– CBD COP 11 Report



The  eleventh  meeting  of  the  Conference  of  the  Parties  (COP  11)  to  the  Convention  on  Biological
Diversity (CBD) was held from 8-19 October 2012, in Hyderabad, India.  Approximately 6,000 delegates
representing  parties  and  other  governments,  UN  agencies,  intergovernmental,  non-governmental,
indigenous  and  local  community  organizations,  academia  and  the  private  sector  participated  in  the

The Zambia Government with the leadership of the Ministry of Lands, Natural resources management
and  Environmental  protection  Minister  Honourable  Wylber  Simuusa  was  represented  by  Ministry  of
Commerce,  Ministry  of  Chiefs  affairs,  Zambia  Environmental  management  Agency,  Zambia  CBNRM
Forum, Zambia Alliance of women, Youth Environment Network (YEN) Zambia, a member of parliament
representing the parliamentary committee on Environment, Zambia National Broadcasting Cooperation,
Lusaka City council and Ministry of Justice.

The Three Civil Society Organisations namely Zambia CBNRM Forum, Zambia Alliance of Women and
Youth Environment Network (YEN) Zambia received support from Civil Society Environment fund as part
of the National delegation as requested by government for support.


The conference had several plenary discussions; two working groups that met periodically and various
side meetings of professionals on different topics related to Biodiversity conservation. The Conference
of  the  Parties  also  included  a  high-level  ministerial  segment  organized  by  the  host  country  in
consultation  with  the  Secretariat  and  the  Bureau.    The  high-level  segment  took  place  from  17  to  19
October 2012 at the Hyderabad International Convention Centre.

The agenda of the main discussions in two plenary sessions included the following:

1.   The  status  of  Nagoya  Protocol  on  Access  to  Genetic  Resources  and  the  Fair  and  Equitable
Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization and related developments.

The  Nagoya  Protocol  was  opened  for  signature  in  February  2011and  it  was  envisaged  that  it
would have come into force but only five countries had signed and ratified it at the time of the
preparatory  meeting.  For  the  protocol  to  come  into  force  it  had  to  be  ratified  by  at  least  50
2.   Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and progress towards the Aichi
Biodiversity targets.

3.   Financial resources and financial mechanism.

GEF  provided  financial  resources  for  a  period  of  five  years  following  certain  thematic  areas
including Biodiversity.

4.   Article   8(j)   and   related   provisions   that   focused   on   in-situ   conservation   and   traditional

5.   Biodiversity and climate change and related issues

6.   Biodiversity and development



The conference of Parties (COP) called upon all  parties to expedite their internal processes leading to
ratification of the Nagoya Protocol. The COP invited parties and others to submit information on model
contractual  clauses,  codes  of  conduct,  guidelines  and  best  practices  and/or  standards,  to  be  made
available through the access benefit sharing (ABS) clearing-house.


The  COP  called  all  parties  to  share information  on,  inter  alia,  results  from  the  monitoring  of  progress
towards  the  Aichi  targets.  On  scientific  and  technical  cooperation  and  technology  transfer,  the  COP
requests  the  Secretariat  to,  inter  alia:  develop  a  coherent,  consistent  and  coordinated  approach  to
technical and scientific cooperation; identify how it can facilitate implementation of the Convention by
acting  as  a  convener  to  build  partnerships  and  capacity  and  collaborate  with  regional  centers  of
excellence in biodiversity to support implementing the Strategic Plan and achieving the Aichi targets in
developing countries.

The COP requested the Secretariat to, inter alia:
    Develop practical information on the indicators;
    Further develop the global indicators  to ensure that  each Aichi target can be monitored by at
least one global indicator by 2014;     Propose a limited number of simple, easily applicable and cost-effective indicators;
    Promote harmonization of global indicators and their use between the CBD, other conventions,
regional agreements and processes and promote further collaboration;
    Provide information about the indicator framework to assist the process to establish sustainable
development goals;
    Further develop and maintain the online database on indicators for the Strategic Plan; and
    Develop an explanatory practical toolkit on each of the Aichi targets.


The African Group called for doubling resources by 2015 and increasing international financial flows to
developing countries by 20% annually up to 2020. Norway underscored the need to combine efforts on
resource mobilization, track biodiversity funding, and create enabling conditions.
Developing countries stressed that establishment of targets is the main outstanding item since COP 10
and many expressed “extreme disappointment,” underscoring a lack of political will. They proposed a
target of doubling biodiversity financial resource flows from developed to developing countries by 2015,
noting  it  stems  from  the  Organization  for  Economic  Cooperation  and  Development  (OECD)  Creditors
Reporting  System  and  the  Rio  markers,  which  established  a  robust  baseline.  They  also  argued  that
reporting and assessment-related targets should not be a precondition for the target on financial flows.

Algeria, on behalf of G-77/China and Mexico, stressed that developing countries engaged in good faith
and  made  significant  commitments  in  Nagoya  with  the  expectation  that  financial  resources  would  be
forthcoming.  They  underscored  that,  unless  COP  11  address  the  issue  of  targets  for  the  Resource
Mobilization  Strategy,  the  gains  of  Nagoya  will  be  negated  and  the  momentum  towards  realizing  the
Aichi targets lost.
Final  Decision:  The  decision  included  sections  on  target  setting,  review  of  implementation  of  the
Strategy for Resource Mobilization, and a roadmap.
The  COP  urged  parties  to  consider  all  possible  sources  and  means  that  can  help  to  meet  the  level  of
resources  needed.  The  COP  decided  on  an  overall  substantial  increase  of  total  biodiversity-related
funding for the implementation of the Strategic Plan from a variety of sources, and resolved to achieve
the following preliminary targets:
•  double total biodiversity-related international financial resource flows to developing countries
by 2015 and at least maintaining this level until 2020;
• endeavor  for  100%  but  achieve  at  least  75%  of  parties  having  included  biodiversity  in  their
national priorities or development plans by 2015;
•   endeavor  for  100%,  but  achieve  at  least  75%  of  parties  provided  with  adequate  financial
resources  having  reported  domestic  biodiversity  expenditures  and  funding  needs,  gaps  and
priorities by 2015; and
•   endeavor  for  100%,  but  achieve  at  least  75%  provided  with  adequate  financial  resources,
having  prepared  national  financial  plans  for  biodiversity  by  2015,  and  30%  of  those  parties
having assessed biodiversity values.

The African Group recommended that the  Global Environment Fund (GEF) allocate funds dedicated to
Access and benefit sharing (ABS) and the Nagoya Protocol in a separate window under during GEF-6.
The  COP  adopted  the  four-year  outcome-oriented  framework  of  programme  priorities  for  the  period
2014-2018 that included:
1.   Expedite  the  provision  of  financial  support,  based  on  a  flexible  and  national  demand-driven
2.   Avoid additional and lengthy processes and use existing NBSAPs as the basis for GEF-6 priorities;
3.   Clarify the concept and application of co-financing for biodiversity projects;
4.   Apply co-financing arrangements in ways that do not create unnecessary barriers and costs for
recipient countries; and
5.   Invite developed country parties and others to increase their financial contributions to GEF-6.
6.   It also requests the Secretariat to make the report of the fourth review of the effectiveness of
the financial mechanism available to parties.
7.   On the needs assessment for GEF-6, the COP took note of the range of estimated funding needs
and urges the GEF to consider all aspects of the expert team’s needs assessment report on the
levels of funding for biodiversity. It also requests the Secretariat and invites the GEF to identify
the Aichi targets benefiting the most from synergies with other GEF focal areas.

The COP  recommended  that the GEF make  funds available for activities to support ABS and  the early
entry into force and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol.
The COP also called upon the GEF, donors, parties and others to  consider providing technical support
and financial resources for work on indicators on Traditional Knowledge (TK) and customary sustainable


The African Group and Pacific Islands called for guidelines on developing legislation to respect, protect
and promote sustainable customary use and TK.

The COP requested secretariat to organize one meeting of the Article 8(j) Working Group prior to COP
12 with the in-depth dialogue to be held on: “connecting TK systems and science.
The COP also requested GEF and invited other donors to support: development of community plans and
protocols  by  Indigenous  Local  communities  (ILC);  documentation,  mapping  and  registry  of  their
indigenous  and  community  conserved  areas  (ICCAs)  by  ILCs;  and  preparation  and  implementation  of
their community conservation plans.
On  participatory  mechanisms  for  ILCs  in  the  Convention’s  work,  the  decision  addresses:  capacity
building; CEPA; development of communication, mechanisms and tools; participation including through
the Voluntary Fund for the Participation of ILC representatives; other initiatives; and local communities.  On capacity building, the COP requests the Secretariat to continue convening regional and subregional
capacity-building workshops on the Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development; and explore
facilitation  of  joint  capacity-building  workshops  with  other  multilateral  environmental  agreements
(MEAs) to promote sustainable use of biodiversity.
On local communities capacity to access conservation Funds, the COP took note with appreciation of the
report of the Expert Group Meeting of Local Communities Representatives and requested Secretariat to
take  practical  steps  to  ensure  that  local  communities’  representatives  have  equitable  access  to  the
Voluntary   Fund   for   the   participation   of   Indigenous   Local   Community   conservation   efforts   and
representatives in Convention meetings.

The  COP  urged  parties  and  encouraged  other  governments  and  relevant  organizations  to  make
concerted  efforts  to  achieve  Aichi  Targets  14  (ecosystems  and  essential  services  safeguarded)  and  15
(ecosystems  restored  and  resilience  enhanced)  and  to  contribute  to  achievement  of  other  targets
through activities that support ecosystem restoration.


