes and natural environment, despite having extensive local knowledge and being vulnerable to any changes in natural resource use. The Shared Resources, Joint Solutions initiative has enabled different NGOs and other civil society organizations to increase their influence in multi-stakeholder partnerships with governments and business, and strengthen their leverage in successfully advocating for inclusive and green development – and in so doing - protecting the global public goods including ecosystem services (IUCN, 2020) 3.0 Understanding of Total Economic Value A shared understanding the total economic value of ecosystems is imperative for planning, policy, and practice. It is important to maintain the health and integrity of ecosystems and balance investments in order to optimize and sustain economic output. Many policy-makers, investors, and even ordinary people, believe that maximization of productivity through investments that heavily intensify ecosystem-use from traditional uses - is the best way to improve economies and move people out of poverty. This misconception is perpetuated because most policy-makers have the opinion that traditional uses are not productive enough and that traditional users are chronically poor (Costanza et al., 1997; TEEB, 2010). Research shows, however, that the traditional methods are productive and sustainable in supporting livelihoods, especially in non-monetary terms. For example, there were plans to drain the Nakivubo Swamp in Kampala, Uganda, for real estate development, without considering its high value for the purification of the wastewaters spilled by the city before they entered Lake Victoria. The plans were finally discarded following the economic valuation of the services provided by the whole swamp at between

3 | P a g e

1m to 1.75 million US$ per year, with further restoration planned that would add value to the ecosystem (TEEB, 2010). The undervaluation of traditional practices has its roots in complex realities. Elaborating the Total

Economic Value of an ecosystem demands a complex conceptual framework. Policy-makers tend to value economical systems by their pure monetary value (TEEB, 2010)

4.0 Responsible Investments: Policy dialogue

In the context of environmental mainstreaming, multi-stakeholder engagement and policy dialogue are critical for integrating multi-stakeholder environmental considerations in decision-making at each stage of the decision-making process. This could apply to decisions made by central government, for example in creating legal frameworks or allocating financial resources, but it could also apply to resource allocation at local level, or to several other decision-making processes. Policies regarding natural resources should meet the expectations that society places on them, which are intimately related with people’s livelihoods. They should be based upon accurate and relevant

information, as policies define or at least set the aspirations on how societies interact with natural systems (Brown and McLeod, 1996). But the use of natural resources is usually constrained by policies and laws that are designed to protect the interests of the holders of influence, power and money leading to poor implementation and enforcement by the designated authorities at different levels.

5.0 Influencing policy means influencing people Policy-makers and decision-makers are people; and so are the policy implementors and enforcers. To make these people change policies and practices we must consider the fact that they are flesh and blood. People

Figure 2: Economic Valuation Model for Total Economic Value of an Ecosystem (RSA, 2007)

4 | P a g e

do not change because they are told to - they change because they want to. So, the process of influencing policy and decision makers to mainstream biodiversity must involve getting them interested, instilling a sense of urgency and a desire to change policy. This starts with the messenger. To get the attention of an audience and get them really listening, the “how” is more important than the “what” (Mehrabian, 1981). Word choice, content and knowledge only make up 7 per cent of an audience’s perception of a speaker. Qualities of how one speaks - voice tone, pitch, and inflection - count for 37 per cent of an audience’s perception. Visual presence and body language count for 55 per cent (Carlson, 1962). To be effective, communication for change must create the mood and turn the audience on to take interest in the change messages. 6.0 Empowering communities: Link Practice and Policy Communities are the primary custodians and stewards of Biodiversity but are paradoxically the primary degraders to, due to inevitable human activity. Communities need to be empowered to link policy and practice. The World Bank (2002) defines empowerment of communities as “the expansion of assets and capabilities of poor people to participate in, negotiate

with, influence, control, and hold accountable institutions that affect their lives”. In its broad sense, empowerment should be considered as the expansion of community freedom of choice and action. This means increasing community authority and control over the resources and decisions that affect community welfare. As communities exercise real choice, they gain increased control over their social wellbeing. However, decision-making by poor communities can be limited by lack of assets as well as powerlessness to negotiate better terms for themselves with formal and informal institutions (World Bank, 2002). There is need to balance biodiversity conservation and livelihoods to ensure sustainable management. It is important to identify key elements of empowerment that persist consistently across social, institutional and political contexts (Bartle, 2000). Sustainability models based on payments for environmental services (PES) accruing from community biodiversity conservation activities have been successful. Even though there is no single model for community empowerment, six elements remain critical: (i) Access to information; (ii) inclusion and participation; (iii) accountability; (iv) local organizational capacity; (v) confidence and (vi) networking (World Bank, 2002).

