Resilience Building In Tanzania: Learning From Experiences Of .

IIED Working paperLearning Use of climate information: Improvement ofclimate information services through relevantradio forecasting is influencing decision-making ofBroad Participation is key. Inclusion of stakeholdersboth farmers and pastoralists, who are choosingfrom all levels of community and government Is essentialseed types and making decisions about livestockto generating government and community ownership ofmovements as a direct response to receiving climatethe project. Use of multi-stakeholder learning groups,information. District governments are supportingdistrict led research and participatory validationthis process by establishing groups of mobileworkshops has laid a foundation for generatingphone users who can distribute climate informationpositive changes.throughout their social networks. In the long term,Preparing the ground through “upstream investments”.this will support safeguarding of assets and potentialEfforts to improve knowledge on local livelihoodsproductivity improvements.and research the gaps between customary and Participatory and responsive planning: Use ofgovernment planning has laid the foundation for moreresilience planning tools has been well received byradical changes.planners. These tools allow communities to betterTargeting key decision makers and district leaders.articulate adaptive livelihood strategies than under theEngaging support of District Executive Directors,current system. Resource Maps, where completed,District Commissioners and other community leadersare already being used to support land use planning, ahas lent authority to criticisms of the current system. Itkey priority in conflict reduction between pastoralistshas also inspired commitment from other key individualsand farmers. All three districts are keen to incorporatesuch as district council department heads and two localfindings from Resilience Assessments into theirMembers of Parliament.budgeting process where possible.ImpactsAlthough CAF’s are yet to be established andwork is still on-going, participant testimonies revealthe beginnings of a process of change beforeany investments into physical infrastructures hastaken place. Attitudes and awareness: Involvement in theproject has contributed to more sophisticatedunderstanding and attitudes on the flaws in thecurrent planning process, and the need to incorporateresilience building relevant to local livelihoodsand economies for better development outcomes.Improved knowledge of elected and appointedofficials and learning at community level has ledto the beginnings of grassroots efforts to improvethe protection of local forests, reinvigorate watermanagement and enforcement of land use plans. Ownership of the change process: Continuousinclusion of the views of local government staff, MPs,customary leaders and communities has generated ahigh level of ownership over project activities. This hasgenerated a sense of anticipation about the project,and has contributed to the increasing role of womenleaders within the community. Cost Savings: Activities so far have cost less than 1m, and early indications, not yet fully valued, wouldsuggest that benefits will exceed this investment.Experiences in Isiolo, Kenya, where devolved financemechanisms are already established and makinginvestments, are encouraging, with significantreturns to communities within three years offund capitalisation.Challenges remain. While there has been broadacceptance of resilience planning tools and awillingness to embrace the use of climate informationservices, old perceptions about sustainability oftraditional livelihoods are deep seated. This brings risksthat well-meaning district officials will continue theirwork in a way that leads to maladaptive outcomes inthe long run. Central government reluctance to loosenbudget rigidity for fear of mismanagement also remainsa significant hurdle. With other districts likely to facesimilar challenges, the project offers a way forwardthrough adoption of open processes that allow localpeople to clearly articulate and manage their ownlivelihood strategies.www.iied.org5