The COP requested  the Secretariat to  compile information from parties on initiatives and experiences
regarding  Climate  Change  and  Biodiversity  Durban  outcome  on  long-term  cooperative  action  and
regarding CBD contribution to the UNFCC Convention objectives and submit a progress report prior to
COP 12; and develop advice on REDD+ issues, taking into full account the relevant UNFCCC decisions.

The definitions and understanding of ongoing work in other fora, including the IPCC, that climate-related
geo-engineering  may  include,  inter  alia,  deliberate  intervention  in  the  planetary  environment  of  a
nature  and  scale  intended  to  counteract  anthropogenic  climate  change  and/or  its  impacts,  with  a
footnote  that  excludes  CCS  at  source  from  fossil  fuels  when  it  captures  carbon  dioxide  before  it  is
released into the atmosphere, and also forest-related activities.

The  COP  noted  the  lack  of  science-based,  global,  transparent  and  effective  control  and  regulatory
mechanisms for climate-related geo-engineering, the need for a precautionary approach, and that such
mechanisms may be most necessary for those geo-engineering activities that have a potential to cause
significant adverse transboundary effects,
The COP also requested the Secretariat, at the appropriate time, to prepare, provide for peer review and
submit  for  consideration  by  a  future  meeting  of  SBSTTA:  an  update  on  the  potential  impacts  of  geo-
engineering  techniques  on  biodiversity  and  on  the  regulatory  framework  of  climate-related  geo-
engineering relevant to CBD, drawing upon scientific relevant reports such as the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report;  and  an  overview  of  parties’  and  other  stakeholders’  views  on  the  potential  impacts  of  geo-
engineering on biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts.

The  COP  advised  parties  to  work  on  activities  of  protected  areas  that  improve  inter-agency  and
intersectoral   coordination,   especially   for   mainstreaming   protected   areas   and   biodiversity   and
integrating protected areas into wider land- and seascapes;
The  COP  also  advised  strengthening  recognition  of  and  support  for  community-based  approaches  to
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity; give due attention to the conservation of wild relatives
of cultivated crops and wild edible plants in protected areas and in ICCAs, in accordance with CBD and
national legislation;

The COP acknowledged that bio fuel technologies may aggravate drivers of biodiversity loss and also bio
fuel’s potential positive contribution to mitigating climate change.
The  COP  Encouraged  continued  initiatives  to  develop  and  apply  tools  and  approaches  to  promote
positive and minimize or avoid negative impacts that affect socioeconomic conditions.
The COP took note of gaps in scientific knowledge, relevant tools and approaches, and of uncertainties
and difficulties measuring and addressing indirect impacts OF Bio fuels.
The COP invited parties to evaluate incentive measures that may drive bio fuel expansion in the context
of the CBD’s cross-cutting issue on incentive measures.
The COP urged parties to monitor the development of the rapidly developing technology and apply the
precautionary  approach;  and  requested  the  Secretariat  to  continue  compiling  information  on  gaps  in
standards and methodologies and compile information on definitions of relevant key terms.


Held from 16-19 October 2012, the high-level segment heard statements from ministers and high-level
representatives,  and  held  panel  discussions  on:  implementation  of  the  Strategic  Plan;  biodiversity  for
livelihoods and poverty reduction; marine and coastal biodiversity; and implementation of the Nagoya
Protocol on ABS.
The  Minister  of  Lands,  Environmental  protection  and  Natural  resources  management  Honourable
Wylber Simuusa of Zambia gave his speech on 17
October 2012 where he announced progress made
by Zambia to  ratification of the Nagoya Protocol and announced the new government committeemen
to  conservation  efforts  by  doubling  Budgets  in  2013  Fiscal  year  to  his  ministry.  The  Minister  further
alluded  to  the  Government  collaboration  with  Mining  companies  in  restoration  of  degraded  areas
through tree planning programmes.


Zambia  delegates  participated  in  a  number  of  side  events  during  the  conference.  The  noted  events
1.    Indigenous  people  event  organised  by  Asian  Pacific  Indigenous  people  association  by  the
Zambia CBNRM Forum,
2.   Global Youth Biodiversity Network a Youth constituency of the CBD Secretariat
3.   Caucus of women.
The Indigenous people forum provided an opportunity for the Zambia CBNRM Forum to make  a brief
presentation on the progress on article 8(J). A presentation on stocktaking of CBNRM works in Zambia
was  done  and  capacity  building  effort  in  communities  through  monitoring  system  of  indigenous
resources and change. The 30 manuals on the Management oriented monitoring system developed by
WWF were shared to the participants during the forum session.

– ATTENTION! Zambezi River Authority Press Release!





For immediate release                                                                       20 November, 2012





ON 29th and 30th NOVEMBER 2012


The Zambezi River Authority wishes to inform the public and all stakeholders that it will open the Kariba Dam spillway gates on 29th and 30th November 2012. This is to facilitate the testing of a generator, Unit 4, at the Kariba North Bank Power Station following completion of rehabilitation works there. The gate opening is scheduled as follows:

DATES:         29th and 30th November 2012


TIME :           08:00 to 16.00 hours on both days


Would the communities and all stakeholders along the Zambezi River downstream of the Kariba Dam please take note and keep a safe distance away from the Zambezi River to avoid loss of life and property due to flooding arising from the spilling.

For further information please contact:

Elizabeth M. Karonga

Public Relations & Communications Manager

Zambezi River Authority

Zim Cell +263 913002978

Zam Cell: +260 0977 318735

Direct Line +260 211 230551

Tel: +260 211 227970/1, +260 211 +260 211 228401/2

Fax: +260 211 227498

Skype: elizabeth.karonga

-CBNRM Forum holds breakfast meeting

Report on CBNRM Breakfast Meeting:

Held on October 30th, 2012 at Southern Sun

Opportunities for Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in Sustainable Development in Zambia

1.0            INTRODUCTION

The Zambia Community Based Natural Resources Management (ZCBNRM) Forum supported by WWF Zambia is an umbrella organization for Community Based Organizations (CBOs) or institutions with interest in or supportive of Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in the country.   The Zambia CBNRM Forum facilitated a donor Breakfast meeting through the Policy Working Group.  The breakfast meeting was intended to bring together relevant stakeholders involved in CBNRM to discuss CBNRM opportunities for sustainable development in Zambia.  The meeting aimed at providing an opportunity to share experiences of the forum and discuss key issues in CBNRM implementation and financing potential towards ZCBNRM practitioners and partners in Zambia. The workshop was held at Sun Hotel on 30th October, 2012.  Participants to the workshop included relevant line ministry staff, Non Governmental Organizations, Consultants, Civil Society Organisation’s (CSOs) and Cooperating partners.

2.0            BACKGROUND

Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) is an approach combining conservation and development and has emerged within the work of international donors and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs). The objective of the CBNRM approach is considered twofold, (1) as a means to achieve rural development and (2) conservation of the natural resources.

However it has been observed in Zambia that most attention is focused mainly on the management of wildlife and very little attention on the rest of the CBNRM sub-sectors such as forestry, fisheries and other resources.  One of the critical requirements to implement CBNRM project is adequate funding. Realizing this fact, the Policy Working Group observed that there is potential to secure funding from the available Cooperating Partners in Zambia.  Thus this meeting was organized to create rapport between CBNRM stakeholders and Cooperating Partners in order to establish a level of information exchange in an attempt to resolve the challenges of which funding is predominant.

3.0            OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the meeting include:

  1. To explore opportunities of decentralization in improved natural resource management
  2. To share policy challenges in CBNRM in Zambia
  3. To find ways of addressing implementation challenges of CBNRM in Zambia but not limited to the following:
  • Local institution arrangements
  • Local level skills
  • Funding
  • Markets






4.1              Welcome Remarks

The Vice-Chairperson of the ZCBNRM Forum Mr. Moses Nyoni from BirdLife Zambia facilitated the proceedings of the meeting.  The facilitator requested participants for self introductions and their expectations.  The main expectations included the following:

  • To explore sustainable deployment potential through CBNRM
  • To nature networking efforts among CBNRM Practitioners
  • To promote a balance covering socio-economic and environmental issues for sustainable development.
  • How can this platform address the concerns of CBNRM practitioners?

The facilitator’s expectation was that potential strategic partnerships among the stakeholders could be created as a result of this meeting. Thereafter, he called upon the Mr. Biston Mbewe the Board Chairman of the Zambia CBNRM Forum to give his welcome remarks and a background presentation on the CBNRM Forum.

In his welcome remarks the Board Chairman highlighted that the goal of the meeting is to create awareness of the forum, clarify the activities and hence look at potential engagements. To further elaborate these aims he made presentation as highlighted in the next sub-section.

4.2              Background presentation by Mr. Biston Mbewe

A background paper was presented by Mr. Mbewe to share information and experiences on Zambia CBNRM activities to motivate a discussion.  The presentation highlighted the following:

  • Background of Zambia CBNRM Forum

The Zambia CBNRM Forum was established in 2004 and formally launched on 12th August, 2005 by the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources (MTENR).

The Forum is an umbrella organization for Community Based Organizations (CBOs) or institutions with interest in or supportive of Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in the country. The forum has a membership of 150 institutions and individuals who registered interest at the Annual General Meeting of September 2011.

  • Vision, Mission and Overall Objective

Vision statement

“To foster sustainable livelihoods among rural communities through sustainable management and utilization of natural resources.”