7.0 Transparency and Accountability In many countries, oil has been said to be a curse due to improper management, lack of transparency, poor accountability and the nations have suffered severely

(Mubazi, 2017). Transparency & accountability are central issues in Natural Resource Management and thus should be cherished. Transparency is the relationship between three rights: the right to access

The discovery of oil and gas in Uganda need not be detrimental to the ecological integrity and tourism potential of the Albertine Rift and its diverse protected areas. Prudent planning, policy and practice are the key to bridging the gap and removing the dichotomy between biodiversity conservation and development. The realm of practice is the most affected due to influence, power and money crowding out policy enforcement and achievement of biodiversity targets.

Figure 3:Responsible Investments Linking Planning, Policy and Practice

5 | P a g e

Figure 4: Some Joint Solutions at Planning, Policy and Practice levels for ensuring the ecological integrity and tourism potential of the Albertine Rift and its diverse protected areas (Ruhanga et al, 2009)

information, the right to participate in decision making and the right to challenge such decisions. Accountability refers to the ability to hold leaders, service providers and government employees answerable for their actions, particularly in the use of public funds. Corruption or abuse of public office for private gain is harmful to communities because they have the least direct access to officials. They also have the fewest opportunities to resort to private services as an alternative. There are three main types of accountability mechanisms: political, administrative and public. Political Accountability, of parties and representatives, can be ensured through elections. Administrative accountability (of government agencies) is sought through internal accountability mechanisms within and between government agencies. Public accountability mechanisms hold local governments accountable to the community and can reinforce political and administrative accountability mechanisms (World Bank, 2002). SRJS presents a variety of innovative ways that have been used to influence policy

processes, from community pressure groups through elected and unelected leaders, to evidence-based advocacy at all levels - including directors of economic planning and conservation. Communities have influenced government, through direct lobbying, influence of parliamentarians, wielding of evidence, and inter-community dialogue, networking, and solidarity 8.0 Joint Solutions: Responsible Practices The discovery of oil and gas need not be detrimental to the ecological integrity and tourism potential of the Albertine Rift and its diverse protected areas. Prudently managed, the oil and gas sector can be highly beneficial to the country, and especially so in the management of ecological resources. There are several joint interventions that both government and oil companies can implement, in collaboration with communities and key stakeholders, to ensure that the ecological integrity and tourism potential of the Albertine Rift is minimally affected by petroleum development:

9.0 Biodiversity Value of the Albertine Rift Oil and gas exploration and production is exciting for Uganda - the excitement coming primarily from the fact that Uganda’s economy totally dependent on agriculture – so the prospect of a new oil and gas industry is expected to bring the much needed economic transformation. However, the Albertine region in which this petroleum exploration and

production is occurring is of dual importance – petroleum rich and high biodiversity value. The Albertine Rift is the northern most part of the western arm of the East African Rift System. It is approximately 500 kilometers long and 45 kilometers wide on average – stretching from the northern tip of Lake Albert to the southern tip of Lake Tanganyika. The Albertine Rift in Uganda covers approximately 23,000 square