1Resilience Building in Tanzania Learning From Experiences of Institutional StrengtheningIntroductionThe Tanzanian districts of Monduli, Longido andNgorongoro (together referred to as “MoNgoLo”) arelikely to be seriously affected by climate change. Hometo 500,000 people, the local economy revolves aroundpastoralist and agro-pastoralist production, and smallbusinesses operating in urban centres. Local livelihoodsare heavily dependent on resources such as soil, waterand pasture, all of which are being affected by changingweather patterns, such as the increasing variability inseasonal onset, greater intensity of rainfall and averagetemperature increase. Such changes bring risks ofcrop, animal or human diseases, affecting livestock andcrop longevity and ultimately undermining the longterm sustainability of local livelihoods. Short-term risksinclude higher chances of flash-flooding or severe,prolonged droughts.Traditional livelihoods in the three districts are basedon planned and careful decision making, flexibility,and communal management of key resources. Whileagriculture and tourism play an important role, theeconomy is dominated by pastoralist activities.Pastoralists in particular have been described as“masters of adaptation”, naturally equipped to managechange and insure themselves against threats suchas drought by accumulating livestock (Msangi et al.,2014). However, the risks brought by climatic changeare exacerbated by existing inequalities. Long-standingneglect of local infrastructure impinges upon transportand the sale of livelihood products. Many years of policyfocused on tourism, conservation and agriculture havechallenged the viability of some livelihoods, particularlythose based on pastoralism. Misunderstandingsabout the strategies and the necessary conditionsfor pastoralism are common, leading to inappropriatepolicies that weaken adaptive capacity.6www.iied.orgThe far-reaching and widespread nature of thesethreats demand an approach to climate-resilientdevelopment (CRD) that incorporates disaster riskreduction, adaptation and long-term developmentpriorities at national and local government levels(Ranger, 2013). Climate-resilient development seeksthe continued improvement of development outcomesin a way that is robust to both long and short-termthreats raised by climate change. An approach that fullytakes into account the needs relevant to local peopleis essential to prevent the impacts of climate changefrom undermining the local and national economy andthreatening the lives of the population.Climate-resilient development is still relatively newto Tanzania’s political and planning discourse. TheNational Climate Change Strategy (NCCS, 2012)and subsequent sector resilience-building strategiesare too recent to gauge any discernible impacts. Anappropriate response to climate impacts must involvethe mainstreaming of locally relevant climate changeadaptation into government planning, budgetingand implementation processes. This will require thecreation of an enabling environment for climate resilientdevelopment at national and local policy and budgetinglevel. This strategy is likely to rely heavily on internationalfinance, particularly from the Green Climate Fund, whichwill dedicate USD50bn of its 100bn pot annually toclimate change adaptation.Responsiveness to the specific needs of individualdistricts, along with flexibility to deal with increasingvariability, requires a significant level of local autonomy.Tanzania has been implementing a decentralisationprogramme since 1998, placing authority fordevelopment decisions in the hands of LocalGovernment Authorities (LGAs) with knowledge oflocal resilience needs. However, progress has stalled

IIED Working papersomewhat in practice, with policy documents pointingout the significant inputs needed to jump start thisprocess (United Republic of Tanzania, 2009).In this context, the UK Department for InternationalDevelopment (DFID) is supporting an IIED-managedproject in partnership with MoNgoLo districtgovernments, the Tanzanian Natural Resource Forum(TNRF) and Hakikazi Catalyst (HKC) to mainstreamclimate change adaptation into local governmentplanning in the MoNgoLo districts. The project has beenimplemented in two phases since 2011 and ultimatelyaims to improve climate-resilient development outcomesand reduce poverty by improving local governments’capacity to respond to both sudden and slow-onsetclimate hazards. This approach has been underway inIsiolo County in Kenya for the last two years, where alocal climate adaptation fund has been set up, and isnow being implemented in a further four contiguousneighbouring Kenyan counties. The model is similarto that being trialled in Tanzania in a relatively similarecological setting.11This paper analyses the costs and benefits of thisproject in the context of Tanzanian planning, budgetingand climate policy and finance structures. It maycontribute to thinking in other states and districtslooking to implement similar climate adaptation andmainstreaming projects. The project and its assessmentinvolved a rich variety of methodological approaches,from participatory resilience assessments to totaleconomic valuation and semi-structured interviews.These are outlined in detail in Annexes 1 and 2.Section 2 assesses the enabling environment inTanzania for climate-resilient development, providingan overview of national climate and sector policies, aswell as decentralisation policies. Section 3 assessesthe planning systems at district level, while Section 4provides a brief overview of project activities so far.Section 5 compares the costs of project activitiesto the benefits for individuals, communities, localgovernment processes and national awareness.Section 6 concludes by identifying key lessons andfuture challenges.For more information on the Isiolo project, see Kenya National Drought Management Authority (2014); and Hesse and Pattison (2013).www.iied.org7