Mission statement

“To promote CBNRM and sustainable utilization of natural resources in Zambia and facilitate the implementation of CBNRM programmes through lobbying, advocacy, capacity building activities, networking and information

Overall objective

“ To influence coordination of CBNRM interventions, influence CBNRM related policy formulation and facilitate effective implementation of CBNRM programmes and projects that develop sustainable strategic partnerships among communities, private and public sectors through continuous consultation and networking among stakeholders”

  • How the CBNRM Forum operates

The Zambia CBNRM Forum operates in two ways; (1) by providing direct support to communities and (2) by initiating various activities through Working Groups (WGs). There are basically four WGs in the forum namely,

  • Management Oriented Monitoring Systems (MOMS)
  • Community Based Enterprise/Community Based Organisation
  • Training
  • Policy
  • Activities
  1. 1.      Management Oriented Monitoring Systems (MOMS)

Piloting MOMs in two chiefdoms of Kabulwebulwe and Mulendema of Mumbwa districts on Beekeeping, Wild life Human conflict, Conservation farming and health/HIVAIDS  The forum has up scaled MOMS to Kaoma in Mufutha Game Management Area ( GMA) targeting only wildlife human conflict and support Village scouts to effectively report to the Community Resource Boards (CRBs).

  1. 2.      Community Based Enterprise/Community Based Organisation
  • Institutional strengthening for honey production sites in Chinsali district through formulation of bye laws.
  • Facilitation of Market linkages to COMACO Honey value chain of Itezhi tezhi honey producers
  • Exploring establishing baobab enterprises in Luangwa district.
  • The forum facilitated member participation at the 2012 Green Expo for market linkages and Green business development.
  • Supporting Community enterprise on producing improved beehive construction in Mpolokoso
  1. 3.      Thematic Training Working Group
  • Participated in the review of the Curriculum of Zambia Forest College.
  • Supported Zambia Forest College for a 6 Months attachment of one member of staff to University of Florida as capacity development in CBNRM training.
  • Supported Natural Resources Development College (NRDC) in curriculum review for CBNRM courses
  • Have signed a contract with Zambia Forest College for provision of a professional course in CBNRM
  1. 4.      Thematic Policy Working Group
  • Submitted comments on EIA on Mining in the Lower Zambezi NP and participated in the public hearing with a position that was considered by ZEMA in the final decision.
  • Submitted comments on the Tourism and Hospitality legislation review to promote;
    • Community ecotourism business
    • Community members working as bush guides without licenses fees
    • Participated in the process of developing of  the National Climate Change Response Strategy
    • Participated in the review and validation of the National REDD Readiness Programme
    • Influenced inclusion for the Chapter on environment in the Sixth National Development Plan
    • Facilitated a process of member organisation developing a position on NRM in the 2012 draft National constitution and community awareness through district meetings about the chapter


  1. 5.      Secretariat Engagement
  • Mobilized recourses from DFID for the establishment of the Zambia Climate Change Network (ZCCN)
  • The Forum sits on the National REDD  steering committee
  • The Forum sits on a Technical committee of the Interim Environment Fund of ZEMA supported by Finish and Danish embassies
  • The Forum sits on the Technical committee of the Lake Tanganyika conservation project.
  • Facilitated participation of two members organisations to the Rio+ 20 Earth Summit in Brazil 2012
  • The forum was nominated to be part of the National delegation to the 11 conference of parties on the convention of Biodiversity in India 2012.

The following were comments, reaction and questions for clarification after the presentation:

Question 1: The meeting observed that from the CBNRM activities outlined in the presentation, fisheries sub-sector appears not to be mentioned. What is the explanation to this?

In response, the meeting was informed that support to communities depends heavily on felt needs of the community. However, this also has a bearing on the historical perspective of CBNRM which was biased to wildlife management and benefit sharing was the driving factor thus other natural resources were sidelined. Nevertheless, the forum is scaling out to other resources but will ensure that benefit sharing is as well incorporated.

Question 2:  It is undisputable that the numbers of extractive industries other than mining are on the increase in resources such as forestry. What measures does the forum put in place to discourage this trend both in the short and long term?

Sensitization activities of chiefs have been undertaken among chiefs particularly in North Western Province in mining areas under the SEPA a member of the CBNRM Forum. Sensitization in schools has also been embarked on. Community sensitization meetings have also been conducted to promote best practices of harvesting caterpillars and hence conserve forests.

The major challenge is the lack of consultation; mining investors and government do not engage effectively with traditional authorities.  Another important issue of concern attention associated to this is the need to safe guard land grabs by investors.

Comment 1: The activities of the CBNRM Forum are well appreciated however; the CBNRM focus should also target remote areas where poverty is concentrated. Hence the needs for the forum to pay attention on scaling up out-reach programs in those areas.

4.3              Presentation on Gaps & Barriers for CBNRM in Forestry, Mining & Wildlife Sectors, Dr. Rose Fumpa-Makano

A presentation on gaps and barriers for CBNRM in forestry, mining and wildlife sectors was given by Dr Rose Makano an independent Policy Analysist/Consultant. The aim of the presentation was to: share feedback on study findings on issues related to barriers and gaps in natural resources management policies affecting CBNRM.  The presentation highlighted the following:

  • The CBNRM Concept

The presentation highlighted some underpinning concepts of CBNRM as way of defining in broad terms what CBNRM is all about.

  • Voluntary community efforts aimed at sustainable management of natural resources
  • A people cantered and time-tested natural resource management tool.
  • Local communities have a natural attachment to their environments, a sense of ownership and, therefore, a responsibility to manage the natural resources in their vicinity.
  • CBNRM concept is based on devolution of authority and responsibility on resource ownership.
  • Covers devolution of power and rights on the resources for mutual benefit.


  • CBNRM Principles

The following were highlighted as principles of CBNRM and these guided the analysis of this study.

  • Local participation
  • Local institutions/governance
  • Benefit sharing  (Generation and distribution)
  • Political Support (Legislation and Policy)
  • Private Sector Linkages
  • Biodiversity conservation

National Forestry Policy of 1998 is under review as well as well as the Forests Act 1973 (and 1999) is under review.  The Statutory Instrument (SI No. 47 of 2006) provides for Joint Forest Management (JFM), a form of CBNRM – which gives access and control over forestry resources to people living in and around forests.  The forestry produce is both commercially important on world, national and local markets and for households’ well-being through the provision of food and beverages, income, shelter, health and so on.  Forestry contributes 5.4% to national GDP


  • National Forestry Policy
    • Overall objective of the policy is: to enhance the sector’s contribution to national socio-economic development in a sustainable manner.
    • Government’s goal in the SNDP (2010-15) is to reduce deforestation and enhance investment in natural resources management.
    • The policy states:
    •       “Local communities, including community-based organisations, shall advise government on policy formulation and implementation. They shall be the key actors in planning and management of forests at local levels. They shall also be the implementers and the determinants of the species and technologies to be used in community based forestry plantation establishment and management” (item 4.1.5 of the National Forestry Policy).


  • Gaps and Barriers under Forestry

Issues under both policy and the Act are currently under review. Government is in support of CBNRM in forestry through the policy, however, the S.I. No 47 of 2006 is not comprehensive; there are some issues that require attention.  The following are gaps and barriers under the Forestry sub-sector:

  • Non commencement of the 1999 Forests Act.
  • The 1998 National Forestry Policy more progressive than the 1973 Forests Act.
  • No clear distinction between commercial and community user rights
  • Levies on products from JFM areas
  • Local communities cannot harvest, use or sell forest produce, have to pay a fee to Forestry Department
  • Community members can only license minor (non wood) products and not major forest products
  • Benefit sharing mechanism not clear
  • Poor information dissemination to communities participating in JFM
  • No Private Sector support to local communitie

The Mines and Minerals Development Policy of 2006 updated the Mines and Minerals Policy of 1995.  Mines and Minerals Act, Cap. 213 (was amended in 2007)

Mining rights supersedes any other rights on the land (surface property rights versus mineral rights). Land owner can be moved if the land he/she occupies has minerals. The Act is not explicit on compensation for affected people.

Both the Mines and Minerals Development Policy of 2006 and the Mines and Minerals Development Act of 2008 provide leverage for CBNRM although not explicitly mentioned. Never the less is implied room for CBNRM).  The intention is to attract local and foreign investment in order to stimulate growth of the small-scale (artisan) mining sector for economic development and wealth creation.

Although the gemstone sub-sector is recognized as having “the greatest potential for enhancing the country’s export earnings, rural employment creation and other alternative sustainable livelihoods and opportunities,” it has several areas of improvement which include among others the following major areas of focus:

  • Access to affordable finance;
  • Technical and managerial skills;
  • Physical infrastructure – roads, power, clinics, potable water, etc;
  • Gemstone marketing bottlenecks; and
  • Developing industry capacity for value addition

Generally, the following key issues in mining were identified during the study:

  • Gemstone miners pay more tax on their revenues than larger mining companies, weakens the very provision the policy identified.
  • Indigenous gemstone miners don’t receive any tax holidays given to larger mining companies.
  • Artisan mining permits valid only for 2 years and are non-renewable. (How will Zambians get wealth from the mineral resources if the law is so restrictive?)
  • Fees for mineral geological maps too high for small scale miners to afford.
  • Inadequate information on mineral wealth.
  • Benefit sharing: focuses on job creation for locals rather than local people having direct and substantial ownership of the resource.
  • All mining revenues go to central government (general revenue account) where is decentralization to support local governance?
  • Lack of access to affordable financing
  • Revolving fund not only inadequate but payback period too short.
  • Terms used in the policy not explained – there is need to unbundle terms for CBNRM purposes. For instance, local people (does this apply to all Zambians or only to those near the mineral resource)?
  • Private sector (does CBNRM groups fall in here?)
  • Ownership of mineral wealth vested in the Republican President on behalf of Zambians
  • Gaps and Barriers under Mining
    • Policy silent on community participation.
    • Policy highly favours commercial investors.
    • Benefit sharing and wealth creation mechanism puts Zambians in a subordinate position, to be employed.
    • Lack of access to affordable financing.
    • Licensing and tax regimes favour foreign investors against local people.