6 | P a g e

kilometers. It is the most species-rich eco-region for vertebrates and one of the most biodiverse areas on the African continent. It has been independently identified as an ‘endemic bird area’ by Birdlife International, an ‘ecoregion’ by World Wildlife Fund and a ‘biodiversity hotspot’ by Conservational International (Plumptre et al, 2003). The Rift has high species diversity, including 39% of Africa’s mammal species, 51% of its bird species, 19% of its amphibian species and 14% of its plant and reptile species. It harbours more endemic species than any other region in Africa. It is also home to 79 threatened terrestrial vertebrates according to IUCN Red Data book listings (IUCN, 2020) . As such it is one of the most important conservation ecoregions in Africa. Lake Albert, as one of the important resources in the Albertine Rift, harbours internationally important numbers of water birds, as indicated by the designation of the Murchison Falls–Albert Delta Wetland System as a Ramsar site. Lake Albert also represents one of Africa’s most important sources of mixed species fresh water fisheries. 10. Biodiversity Conservation in Oil& Gas Development Oil and gas exploration and production in ecosystems of high biodiversity value such as the Albertine Rift poses great environmental and socio-economic risks. In general terms, operations can have negative primary and secondary impacts on ecosystems and the quality of air, water and soil. The unintended consequences of migration into rural areas and rapid socio-economic change will also have disastrous consequences on the environment, unless mitigated through careful planning and management. Avoiding, minimizing and mitigating these impacts should be the priority of oil companies, the Government of Uganda and all stakeholders. Countries which lay emphasis on institutional design and planning for oil-sector efficiency; balancing oil-sector developments with protection and conservation of natural environs; national and regional diversification of the economy and energy sector; and strategic investment of petro-revenues; are able to maximize returns from the sector for current and future generations:. These considerations are vital for thinking about, and working toward efficiency, sustainability, and an exit strategy in the country’s oil and gas sector (ACODE, 2017).

11.0 Policy Dialogue for Mainstreaming Biodiversity Worldwide attention to environmental challenges is growing, bringing ever more actors into policy debates, with emerging alliances and changing roles for science, government and Civil Society. This creates both opportunities and constraints for moving towards a more enabling policy environment for sustainable development, as more avenues for dialogue are created. At the same time new alliances and power bases are emerging, for example, with the disproportionate power of Aid Agencies in relation to comparatively weak Civil Society in Eastern Africa. This contributes in some cases to growing scepticism of purely technical advice in policy-making processes and a growing interest in and awareness of more open, public consultations (Holmes and Scoones, 2000). Models and interpretations of policy influence that are used in development work have been accused of being dominated by experience from industrialized societies. These models make unrealistic assumptions about participation of citizens in policy processes, and about the rationality and predictability of institutional arrangements and policy processes. The reality in developing countries is quite different where it can be particularly challenging to bring new arguments and good science to bear on decision-making processes. In many developing countries democratic institutions and practices are weak and policy-makers lack autonomy and may be more susceptible to influence from personal relationships. At the same time, policy-oriented research in developing countries may be weak and intermediary institutions to translate research into policy may not exist. As a result, policy-makers often lack confidence in researchers and their demand for research is low (Carden, 2009). In countries where trust is weak, whether between people and government or between different interest groups, inclusive policy-making processes are particularly important. Consultative processes take on yet greater importance in relation to policies where different interest groups are highly active, with entrenched positions and where the stakes are high. In many developing countries, inclusive, consultative or participatory policy processes are favoured by many actors outside government, because trust towards government is weak and the State is usually associated with corruption, failure to deliver basic services, and misgovernance (Holmes and Scoones, 2000).

7 | P a g e

12.0 Key Results from the SRJS Project

12.1 The SRJS Project Response In 2016, as a response to the biodiversity challenge posed by the Oil & Gas developments in Uganda, a partnership of four national Civil Society Organizations (CSOs),1 supported under the Netherlands Government funded ‘Shared Resources, Joint Solutions ’(SRJS) program, began to secure the international public goods (IPGs) in the Albertine landscape of food security, water provisioning, climate resilience and biodiversity amidst oil, sugar agribusiness, and other developmental threats through two pathways: (i) Forest ecosystem services maintained and restored and, (ii) environmentally sustainable Oil &Gas activities through evidence-based advocacy. The planned outcomes under the first pathway were: Land users adopt sustainable land use practices and mandated institutions adequately manage protected areas, while under the second pathway, the outcomes were: Oil & Gas impacts on ecosystem minimized; Oil & Gas players comply with international and national social and environmental policies and institutional policies of Oil & Gas players are complied with. The program design and choice of activities were informed by baseline landscape analyses, stakeholder mapping and formulation of a theory of change. The program was aligned to SDG 15 (Life on Land), SDG 14 (Life under Water), SDG 6 (Clean water and sanitation), and SDG 13 (Climate Action). It was also aligned to society related SDGs, especially SDG