2Resilience Building in Tanzania Learning From Experiences of Institutional StrengtheningAssessing theplanning environmentfor Climate ResilientDevelopmentThe threats posed by climate change force governmentsto become more responsive to both short-term variabilityand longer-term changes. Planning systems – i.e.policy frameworks, institutional arrangements, andfinancial arrangements – must create an environmentthat is responsive to the new priorities raised by achanging climate. This section assesses Tanzania’splanning environment for CRD, looking at each aspectof the planning system at national and local level, andreflects on how well they contribute to successfulCRD planning. It begins by outlining the assessmentapproach we used.2.1 Indicators for assessingCRD and planningTo gauge how well the Tanzanian planning environmentsupports CRD, it is worth establishing principles onwhich to base an analysis. Tracking Adaptation andMonitoring Development (TAMD) is a participatorymonitoring and evaluation tool used to assesshow well climate risks are being monitored andmainstreamed, and whether development is improvingclimate resilience (see Annex 1). It relies on a series ofindicators developed to assess the quality of climate8www.iied.orgrisk management (CRM)at government level . The closelinks between CRM and CRD mean that it is possibleto adapt the TAMD indicators for use as a lens throughwhich to assess the planning environment: Institutional capacity for decision making underclimatic uncertainty: Effective responses to climaticvariability and unpredictability require capacity forlocal discretion and authority to plan and use fundsto alleviate or avert these threats. Long-term changesmay force district governments to make decisionsbeyond the scope of pre-set policy guidelines. Responsiveness to local needs: This qualityamalgamates two TAMD indicators (“Quality ofstakeholder engagement in decision-making” and“Awareness of climate change issues, risks andresponses”). An effective response must be contextspecific, requiring close engagement with localstakeholders with deep knowledge of their localenvironment, how it is changing, and how theirlivelihoods can be best supported. In Tanzania, wheresoil types, temperature, rainfall and other factors canvary both between and within districts, it is essentialthat planning is relevant to the context. In MoNgoLo,home to significantly higher numbers of pastoralistscompared to farmers, planning that suits districtsdominated by farming may not apply. For example,

IIED Working paperresponsiveness may demand reconsideration of someplanning initiatives to reflect pastoralist livelihoodstrategies. The ability to apply both long and shortterm climate information to a local context is alsokey to appreciating what is feasible or at risk in agiven context.environment for climate change responsive districtplanning is drawn from policy developed before climatechange became a noticeable discourse in Tanzania.The fact that livelihoods are dominated by pastoralismin the MoNgoLo districts provides a litmus test for theresponsiveness of national policy. Because pastoralism Extent to which climate information is used to inform represents a livelihood approach that is significantlyresponses to climate change: This can include use of different to those in other parts of the country, prioritiesin these districts are also different. If a core facet ofclimate information to safeguard existing investmentsCRD is responsive planning and flexible decisionat risk from a range of climate hazards. It may alsoinclude use of climate information for forward looking, making relevant to the specific, changing context oflivelihoods in a district or even village, then the scope“climate-smart” investments that reduce the risk ofof government policy and planning for supporting thesefuture compromise by predicted future hazards orchanges that undermine long-term viability. This isspecificities will provide a useful indicator of their abilityparticularly relevant to both agricultural and pastoralist to ensure climate-resilient development. The indicatorslivelihoods, to support governments and the public indetailed above will be used gauge the extent to whichmaking climate-aware decisions that reduce lossesgovernment strategies create an enabling environmentand enhance productivity.for CRD. Extent and quality of co-ordination across relevantinstitutions: 2 The wide-ranging nature of climatechange impacts demands a cross-sectoral approach.In Tanzania, where relevant institutions includeenvironmental management bodies as well as severalministries, this is a challenging task. Co-ordinationmust support effective, climate smart and responsiveplanning across geographical areas and sectors, butalso careful monitoring and learning from resiliencebuilding programmes, internalising lessons acrossstakeholders. Co-ordination requires an institutionalinfrastructure headed by a body with authority toconvene different stakeholders and feed lessons backto central planners.2.2 Tanzania’s climaterelevant policy frameworksClimate policy in Tanzania stems from the Vision2025 strategy paper, the cornerstone of strategicdevelopment planning, and the National EnvironmentalPolicy. The National Growth and Poverty ReductionStrategy papers, known as Mkukuta I and II, highlightmedium term goals contributing to Vision 2025, withimplementation detailed in corresponding five yearplans. Prior to the more climate specific documentsof the National Adaptation Plan of Action (UnitedRepublic of Tanzania, 2007), and the National Climate “Financial support for climate change mainstreamingChange Strategy (United Republic of Tanzania, 2012),and related initiatives”: A robust financing frameworklow-carbon, climate-resilient development was not ais necessary to support a transition to a CRDpriority. Policy guidance stemmed from an generalpathway. Financial frameworks should be assessed forenvironmental focus aimed at the conservation oftheir ability to cost, budget for and provide necessaryexisting natural resources and wildlife. Tanzania’s onfinance for climate change related initiatives. Thisgoing decentralisation process is another importantmay include approaches to encouraging spending onarea of focus, in theory placing Local Governmentclimate related objectives and tracking expenditureAuthorities (LGAs) as the drivers of development,to gain better understanding of progress. Financingbalancing the demands of top-down national growthmust be sustainable and long term. A committedand development strategies. Given the projects focusstrategy for mobilising both domestic and internationalin areas dominated by pastoralism, their attention toresources is necessary. At district level, the needpastoralist needs should also be taken into account.to be flexible and responsive will require localimplementing institutions to be able to reallocateNational Environmental Policy (1997)funds quickly depending on seasonal circumstances.This demands robust and transparent financialThe National Environment Policy remains the centralmanagement systems.policy for managing environmental issues, and hasserved as the basis of climate policy development,Tanzania has only recently begun to develop policiesdespite the fact that climate change is not directlyand strategies that focus directly on responding toreferenced (United Republic of Tanzania, 1997). Landthe impacts of climate change and promoting climatedegradation, water access, pollution, wildlife andresilient development. As such, much of the enablingdeforestation are key topics. It promotes “management2This has been adapted from the TAMD wording, “Extent and quality of co-ordination of climate risk management across relevant institutions”www.iied.org9