Wildlife is the pioneer sector to formally institutionalize CBNRM in Zambia (through ADMADE).  Both the National Parks and Wildlife Policy of 1998 and the Wildlife Act of 1998 support CBNRM.  It is worth noting that that Wildlife Act of 1998 also applies to forests & water resources found in National Parks and GMAs.  CBNRM in wildlife management provides many useful lessons that could be used design models in other resources.  Local communities’ participation is provided for through Community Resource Boards (CRBs)


The following issues were identified in the wildlife sub sector:

  • Land can be delineated for GMA purposes without permission, unless one has title to that land.   (But few people have title deeds on customary lands).
  • Immunity given to wildlife officers excessive (village scout or honorary wildlife police officer) Places the officers above the law, a good recipe for abuse of office and shielding erring officers.
  • Too much power given to ZAWA and the Minister
  • Appointment of a Patron for areas that cut across Chiefdoms is not clear.
  • Compensation for displaced communities during creation of National Parks not mentioned.
  • Community user rights and access to National Parks not clear.
  • Research information to be disseminated to other people, does not mention giving it to communities where the info would have been collected from (Knowledge is power!!)
  • Ownership of wildlife vested in the Republican President on behalf of Zambians (in a way it takes away local ownership!)
  • Gaps and Barriers under Wildlife sector
    • Emphasis on economic value of wildlife may drive utility motives at the expense of sustainability
    • Community participation not clear at planning level, policy mentions inter-disciplinary team of professionals.
    • Compensation for displaced communities during creation of National Parks not mentioned.
    • Excessive immunity given to wildlife officers may lead to abuse of office.
  • Sectors that were embarked upon during the study are;
    • Agriculture
    • Energy (electricity)
    • Environmental Management
    • Fisheries
    • Forestry
    • Land
    • Mining
    • Water
    • Wildlife
    • Wetlands



















Table 1:  Gaps and Barriers In Legal-Policy Framework For CBNRM in Zambia


Policy Legislation Comments
Agriculture Yes No Implied in cooperatives & farmer organizations. Act does not provide for CBNRM initiatives.
Energy (electricity) No No No direct measures for development or management of energy by communities. However, some CBNRM entry points available.
Environment Yes Yes Not stated explicitly but implied in various statements that demand for the right to a safe environment, and responsibility for actions that promote environmental best practices.
Fisheries Yes Yes
Forestry Yes Yes
Land No Yes Policy acknowledges participation but no specifics on how. The Act recognizes customary tenure, protection of use & occupancy rights.
Mining No No Corporate oriented.
Water Yes Yes Recently incorporated in the National Water Policy of 2010 and 2011 Water Act.
Wildlife Yes Yes Provides lessons for other sectors.
Wetlands n/a n/a 2001 Draft, awaits agreement among stakeholders to move forward.

Table 2: The Consulting Team


Dr. Rose Fumpa Makano Freelance Consultant rose.makano@gmail.com
Mr. Moses Nyoni Birdlife Zambia zosproject@zamnet.zm
Mr. Alimakio Zulu Natural Resources Consultative Forum alimakio_zulu@yahoo.com
Mrs. Faustina Mwenda PELUM  (Participatory Ecological Land use Management) Association mwenda.faustina@gmail.com
Chitaku Mucheleng’anga NISIR (National Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research) chitaku_58@yahoo.com
  • Reaction to the Presentation

Comment and question: There is need to have linkage between community, sustainable development and resources.  The study alludes to the fact that job creation is the major focus of CBNRM in as regards mining; a question was raised if there is any data to substantiate this statement?


Comments: There is need to link economic value and sustainability of natural resources.  What is the forum doing to promote natural resources economic enterprises in support of conservation? Examples of such initiatives could be in the areas of game ranching, aquaculture and forestry plantation.  The other initiative could be in the area of policy advocacy such as to call for higher taxes in mining to discourage such extractive industries.


Comment and question:  The challenge is that Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) are visibly fragmented and so are there efforts. There is need for well harmonized CSO to ensure that the all activities are well coordinated and CSOs speak with one voice in the sector.

Comment: Compensation for displaced communities due to extractive industries investments such as mining is a challenge. Therefore, the CBNRM practitioners need to find ways of facilitating an effective processes of resolving resettlement compensation issues on behalf of the voiceless and vulnerable communities.


Comments:  By representative of Forestry Department present in the meeting, the following comments were made:

  1. The CBNRM practitioners were commended for their efforts in the implementation of the initiatives aimed at conservation of natural resources as well as improved livelihoods. However, CBNRM practitioners should not focus on “money” but “innovative ideas”.


  1. The existing law does not differentiate between ‘commercial’ and ‘community’ user rights. This means that communities by law are required to pay for any felling or removal of any forest produce and any other activities that require a license accordingly.   In the light of this statement, it was emphasized that this is only applicable to commercial purposes and not applicable to domestic use of forest produce.
  2. On excessive Forestry officers’ immunity, it was emphasized that this was a necessary provision to guarantee the officers to perform their duties as necessary in the interest of conservation.
  3. Benefit sharing in the Forestry co-management arrangement, should not be compared to the model of wildlife sector which is done through the CRBs. This is because the benefits in the forestry co-management arrangement cannot easily be translated into monetary value; hence the benefits are translated in a form of use of forest produce in general including ecosystem services.  Still, the question is; where is empowerment?

4.4              Presentation on   Community Based Natural Resource Management  (CBNRM) in Southern Africa  (The case of Zambia)


A presentation on the Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in Southern Africa (The case of Zambia)   was given by Mr. Mwape Sichilongo from WWF Regional CBNRM Capacity Building Programme in Southern Africa.  The objective of the presentation was to share CBNRM conceptual approach taking a case for Zambia. The presentation focused on the areas of focus and successes of CBNRM.

  • Why communities

Communities are the traditional and historical owners of land and natural resources even where national parks are today. Most high value conservation areas are either shared with communities or surrounded by poor communities. Communities therefore, are legitimate partners.

Regional CBNRM Capacity Building Programme operates in the SADC countries; thus the SADC Treaty embraces the protocol on wildlife and law enforcement through international conventions such as (CBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD).

  • Effective community engagement results in the following:
    • Additional capacity and goodwill for natural resource management mobilised;
    • Reduced tension and improved enabling environment for conservation and development
    • Improved natural resource governance – decentralisation, democratisation, promotion of human, cultural, social, economic and environmental rights
    • Increased progress in achieving national and global targets under international conventions
  • Four Key Elements in CBNRM

The following are the four key elements in CBNRM.

  • Conservation through use – incentives for landholders to manage the environment; choice; social, economic and political issue
  • Devolution – authority and responsibility; right to manage, benefit and sell
  • Economic justification – major driver of sustainable use; policy to make wildlife more competitive
  • Communal ownership or proprietorship – a defined group managing a resource within defined boundaries
  • Community Based Natural Resources Management; A case for Zambia

Origins and rationale of CBNRM in Zambia was based on heavy elephant and rhino poaching in the Luangwa Valley in the 1980s. Stakeholders’ workshop 1983 came up with a consensus that conservation success depends on community participation with benefits; not government alone.

Two pilot projects – Administrative Design for Game Management Areas (ADMADE) at national level and the Luangwa Integrated Resource Management Project (LIRD) were initiated to pilot CBNRM in Zambia. The following were the key features of implementation of these programmes:

  • Engaged traditional leaders and communities
  • Created community structures
  • Hired village scouts
  • Pilot projects were initiated
  • National Parks and Wildlife Act of 991 transformed into the Zambia Wildlife Act of 1998 which encouraged formal community participation and benefit sharing.
  • It is however, acknowledged that basic components of the enabling environment of CBNRM are in place but these are not adequate.

Regarding benefit sharing, the Administrative Design for Game Management Areas (ADMADE) established a revolving fund which was retention of 50% out of hunting revenue to create this fund.   The Luangwa Integrated Resource Management Project (LIRDP) to the contrary had 100% retention of the hunting concession fees.

There are over 70 Community Resource Boards working with co-managers of GMAs such as programmes like Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO).  The focus of the operations is on Community development and resource protection.  Basic components for implementation of CBNRM are in place and provide substantial lesson learning opportunities for other natural resources conservation.

  • Challenges

The following challenges have been experienced in CBNRM:

  • Enabling environment not comprehensive – poor distribution of benefits, land use conflicts, low wildlife populations in some areas; encroachment; degradation
  • Poor incentives for conservation compared with agriculture
  • Limited implementation of CBNRM due to limited capacity
  • Limited capacity of community partners; poor engagement
  • Limited partnership opportunities between communities and private sector and NGOs
  • Over dependence on one source of income
  • GMAs and resource base under threat
  • Lessons from community engagement
    • Where communities are not adequately empowered and supported – natural resources are in decline
    • Where communities are empowered legally; given space, skills and status – improved indicators of sustainability do manifest.
    • CBNRM is delivering economic and conservation benefits as a result of community participation but only when capacity is facilitated; enabling conditions are in place; partnerships make things happen, business approach; enterprise developed, communities (citizens) trained, mentored
  • Opportunities
    • Review of GMAs to improve protection of high biodiversity areas and improve management of depleted areas – through partnerships with communities and private sector
    • Partnerships should be realistic and equitable
    • Promote Community Game Ranching – integrated with forestry
    • CBNRM should be more beneficiary-focused
    • CBNRM support programme – community engagement, capacity, skills, local land use planning are essentials for a successful CBNRM implementation
    • Innovative CBNRM models – ecotourism, enterprise, carbon, payments for ecosystem services; joint ventures; COMACO. We have been stuck on wildlife management model for over 30 years
    • Action – policy and legislation review; role of government; what role should government play?