2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 7 (Affordable clean energy), as well as economy-related SDG 12 on responsible consumption and production. The program ends in November 2020. 12.2 Key Assumptions The SRJS project held five main assumptions: (i) Local communities (as primary beneficiaries) willing and able to take part in developing solutions for sustainable ecosystem management; (ii) Private sector firms see value of environmental services in their value chains; (iii) Politics and public management are transparent to allow for CSO and multi-stakeholder engagements at all levels; (iv) By bringing stakeholders in dialogue platforms, trust will be built, knowledge will be shared and willingness to cooperate will be nurtured; and (v) Oil & Gas Companies give access to information on the policies and standards they follow for O&G development 12.3 Key Outcomes and achievements

Table 1 below presents the main SRJS achievements to date in the context of the Planning, Policy and Practice framework. The Partners voiced their contributions at relevant decision-making platforms and facilitated meetings and participation of community members and Local Governments in some of the engagements; and sponsored TV and radio talks shows.

Table 1: Timeline of outcomes/achievements, 2017-2020

Year Month Outcome/achievement

2017 June Government of Uganda (GOU) Cabinet approved the National Content Policy for the Petroleum Sub-sector with environmental safeguards against oil threats but also ensuring local participartion in contract awards(to curb high rate of unemployement and to ensure citizens benefit too).

Sept. The Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of the National Parliament of Uganda halted the process of

amending Article 26 of the 1995 Uganda (which would have allowed government to first acquire assets in construction projects and compensate their owners later!)

2018 Jan. Hoima District local government council, in the Albertine area, convened a meeting and passed a resolution to develop an ordinance for food security and governance as a move to promote community rights to food and land.

April Masindi Ditrict Local Government, in Uganda’s Albertine area, devolved the responsibility of managing ten forests to the community. The community mobilised and registered as Communal Land Associations the legally recognised responsible bodies for management of community forests

Two tobacco companies, operating in Masindi distrct, resolved to stop buying tobacco grown in Ongo Community forest and offered free seedlings to restore the degraded areas.

May In Buliisa district of Uganda’s Albertine region, communities (7,000 households) pressured Total E&P and Ministry of Energy to use the Land Acquisition and Resettlement framework (LARF) to disclose the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the Tilenga oil project. The communities used the information in the RAP that indicated the

1 AFIEGO,ECOTRUST,IUCN and NAPE

8 | P a g e

compensation for their properties to demand an increase in their compensation from Shs 1 million to Shs 3 million per acre of land.

Nov. Uganda’s National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) and Petroleum Authority of Uganda (PAU)

were pressured to organise public hearings for the Tilenga Oil Projects’ Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) report.

Dec. TOTAL E&P UGANDA’s attention was brought to the need to protect sacred natural sites in line with the Resettlement Action Plan for the Central Processing facility.It has since fenced off 5 critical sites including Kihagya cultural forest.

The Climate change department under the Directorate of Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Water and Environment in Uganda, incorporated views of the indigenous and vulnerable groups into the draft climate change bill, particulary with respect to the adaptation goal

2019 March Uganda enacted the National Environment Act 2019 with provisions on SEA and ESIA and others to protect the environment from oil threats into law

April Kinyara Sugar Company Ltd (KSCL) operating in Masindi district of the Albertine Rift, provided financial support under Corporate Social R responsibility (CSR) for waste management in Kabango Town to protect wetlands through two CBOs-KIKAWECA and KAKAMUWECA

May Hoima Sugar Ltd halted conversion of Bugoma Central Forest Reserve (CFR) to sugar growing despite court ruling in their favour.

July Enactment of Uganda Wildlife Act, with provisions for creation of community wildlife committees; punitive sanctions for wildlife crime for endangered species; targeted revenue (benefit) sharing; sustainable utilization of wildlife on private land ; domestication of CITES among others.

August Wetlands Department under Uganda’s Ministry of Water and Environment consented to the mainstreaming of

the protection of Sacred Natural sites into the National Wetlands Resources Management bill and policy 2019

Sept. Communities in the Bugoma – Budongo CFR wildlife Corridor applied to Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development for 9 Community Land Association (CLA) certificates to manage community forests.