Resilience Building in Tanzania Learning From Experiences of Institutional Strengtheningand control of the migration of livestock” alongside“restoration and protection of grazing lands” (ibid.,p.20), policies which undermine key tenets ofpastoralist production strategies. However, it alsogives responsibility to LGAs for overseeing planningprocesses and establishing local policies, and noteslocal people’s right to participate in land management.Vision 2025 (1999)Heavily influenced by the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, its broad aims include achieving – by 2025 –middle-income status, good standards of governance,inclusive growth, high levels of education and a semiindustrialised, resilient economy. It further envisionsa food-secure population, gender equity, qualityhealthcare and access to safe water. Climate change isnot mentioned, although the vision document states that“high priority must be given to organisational learningand creativity in response to the challenges of nature(including disaster) and to development in the regionaland global economy” (United Republic of Tanzania,1999). It also notes the need for affirmative action toprovide special support for traditional or indigenouspopulations (ibid., p17). This is a notable inclusion in thecontext of years of underinvestment in regions with largeMaasai populations.National Adaptation Plan of Action(2007)Tanzania developed its National Adaptation Planof Action with support from the United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) to address urgentclimate change adaptation priorities. However, there islittle evidence to show that its activities were carriedout or monitored (NAPA, 2007). While none of itscosted projects were based in Monduli, Longido andNgorongoro, the document advocated distinctly nonpastoralist approaches to livestock, including zerograzing (feeding animals without movement acrosspastures) and controlled movement of livestock. Suchpractices undermine pastoralists’ strategies whichinvolve flexible mobility according to conditions.advocates village-level land-use planning in all districts.However, while this may improve participatory land-useplanning, the fact that pastoralists need access to largerspatial scales than village boundaries is ignored. Nordoes the policy recognise that fixed land-use plans maybe made irrelevant by continually unpredictable weatherpatterns. It also includes directives to support zerograzing dairy farms, although gives no direction as towhere in the country these might be most appropriate.MKUKUTA II (2011)The National Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy– known as MKUKUTA II – guides the achievement ofVision 2025 (United Republic of Tanzania, 2010). Thissecond iteration of the strategy highlights modernisationand commercialisation of agriculture as a route topoverty reduction, economic growth and food security.Climate relevant targets include ensuring “crop andlivestock varieties suited to adverse conditions broughtabout by climate change are introduced and adopted”and improving capacity to “mitigate adverse impact ofclimate change natural and human made disasters”.Environmentally sustainable growth is a key aspectwhich incorporates the need to co-ordinate climatechange adaptation.The strategy plans significant growth of the livestocksector, the development of “livestock varieties suited toadverse conditions brought about by climate change”,and means to support livestock producers in the face ofdrought (ibid., p58). This breeding approach contrastswith actual practice promoted by district governments,in which livestock breeding is focused on heavierbreeds so as to gain higher prices at market, ratherthan on drought tolerance. In contrast to other livestockpolicies (see below) however, there is no me

2.3 Tanzania's institutional arrangements for climate resilience 12 2.4 Tanzania's financial arrangements for climate resilience 12 3 Planning and budgeting at district level 13 3.1 District revenue 14 3.2 How conducive is the planning environment to climate-resilient development? 15 4 Towards greater local resilience: the project so far 20