4.5              Presentation  on Collaborative Forestry in Zambia: Experiences from PFAP II


A presentation on Collaborative Forestry in Zambia: Experiences from PFAP II by Mrs. Guni Mickels Kokwe from Zambia CBNRM Forum.  The objective of the presentation was to share experiences from PFAP II in Zambia.

  • What was PFAP?

PFAP stands for Provincial Forestry Action Programme, which aimed at decentralised forestry and Finland funded the programme in two phases: PFAP I and II.  PFAP I emerged from ZFAP (Zambia Forestry Action Programme), building decentralised capacity in Forestry Department to manage forestry through the preparation of provincial plans. PFAP I  came to an end in 1998/9.

The PFAP II ran from 2000-2004 and shifted focus to district level to initiate a collaborative forestry around 2001.  After 2004, PFAP II continued and went into a non-cost extension until 2008.  Piloting collaborative forestry, known as Joint Forest Management, enabled by two SIs.  This was piloted in a total of 9 sites picked ( 6 local forests, 2 national forests, 1 open area).  Under the JFM plans were prepared for 5 Local Forests and 1 National Forest. However, the process was ground to a halt around 2005.

  •  Key Achievements

The following were the key achievements were realized through the JFM:

  • Communities were very enthusiastic with the engagement (some committees formed ten years ago are still functional!)
  • Forest brought under protection and management – still active in some locations (e.g. Mwewa Local Forest in Samfya district)
  • Valuable lessons were learnt at forest level about what works and what does not (”good practice”) – silviculture, organisation, etc
  • Dialogue opened between communities and Forestry Department; when handled well this would provides  a way to resolve many other problems
  • Forestry Department staff who were exposed to collaborative forestry, were very appreciative and interested – skills platform was generated!
  • Key Weaknesses and Challenges
    • Institutional challenges: Forest Department Headquarters – guidance and support lacking for the districts
    • Institutional challenges: Working in silos – cross-sectoral collaboration
    • Legal challenges: Inability to resolve cost-benefit sharing mechanism in practice
    • Funding challenges: Process too dependent on donor support, local level set up too expensive
    • Funding challenges: Appropriation in aid – not working for the districts
    • Lack of capacity at district level –in terms of materials, equipment and skill – but also in some cases in appreciation of the task  But the latter (# 6) can be corrected – if the
      above are attended to
  • Future for collaborative forestry?

It is imperative that collaborative forestry needs to be revived and there broad opportunities to support this as follows:

  • Revised Forestry Legislation (Forest Bill 2012) allows for additional forms of collaborative forestry;
  • Revised Zambia Forestry Action Plan (ZFAP 2012)  may provide framework for process;
  • Renewed interest from donors: USAID in Eastern Province, Finland decentralised forestry in Muchinga and NWP provinces.
  • REDD + voluntary carbon schemes?
  • Responses to the presentation
  • Collaboration under the studies done to ensure that things move
  • There is need that the forum considers to set up a special group focusing on forestry under CBNRM.
  • There is need to embark on resource mobilization both locally and internationally in view of the Zambia Forestry Action Programme. There are a lot of pledges in ZFAP document that did not get their fulfillment thus there is an opportunity for the Zambia CBNRM Forum and partners to pursue these pledges.
  • There is a tendency to initiate pilot projects which often time result in not as much of benefits on the ground.
  • Although donor support is inevitable and of great importance the drawback however it that the guidelines seem to be very restrictive in the activities of support – rigidity in guidelines.
  • There is a huge budget deficit for CBNRM to allow the activities to cover the whole country.
  • There are lessons learnt from Uganda where funding is often provided as direct support projects to local communities to run their own income generating activities.
  • There is need to precisely identify policy issues that have direct effect on poverty and advocate for policy reforms for such policies.
  • Due lack of significant beneficial impact at community level from many projects, communities are compelled to continue with practices detrimental to the environment such as charcoal burning to make quick income for their immediate needs. Thus the forum needs to identify alternative income generating activities and sustainable livelihoods.
  • Although capacity building projects, such as training programmes at local levels, are not highly preferred by Cooperating Partners (CPs) the general state of affairs is that there is lack of local level leadership on the ground to lead the several committees that have been formed and ensure an integrated approach for conservation.
  • There are media reports on BBC for example that there is more game meat in the U.K. which come from commercial game ranchers. Communities could be supported to venture in this business and compete on the international market.

4.6              Presentation  on WWF Support to CBNRM

A presentation on WWF Support to CBNRM was given by Dr. Nyambe Nyambe from WWF Zambia Country Office.  The objective of the presentation was to share historical, current and future perspective of WWF support to CBNRM.  The presentation was in form of comments in relation to issues raised in the earlier presentations during the meeting.

The WWF mission statement highly recognizes the value of biodiversity and effective partnership to achieve conservation locally and internally.  CBNRM is the sustenance of the WWF as an institution.

Historically WWF was involved in the Administrative Design for Game Management Areas (ADMADE), CAMPFIRE in Zimbabwe and currently in Botswana and Namibia. However, there is need for further support to CBNRM.

Piloting is the approach being taken both at national and regional levels particularly in responding to weak civil society Organisation (CSO).  In trans-frontier nature conservation areas (TFNCAs), CBNRM is equally a challenge to implement.

WWF in Zambia operates in 4 focal areas namely; the Bangweulu basin, KAZA, Luangwa and Iluwa but spreading thinly throughout the country in the forestry sector, extractive industries, and wetlands in addition to wildlife through CBNRM initiatives.

  • Overall Comments on issues by Dr Nyambe
    • The desired outcomes of WWF efforts are to see strengthened conservation platforms and structures at various levels. The inconspicuous fisheries sector in CBNRM is a challenge. This is as a result of lack of an integrated approach to natural resource management that have compelled many to pay greater attention only to wildlife and neglecting such important resource as wetlands.  Furthermore due to the same reason, structures that have been formed also confuse local communities as they do not ‘’speak to each other ‘’- they take a fragmented approach to natural resources management.  There is need to pilot new models in CBNRM i.e. to explore what else can be done differently.  This therefore requires development of long term strategies to safeguard land and effects of extractive industries for example.
    • Impact at household level is of profound importance and a challenge also effective use of fund in implementing CBNRM i.e. value for money.
    • Capacities at community level should be built; therefore the forum is required to communicate effectively to ensure the community members are sufficiently informed about CBNRM programming.  In addition outreach should be worked on if the forum will have to make greater and wide spread impact.
    • Fragmentation of efforts in the forestry sector needs to be worked on in order to achieve greater impact.
    • Forum needs to run for the vision and not money is an important observation.
    • Gaps and barriers in CBNRM will need to be focused so that strategies to address them can precisely be embarked upon.
    • There are good lessons from PFAP which could be exploited to improve on weaknesses and challenges in the forestry sector.
    • The fisheries sector appears to be neglected in CBNRM and thus there is need to shift the attention towards fisheries management.
    • The purpose of this Donor breakfast meeting was to attract good will from Cooperating Partners (CPs) to show case what the Zambia CBNRM Forum and its partners are doing

5.0            RECOMMENDATIONS

  • The CBNRM Forum needs to undertake a total review of all CBNRM related activities and programmers that have been implemented in the past to take stock of what is available and obtain lessons from these reviews.
  • Challenges of financials will be eminent with the Zambia CBNRM Forum as the WWF support to CBNRM will be on the decline as consolidation phase is progressing into mid 2014.  The forum should consider collaborating with the Southern Africa Resource Watch (SARW) as the organization mentioned that they are in search of suitable institutions to collaborate with.
  • From the gap analysis and barriers presentation, it is evident that there is need for collaboration among stakeholders to promote public private partnerships (PPPs).

6.0            CONCLUSION

The Vice Chairperson of the Zambia CBNRM Forum on behalf of the Chairperson, Mr. Moses Nyoni, in closing the meeting thanked all participants for the active participation and valuable contributions. He stated that the process of stakeholder engagement would continue to create enabling environment for strategic partnerships.  As a forum we welcome constructive criticism. Lastly he again thanked the members  for their time.

-Zambezi Resources seeks review of ZEMA decision

The Post, Thursday November 1, 2012


the developers of the kangaluwi copper project should accept the decision by ZEMA to reject mining activities in the Lower Zambezi national park because of the negative impacts to the communities, wildlife and the environment says environmental activists’ group.

The Zambia environmental management Agency (ZEMA) has rejected environmental impact study (EIS) submissions for the proposed US $494 million copper project citing environmental concerns.

But Zambezi Resources, which owns the Kagaluwi project, through its chief executive officer Frank Vanspeybroeck claimed that senior ministers in the Zambian government were surprised at the decision by ZEMA to reject the construction of a mine.

Zambezi resources has since lodged an appeal to the minister of environmental protection seeking a review of ZEMA’s decision as provided for in the Environmental Management Act of 2011.