Dec. Kinyara Sugar Company Ltd (KSCL) contributed financial support under its CSR in support for the development of Kiiha Catchment Management Plan

2020 March Bunyoro Kitara Cultural Kingdom opens up to ECOTRUST for a counter-offer of PES-based conservation agreement instead of converting Bugoma Forest for sugar cane growing

12.4 Enabling Factors Key enabling factors included: (a) Enabling legislation: The provisions for Communal

Land Association in the Land Act 2005 and registration of community forests in the National Forestry and Tree Planting Act served as basis to support communities register forests for their sustainable use. The rights of communities to the custodianship of the resources they were heavily dependent on for food gathering and fuelwood were respected. Besides, with legal rights, communities were able to access additional investments through Trees for Global Benefit (TGB), a cooperative carbon offsetting scheme linking farmers in Uganda to the voluntary carbon market. It is therefore equally appreciated why the four CSOs under SRJS Program advocated for relevant provisions in the recently enacted legislation (National Environment Act, 2019, the Wildlife Act, 2019) and in the Bills (Climate change and Wetlands Bill).

(b) Strategic partnerships: In addition to their own platform as Partners under SRJS program, the CSOs

took advantage of other platforms where they were already members and created new ones to deal with the diverse and complex issues as they were fast evolving in Murchison-Semliki Corridor. Taking advantage of a relatively free press worked in their favour.

(c) The power of the media and improved free press: This helped in dissemination of information on all processes that were taking place in addition to engaging different power centers in talk shows and debates

12.5 Key Challenges and constraints and Mitigation Measures (a) Diversity of interests for a richly endowed

landscape under conflicting development approaches: While being accepted for its tourism significance, biodiversity conservation is not attracting strong and powerful lobbyists especially in comparison with O&G and its antecedent heavily funded infrastructure projects. To navigate in such an environment, the Partners under SRJS Program partnered and collaborated with other CSOs, government agencies and private sector that

9 | P a g e

wanted transparent procedures and safeguards for O&G. These became sources of information used or shared to argue for against certain positions vested in some power centres. In that strategy, they also took advantage of multiple communication media channels (i.e. Press, radio, TV and social media).

(b) Limited capacity of beneficiary communities to internalize the complexity of very many developments in the landscape: In as much as the Partners for Shared Resources, Joint Solutions had the communities targeted as primary beneficiaries, they wanted them to voice their interests and

concerns in relevant fora. But they lacked the capacity to critically analyze the power play behind the developments. The Partners took advantage of their knowledge of the landscape and networks to access data and information for use or for transfer to be used by communities they supported (e.g. data and information from the voluminous EIA and SEA reports and technical studies)

(c) Restricted civic space limits engagements: (d) Lack of sensitivity and capacity of the judiciary to

appreciate the implication of their judgements:

13.0 Key lessons for Post-2020 CBD Framework

(a) Avoiding current and future costs from negative impacts of other sectors: By its design, the SRJS program was intended to mitigate the impacts of O&G. In the process of program implementation, the impacts of agriculture also came into focus since they were accounting for deforestation on private land. The need by other sectors to mainstream biodiversity and concomitantly allocate budgets for those interventions will be central to building a new culture of institutional behavior. The positive steps shown by the private sector companies to offer financial support in protecting wetlands, reforestation and catchment management demonstrate that constructive engagement rather than confrontation can yield positive achievements, but more needs to be done.

(b) Horizontal-cum-vertical strategies: These will ensure that negative impacts from other sectors and to other sectors are addressed at relevant stages of every activity (i.e. horizontal) by different institutions with varying power, influence and capacity to make a difference at local, sub-national, national, regional and global scales. It will strengthen a culture of biodiversity mainstreaming in sectoral and institutional plans, policies and legislation and engender formation of new forms of partnerships and collaboration.

(c) Enabling legislation: This will remain critical and it will have to cut across all sectoral legislation rather than those solely for biodiversity and its ecosystems. This is to ensure that provisions can be enforced and used as basis to hold those violating them accountable. For example, as a result of recently enacted Uganda Wildlife Act 2019 and its punitive measures in Table 1, a poacher who illegally entered Bwindi National Park and killed Rafiki, the rare silverback of Nkuringo gorilla group was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment by Magistrates court in Kabale, Uganda on 30th July 2020.This will deter other poachers and illegal traders. Enabling legislation and incentives to protect biodiversity outside protected areas where the pressures are higher than protected areas will be a key enabler2.

(d) Institutional re-engineering and capacity building: The case study has demonstrated that with modest engagement, institutions can open up to supporting biodiversity conservation but it can be better when as a first principle, institutions commit themselves to avoiding further loss through institutionalizing environmentally friendly practices. Institutions must be open to taking advantage of others with better comparative advantage e.g. media and the press which can reach out to many people in shorter time. But it has also shown that CSOs will have to embrace new tactics of advocacy to counter the powerful forces working against biodiversity conservation.