Commenting on the matter, Community-Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) Chairman Biston Mbewe said ZEMA rejected the project because the EIS submitted by the developer failed to address serious environmental concerns such as the issue of acid rock drainage and the negative impacts of abnormal discharge of effluent in case of failure by the tailing storage facility.

“We agree with ZEMA that while the project provides short-term economic benefits to the communities in the Lower Zambezi, if allowed, the project would have long term and permanent negative impacts to the communities, wildlife and the environment,” Mbewe said.

He said there was need to protect the environment from harmful economic activities such as mining in protected areas and ecologically-sensitive areas.

“We would like to appeal to all stakeholders including the developer to accept and respect the professional decision by ZEMA on this matter,” said Mbewe. “We also wish to clarify assertions by the developer in its quest to appeal ZEMA’s decision that various stakeholders including conservation groups were in support of the project. This is untrue as people raised concerns about the potential negative impacts of the project to the environment.”

And the Earth Organisation Zambia chapter executive director Lovemore Muma said ZEMA should be commended for making a professional decision without influence form government.

“this is unlike in the past where mining and other projects will start operating without ZEMA approval, so we urge ZEMA to follow up the projects that are approved already to make sure they comply with their environment management plans as contained in the EIA and ZEMA should close down projects that do not comply with their own environmental management plans,” said Muma.


– CBD CoP 11- Ministerial Briefing

CBD COP 11-SADC Ministerial Briefing Meeting

1.         Introduction

1.1       The negotiations at the CBD-COP 10 held in Nagoya, Japan in 2010 were centred on three key elements, namely: the adoption of the Strategic Plan 2011-2020; the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resource and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefit arising from their Utilization (Nagoya Protocol on ABS) and the provision of adequate resources to implement the Strategic Plan and the Nagoya Protocol on ABS.

1.2       These three issues were regarded as a linked package of outcomes by the African Group and most of the developing countries. During the negotiation process, these issues were adopted; however a plan on the provision of adequate resources was not adopted.

2.         Key issues for COP 11

2.1       This COP is expected to consider the status and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS, the Strategic Plan 2011 to 2020, resource mobilisation and financial mechanism (GEF) and Budget. Other key issues include marine and coastal biodiversity; periodicity of COP and COP-MOP meetings.

2.1.1   Status and Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS

            The Protocol will enter into force after the deposit of the 50th Instrument of Ratification, Acceptance, Approval or Accession. To date only seven countries, namely Gabon, Rwanda, Seychelles, Mexico, Jordan, and Micronesia and Lao (People’s Democratic Republic of), have ratified the Protocol. As such, the first meeting of the Parties (COP-MOP 1) could not take place to discuss further action and implementation of the Protocol following the outcomes of the 1st and 2nd of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Protocol (ICNP).

This is a result of the diversity of circumstances of different countries, for example, in relation to their constitutional obligations, some countries require extensive consultation processes before signing and depositing an instrument of ratification which necessitates additional financial, human and technical resources.

Developing countries have raised issues around accessing of resources directed at ratification of the Protocol. As such, the SADC region should request this COP to give clear guidance to the GEF on the financing mechanism for the Protocol and the extension of the Implementation Fund for the Nagoya Protocol.

The SADC member states should therefore be encouraged to expedite the ratification process and also encourage other Parties, particularly those from the African region to fast-track the process of ratifying or acceding to the Protocol and also allocate resources for national implementation. It is in the interest of the African continent and the developing countries, which possess the majority of biodiversity and genetic resources, to ensure that the Protocol enters into force as soon as possible.

The SADC region should support the convening of the proposed third meeting of the ICNP with clear direction, timeframes and funding.

2.1.2   Implementation of the Strategic Plan

Ministers will recall that the CBD COP10 in Nagoya in 2010 adopted the Strategy Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and its Aichi Targets, and urged Parties to implement it. The COP urged developed country Parties to provide adequate, predictable and timely financial support to developing country Parties to enable the full and effective implementation of the Strategic Plan. The SADC region is encouraged to make efforts to access these funds and also proceed with implementing those activities which are less resource or funding intensive. Ministers should take note that effective implementation of the Strategic Plan will require adequate budgetary allocations.

2.1.3   Resource Mobilization & Guidance to the Financial Mechanism (GEF)

Ministers will recall that at COP 9, a resource mobilization strategy to assist Parties in establishing national targets, goals as well as action for enhancing international financial flows and domestic funding for biological diversity was adopted. COP 10 agreed on a process to establish concrete financing targets for the implementation of the Strategic Plan (2011-2020).

Up to now there has been some resistance by the developed country Parties to establish concrete financing targets. COP 11 discussions have focused mainly on technical aspects such as which year or period of years should be used for calculating ‘robust’ baselines or a need for clear reporting framework targets. On the other hand, the developing countries support international financing targets to fund the implementation of the strategy.


Developed countries are pushing to include private and innovative finance mechanisms in the establishment of financing targets as an element of great importance, while signaling for an increase of biodiversity funding through Official Development Assistance (ODA) arrangements.

2.1.4   Budget

Under this item, the Conference of the Parties is invited to adopt a programme budget for the biennium 2013-2014 to meet the core administrative costs of the Conference of the Parties and the meetings of all subsidiary bodies and the Secretariat.

COP 10 requested the secretariat to prepare and provide three alternatives for the core programme budget for the biennium 2013-2014 based on the following options:

• Option 1:  based on the assessed growth of 22.7%.

• Option 2:  based on 7.5% growth

• Option 3:  based on 2011-2012 nominal terms

The Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity highlighted that the proposed budget is based on the increased workload that is not fully supported by the current budget allocation. The increased workload is a result of among others: adoption of the ABS protocol and subsequent activities; development of major initiative aimed at local authorities and cities as well as South-South activities based on COP decision; increasing requests for activities and cooperation on agriculture which includes biofuels; new engagements on business; increase in public awareness, and increase work on CHM etc. The afore-mentioned activities have overstretched the Secretariat’s capacity thereby hampering the effective delivery of the Secretariats mandate.

Each budget option was analysed by Parties and implications in terms of staffing, meetings of the subsidiary bodies, the Conference of the Parties and the first meeting of the Parties to the Nagoya Protocol.

The issues of concern to the SADC Member States are the following:

  • There is a proposal to reduce the languages that are interpreted during subsidiary body meetings, i.e. only three UN languages to be used. This proposal is not supported by SADC Member States as it would disadvantage other Parties .
  • SADC member states are encouraged to support that the COP/MOP meetings of the Nagoya Protocol and the Cartagena Protocol should be held concurrently. However it should be noted that this will have some cost implications. For this reason it will be important to ensure that the core budget is adequately resourced to accommodate all the meetings of the subsidiary bodies of the Convention.


2.1.5   Marine and Coastal Biodiversity

Ministers will recall that the CBD-COP10 requested the Executive Secretary to organize a series of regional workshops to facilitate the description of ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine areas (EBSAs), with a view to include the endorsed workshop reports in a repository. These reports are to be submitted to the United Nations General Assembly and particularly its Ad Hoc Open ended Informal Working Group on diversity management in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as well as relevant international organizations, Parties and other Governments. EBSAs can be both inside and or outside areas of national jurisdiction.

During the last meeting of the Scientific and Technical Body of the CBD, it was noted that none of the African sub-regions had participated in EBSA workshops. The Secretariat promised to have such workshops with immediate effect. A workshop on EBSAs was convened and held in July 2012, in Mauritius for the South Indian Ocean Region.

Developing countries should support the recommendation that the outcomes of the workshops should be shared with the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) process that is considering the management of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. This will ensure that that the UNGA process for improved management of biodiversity in the high seas is supported.

Additionally, the current link between marine and coastal biodiversity and the eradication of poverty and economic development should be emphasized. This concept acknowledges the significance of the of growing resource and economic potential of ocean ecosystems particularly for the developing world.

2.1.6   Periodicity of COP and COP-MOP meetings

Ministers will recall that currently CBD COP meetings are convened every two years with intersessional meetings of other bodies. The developed countries are motivating for the extension of the period between meetings on the grounds of financial constraints. However, developing countries are advocating for the retention of the two year periodicity of meetings. This is because biodiversity issues remain a priority for developing countries. Conceding to the extension will have serious negative implications on the effective implementation of the Convention and its Protocols.

– CBNRM Forum Analysis Report on Draft Rebulican Constitutional Provisions on Part XIX

Chinsali Community Constitution Engagement. The Forum arranged for district and provincial community engagement workshops on the provisions of Part XIX of the draft constitution to sensitize and advocate for community submissions for the analysis report in order to involve rural communities in the constitution making process.


   To  give  guidance  for  a  clear  understanding  of  the  provisions  of  the  draft  Republican  Constitution  on  Environment and Natural Resources Management
   To facilitate a review and analysis of the draft  Republican Constitution provisions  in line with emerging
issues in Environment and Natural resources management example climate change, genetically modified
organisms, REDD+, CBNRM, Bio-fuels, land tenure, benefit sharing, polluter pays principle
   To facilitate the identification of gaps and barriers that might hinder sound conservation, environment and
natural resource management
   To  provide  a  Draft  Republican  Constitution  analysis  report  and  facilitate  the  development  of  a  position
paper that will be shared with the CBNRM Forum Stakeholders for validation and later submission to the
Technical Committee drafting the Republican Constitution
A constitution is a document that basically provides a framework, statement of ideals and guiding principles. It is
the basis for the organisation of any State. The State is the mechanism through which a society provides for the
exercise of political, administrative and judicial powers in order to ensure law and order, protection of rights of
people, promotion and regulation of the economy.  From a legal dimension, it is not only a law, but a supreme
law.    This  means  that  no  law  or  policy  that  is  inconsistent  with  the  Constitution  is  valid.    The  Constitution
protects individual rights, that is, civil and political rights such as (right to life, human dignity, protection from
inhuman  treatment,  freedom  of  association,  freedom  of  movement,  freedom  of  person,  security  of  person, 2

protection of privacy of person, home, property and communication, freedom of religion and conscience, access
to information, political rights, right to assemble, demonstrate, picket, lock out and petition, equality before law,
fair  administration,  equality  before  the  law,  fair  trial,  equality  of  both  gender,  family,  children,  protection  of
young  persons,  persons  with  disabilities,  acquisition  and  protection  of  property  )  and  economic,  social  and
cultural  rights  (economic  and  social  rights,  language  and  culture,  freedom  to  choose  trade,  occupation  and
profession, labour relations, consumer rights, environment).
The draft Republican Constitution has to some extent taken into consideration some international principles in
relation to the  environment and natural  resources  management. The starting point is  in the Preamble to the
Draft Republican Constitution which includes the principle of sustainable development.  Sustainable development
is the general principle that human development and use of natural resources must take place in a sustainable
manner.   The Preamble also recognises and upholds the multi-ethnic and multi-cultural character of our nation
and the self actualization of people living in different Provinces of Zambia and their right to manage their own
local affairs and resources in a devolved system of governance within a unitary State.  Article 9 provides for the
national  values  and  principles  and  the  basis  of  State  policy  that  includes  the  principle  of  sustainable
This is an important inclusion as its successful application would require not merely the legal, but also economic
and policy instruments in order to bring  about sustainable development.  Any human activity deemed useful,
but  which  affects  the  environment  in  which  we  live  in  a  detrimental  manner,  may  be  required  to  fulfil  the
criterion  of  sustainability  in  the  sense  that  the  activity  may  not  be  allowed  to  reduce  the  capacity  of  the
environment  to  ensure  its  continued  usefulness  for  that  and  other  human  activities.    The  Draft  Republican
Constitution creates a sound basis for subsequent review of sectoral pieces of legislation with competence over
natural resources to ascribe to these principles and obligations imposed on the State under Article 63 (4) and
(5). 3

The provisions of the Draft Republican Constitution affirm environmental rights in Part V under the Bill of Rights.
It introduces the  right to a healthy, clean  and living environment, and classifies it as a fundamental or basic
right under Article 67. This right is further enforceable as a basic right through Article 26 which states that
when  applying  or  interpreting  the  rights,  the  Constitutional  Court  shall,  if  necessary,  develop  human  rights
jurisprudence  where  legislation  does  not  give  effect  to  a  right  or  freedom  as  contemplated  under  the  Bill  of
Rights.    When  applying  the  Bill  of  Rights,  the  Constitutional  Court,  a  Court,  tribunal,  the  Human  Rights
Commission,  any  person  or  body  shall  interpret  a  right  or  freedom  in  a  manner  consistent  with  the  spirit,
objectives, limitations and derogations permitted  under the Bill of Rights.   This forms a concrete basis of an
environmental right as it extends beyond procedural matters and becomes a legally enforceable environmental
The following clauses under Part V of the Bill of Rights have a bearing on environmental rights, namely –
Article 22 – Responsibilities of citizens
Article 22 (1)(c ) and (d) places a responsibility on a citizen to protect and conserve the environment and
utilize  natural  resources  in  a  sustainable  manner  and  maintain  a  clean  and  healthy  living  environment
respectively.  This  can  be  said  to  be  linked  to  Article  37  on  access  to  information  which  forms  a  primary
element of environmental conservation, protection and management. Article 22 firmly defines responsibilities
for people to protect, conserve and manage the environment and natural resources as envisaged under Article
303  of  the  draft  Constitution.    In  order  to  realise  this  fundamental  right,  the  Government  is  required  under
Articles  301 (on land) and Article 305 (legislation relating to environment and  natural resources) to enact
legislation with regard to the environment and natural resources. The Draft Constitution has made a deliberate
effort at incorporating sustainable utilisation and sustainable management and use of natural resources, and this
is commendable. 4

Article 25 – Duty of the State to promote rights and freedoms
Article 25 – the State has a duty to respect, protect, promote and fulfill the Bill of rights. It shall also recognise
the role that civil society plays in the promotion and protection of the Bill of Rights.  This provision is important
and necessary for advocacy.
Article 26 – Application and interpretation of Bill of Rights
Article  26  –  Application  and  interpretation  of  the  Bill  of  rights  by  the  Constitutional  Court,  Human  Rights
Commission, a Court, and Tribunal in a manner consistent with the spirit and objectives, limitations, derogations
permitted in the Bill of Rights.   Access to tribunals in order to challenge environmental decisions is important in
realizing  fundamental  rights  on  the  environment  and  natural  resources.  This  will  further  development
jurisprudence in environmental law.
Article 28 – Right to life
Article 28 – The right to life advances environmental protection through provisions  in Clause 62 on economic
and social rights such as the right to clean and safe water in adequate quantities and to reasonable standards,
highest  standard  of  health,  and  access  to  adequate  food  of  acceptable  standards.  This  Article  guarantees
fundamental human rights to life and human dignity (Article 29 ) and it can be argued to be linked to the need
for a healthy and clean environment to give effect to these rights.
Article 29 –Human Dignity
Article 29 – A person has inherent dignity and the right to have that dignity respected and protected. It can
also be argued that the right to life incorporates the right to human dignity. The two rights are entwined as the
right to life is more than existence. It is also a right to be treated as a human being with dignity. 5

Article 37 – Access to information
Article 37 – Access to information held by the State and information that is held by another person which is
lawfully  required  for  the  exercise  or  protection  of  any  right  or  freedom.  To  be  effective  participants,  citizens
must be well informed and have access to accurate and reliable information as well as opportunities to present
their  views  and  to  question  and  challenge  decisions  which  have  adverse  environmental  impacts.  In  order  to
exercise this responsibility, citizens must therefore be granted certain rights, including access to information, the
right to participate in environmental decision making and access to tribunals in order to challenge environmental
Article 44 – Acquisition and protection of property
Article 44 – A person has the right either to individually or in association with others, to acquire any property
of any description and in any part of Zambia.  This is an important fundamental right and from an environmental
right  perspective,  this  Article  touches  on  protection  of  genetic  resources  and  traditional  or  indigenous
knowledge.  This should be read with Article 63 on language and culture and Article 67 on the environment.
Article 303 provides for the utilisation of natural resources and management of the environment. It inter alia
states that the State will protect genetic resources and biological diversity, protect and enhance the intellectual
property  in,  and  indigenous  knowledge  of,  biodiversity  and  genetic  resources  of  the  local  communities.    It
should be augmented further by the need to utilize the environment and natural resources for the benefit of the
people of Zambia.
Article 47 – Access to justice
Article 47 – A person has the access and right to justice. A person has the right to have any dispute resolved
and decided timely and to have a fair hearing before a court or, where appropriate, any other independent and 6

impartial  tribunal.    This  is  an  important  fundamental  right  in  so  far  as  environmental  decision-making  is
Article 62 –Economic and social rights
Article 62 – A person has the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to
health care services and reproductive health, accessible and adequate housing, be free from hunger and to have
access to adequate food of acceptable quality, clean and safe water in adequate quantities and to reasonable
standards of sanitation. Water is a fundamental right and every person should have a right of access to basic
water supply and sanitation. It is imperative upon the State to ensure that the country’s resources permit, and
aim  to  provide  all  Zambians  access  to  clean  water  and  reasonable  standards  of  sanitation.  This  has  been
recognised in the draft Republican Constitution and issues of access, use, proprietary rights are best dealt with
in an Act of parliament such as the Water Resources Management Act and other relevant legislation.
Article 63 – Right to language and culture
Article 63 provides for language and culture. Specifically,  Article 63(4)(b) and (c ) obligates the State to
recognise  the  role  of  technology  and  indigenous  technology  in  the  development  of  the  Nation,  and  support,
promote  and  protect  the  intellectual  property  rights  of  the  owner,  or  the  people  of  Zambia.    Article  63(5)
states that Parliament shall enact legislation to ensure that communities  receive compensation or royalties for
the  use  of  their  biological    knowledge,  medicinal  plants  and  cultural  heritage,  recognise  and  protect  the
ownership  of indigenous seeds and plant varieties their genetic and diverse characteristics.  This protection of
genetic resources and traditional knowledge is a subject matter of the constitutional provisions on protection of
right to property, culture and environment.  Genetic resources and abiotic resources have many benefits, and
well managed biodiversity is an important tool or vehicle towards achieving food security and improvement in
human and public health (medicinal aspects of traditional and conventional medicines) and every effort should
be made to sustainably use and conserve them. This can be further amplified in an Act of Parliament that will 7