2 The challenge of deforestation and forest degradation in the Murchison-Semliki Corridor is representative of the national picture. Between 1990 and 2015,Uganda registered a reduction of its forest cover a percentage of land area from 24% to 9%, but as high as 80.1% was registered on private land compared to only 30.2% in protected areas (MWE,2016)

10 | P a g e

References: 1. ACODE, 2017, Efficiency, Sustainability and Exist Strategy in the Oil & Gas sector: Lessons from Ecuador to Uganda,

ACODE Policy Research Series No.81, 2017 2. Amos, J. 2003. Environmental Aspects of Modern Onshore Oil and Gas Development. Testimony to the 3. Brooks et al., 2004, The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for

adaptation, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK, 2004 4. Brown, J.R and Mcleod, N.D. 1996. “Integrating ecology into natural resources management policy,” Journal of

Environmental Management. 20 (3): 289–296. 5. Carden, F. 2009. Knowledge to Policy: making the most of development research. Ottawa, and Sage, New Delhi:

International Development Research Centre. 6. CBD, 2020, The Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, CBD/WG2020/2/3 7. Center for Resource Conservation. 2005. Responsible Energy Development for Sustainable 8. Committee on Resources of the United States House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Energy and 9. Costanza, R., et al, 1997. “The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital,” Nature, 387, 253–260. 10. Dalal-Clayton, B. and Bass, S. 2009. The Challenges of Environmental Mainstreaming: experience of integrating

environment into development institutions and decisions. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

11. Development. 12. GOU, 2010, National Oil and Gas Policy, Republic of Uganda. 13. Holmes, T. and Scoones, I, 2000, Participatory Environmental Policy Processes: experiences from north and south. IDS

Working Paper 113. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. 14. IUCN, 2020, https://www.iucn.org/theme/business-and-biodiversity/our-work/business-engagement-project/shared-

resources-joint-solutions#:~:text=The%20Shared%20Resources%2C%20Joint%20Solutions,for%20inclusive%20and%20green%20development.

15. MA. 2005. Living Beyond Our Means: natural assets and human wellbeing. Available at www.maweb.org/documents/document.429.aspx.pdf.

16. McLennan & Plumptre, 2012; Protected Apes, Unprotected Forest: Composition, Structure and Diversity of Riverine Forest Fragments and Their Conservation Value in Uganda, Mongabay.com Open Access Journal - Tropical Conservation Science Vol.5 (1):79-103, 2012

17. Mehrabian Albert, 1981, Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes, Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1981

18. Mineral Resources September 17, 2003 19. Mubazi E, 2017, An Environmental Approach to handling Oil & Gas in Uganda, www.climatecolab.org 20. Plumptre et al., 2007, The biodiversity of the Albertine Rift, Alservier Ltd, Journal for Biological Conservation 134 (2007)

178 – 194, 2006/7 21. Plumptre, A.J et al. 2003. The biodiversity of the Albertine Rift. Wildlife Conservation Society. 22. Plumptre, Cox, & Mugume, 2003, The Status of Chimpanzees in Uganda, Wildlife Conservation Society, 2003 23. Rachel Carson, 1962, Silent Spring: The Classic that launched the Environmental Movement, Houghton Mifflin, 1962 24. Republic of South Africa (RSA), 2007, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning; Provincial Guideline

on Biodiversity Offsets. Edition 2. Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning, Cape Town.

25. Ruhanga et al, Mainstreaming Conservation and Tourism Value of Protected Areas in Petroleum Development Zones of the Albertine Rift, Uganda Wild life Society, 2009

26. Stattersfield, A.J., Crosby, M.J., Long, A.J. & Wege, D. C. 1998. Endemic Bird Areas of the World: Priorities for Biodiversity Conservation. BirdLife Conservation Series No. 7. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UKOlson and Dinerstein, 1998; Burgess et al., 2004

27. TEEB. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. UNEP and IUCN. www.teebweb.org/TEEBSynthesisReport/tabid/29410/Default.aspx.

28. World Bank. 2002. Empowerment and Poverty Reduction: a source book for poverty reduction and environmental management (PREM), Washington, DC: World Bank.