detail issues of biotechnology, issues of commercialization of genetic resources and communities benefit from
such activities. Article 304 is instructive on this point. The realisation of these principles under Article 63 will
require significant legal reform and judicial enforcement.
Article 67 – Right to environment
Article 67 provides that a person has the right to a clean and healthy living environment.   This provision will
fortify and enhance environmental management.  It is also actionable and enforceable as a basic right through
Article 47 where a person has the access and right to justice and can go to court for an interpretation of the Bill
of rights and any freedoms. The Environmental Management Act also makes provisions for a person to bring a
matter  into  court  for  any  environmental  wrong  bringing  the  common  law  principle  of  locus  standi  (legal
standing). The Draft Republican Constitution now embodies this principle.
Article 72 –Enforcement of Bill of Rights
Article 72 (1) provides that where a person alleges that any provisions of the Bill of Rights has been, is being
or is likely to be contravened in relation to the person, that person may apply for redress to the Constitutional
Court.  Parliament shall enact legislation to give effect to this part and for the enforcement of the Bill of Rights.
It  can  be  deduced  that  the  intention  of  this  provision  in  the  draft  Republican  Constitution  is  to  implement
measures that will also promote and uphold rights relating to environmental and natural resources management.
Article 303  –Protection of environment and natural resources Article 304 – Utilisation of natural
resources and management of environment
Articles 303 makes provision for the protection of environment and natural resources.  Article 304 provides
for  the  utilisation  of  natural  resources  and  management  of  the  environment.      It  sets  out  obligations  on  the
Government relating to environmental and natural resource management. It compels the Government to ensure 8

sustainable utilisation, exploitation, management, protection and conservation of the environment and natural
resources, and to ensure the equitable sharing of accruing benefits.   This obligation combines the human need
to utilize resources in a sustainable manner, with the duty to sustainably manage and conserve those resources.
There is also a duty on every person to co-operate with the State, State institutions and other people to protect
and  conserve  the  environment.    The  inference  to  draw  from  these  provisions  is  to  ensure  ecologically
sustainable development.
As  the  law  is  dynamic  and  evolving,  the  numerous  emerging  issues  in  environment  and  natural  resources
management are best dealt with under an Act of Parliament. These include issues on land use, forests, climate
change etc.
The draft Republican Constitution introduces Part XIX on land, property, environment and natural resources.  As
per Terms of Reference, below is an analysis of Part XIX of the Draft Republican Constitution following three (3)
Consultative and brainstorming sessions with the Zambia CBNRM.  This Analysis Report now serves as an input
towards  the  development  of  a  position  paper  that  will  be  shared  with  the  CBNRM  Forum  stakeholders  for
NOTE: For ease of reference, please note that the underlined part in the text denotes the inclusion
of new phrases or sentences in the respective Articles.


Article 63 (5)(b)  Parliament   shall   enact   The protection of genetic  It  is  proposed  that  Article 9

Language and culture    legislation       to       (b)
recognise and protect the
ownership  of  indigenous
seeds  and  plant  varieties
their  genetic  and  diverse

resources and indigenous
knowledge  is  a  subject
matter    of    the    Draft
Republican    Constitution
and    touches    on    the
Articles      relating      to
protection  of  the  right  to
property,    culture    and
environment.  The Article
is  devoid  of  any  mention
on    fauna  and  this  is  an
The      Article      should
specifically  emphasis  and
include a provision on the
need        to        protect
traditional       knowledge
holders     against     any
infringement     of     their
rights,  as  well  as  their
protection against misuse
and unlawful exploitation.
Traditional      knowledge
holders    should   benefit
from  their  contribution  in
the       generation       of
intellectual        property.
Important  issues  such  as
63(5)(b)   be   amended   as
follows –

(b)  recognise  and  protect
the          ownership          of
indigenous  abiotic
resource,  seeds  and  plant
varieties  their  genetic  and
diverse characteristics, and
indigenous fauna.

It  is  proposed  that  Article
63(5)     be     amended     to
include the following –

(c    )    protect    traditional
knowledge     against     any
proprietary infringement of
their  rights  as  well  as  the
protection   of   expressions
of         folklore         against
misappropriation,     misuse
and unlawful exploitation. 10

how  to  deal  with  cross
species        modification,
contamination   shall   be
addressed  in  an  Act  of

Article 67
A person has a right to a
clean  and  healthy  living
It  is  not  clear  what  a
living environment entails
in  this  context.  It  could
mean  the  anthropogenic
environment        (human
access          to          and
sustainability  of  drinking
water, breathable air, and
safe   soil)   OR   it   could
mean  biocentric  ensuring
biodiversity          species
protection  and
From the way this right is
framed,  it  is  indicative  of
an  anthropogenic
approach or choice to the
environment  as  it  would
appear  to  be    concerned
with      the      increasing
A definition of environment
is proposed as follows –

“environment’   means   the
natural      or      man-made
surroundings  at  any  place,
comprising air, water, land,
natural  resource,  animals,
buildings        and        other
constructions     and     such
processes     that     support
natural  resource

deterioration  of
environmental quality and
integrity.        This        is

Secondly,    there    is    a
generality  in  the  use  of
words  such  as  “healthy”,
and it must be recognised
that there is no universal
definition  for  a  healthy
environment.    The  word
“environment”  has  been
defined  in  this  clause  as
is  in  the  Environmental
Management     Act     of

Article 293 (1)
Principles      of     land
Land  in  Zambia  shall  be
held  and  managed  in  a
manner that is equitable,
efficient,  productive  and
sustainable,      and      in
accordance     with     the
following principles –
Provisions do not address
the land use and the use
of  land  according  to  its
best  possible  use  in  line
with  preserving
environmental     integrity
and     sustainable     use.
The   importance   of   a
consultative  and
participatory      approach
There is need to insert new
sub-clauses  in  Article  293
(1) as follows –

(h)  land  use  planning  shall
be  done  in  a  consultative
and participatory  manner;
(i)  sustainable  use  of  land
according     to     its     best
possible    use    so    as    to 12

should  be  recognised  in
land use planning.
In     principle,     it     is
important       to       also
recognise  usufruct  rights
in  land  use.    Usufruct
rights    are    rights    to
enjoyment    enabling    a
holder  to  derive  profit  or
benefit    from    property
that  belongs  to  another
person.      These   rights
become  relevant  in  the
context    of    the    use,
development  and
management   of   natural
resources.  The detail and
processes  can  be  fulfilled
and realised under an Act
of Parliament

preserve        environmental
(j)  recognition  of  usufruct
principles and rights

Article 293 (1)(f)
Principles      of     land
Land  in  Zambia  shall  be
held  and  managed  in  a
manner that is equitable,
efficient,  productive  and
sustainable,      and      in
accordance     with     the
following principles –
This  provision  does  not
take   into   account   the
livelihood         of         a
It  is  proposed  that  Article
293  (1)(f)  be  amended  as
follows –

(f)  river  frontages,  islands
and  lakeshores  maintained 13

(f)      river      frontages,
islands   and   lakeshores
maintained  and  used  for
preservation     activities,
public      access      and
enjoyment,     and     not
leased, fenced or sold;

and  used  for  conservation,
preservation         activities,
public        access,        local
communities      livelihoods,
social  and  cultural  spiritual
practices   and   enjoyment,
and  not  leased,  fenced  or
Article 293 (1)(g)
Principles      of     land
(1) Land    in    Zambia
shall  be  held  and
managed     in     a
manner    that    is
equitable,  efficient,
productive       and
sustainable,  and  in
accordance     with
the          following
principles    –    (g)
investment  in  land
to also benefit local
communities    and
their economy

The   use   of   the   word
“also”  waters  down  the
intent of the provision. It
is proposed that the word
should   be   replaced   by
It  is  not  clear  what  type
of investment and type of
land is envisaged.
The  investment  in  land
should  not  only  benefit
local   communities   and
their     economies,     but
should   go   further   and
benefit  their  social  and
economic development.
It  is  proposed  that  Article
293  (1)(g)  be  amended  as
follows –

(g) investment in land shall
benefit   local   communities
and  their  local  livelihoods,
social       and       economic

Article 294 (1)   (1) Land  in  Zambia  is   A  new  concept  of  land  It  is  proposed  that  Article 14

Vesting    of    land    in
vested     in     the
President   and   is
held      by      the
President  in  trust
for,  and  on  behalf
of,  the  people  of
ownership  is  required  in
Zambia so that it is made
clear  that  the  President
merely   holds   land   on
behalf  of  the  people  of
294  (1)  be  re-worded  as
follows –

(1)    All       land       in
Zambia  belongs  to
the      people      of
Zambia  collectively
as    a    nation,    as
communities     and
as individuals.

Article 294 (3)
Vesting    of    land    in
The     President     may,
through      the      Lands
Commission,   chiefs   or
local  authorities,  alienate
land  to  citizens  or  non-
citizens,  provided by this
Constitution  and  by  or
under     an     Act     of
Land  should  categorically
belong    to    citizens    of
Zambia.  That  is  through
the   people   of   Zambia,
followed       by       local
communities,    traditional
authorities,  Lands
Commission and then the
President.      This   is   to
remove  any  abuses  that
may      arise      in      its
Secondly,    non    citizens
should  not  be  accorded
the    same    rights    as
citizens  in  the  tenure  of
The   provisions   in   Clause
332    in    the    Mung’omba
Constitution      with      the
necessary           re-wording
should     be     inserted     in
Clause 294  as follows –

(4)  Subject  to  clause  (1),
State land may be held on a
lease  of  99  years  or  such
lesser   years   as   may   be
provided  by  legislation  for
different      categories      of
state land.

(5)  A  person  who  is  not  a 15

land. If any land is to be
alienated  to  non-citizens,
it  should  be  by  way  of  a
sub-lease    through    its
citizens  and  not  directly
from  the  State.  Any  use
of  land  by  non-citizens
should  be  in  partnership
with    citizens    so    that
citizens  participate  in  the
use     of     the     natural
resource.  It  is  proposed
that      restrictions      be
applicable on non citizens
holding  land  as  is  the
case in other jurisdictions
taking  cognizance  of  the
need        to        balance
development  and
investment  needs  which
should   not   override   or
undermine citizen’s rights
under the Constitution.

The NCC in  its provisions
under  Article  295  (3)-(5)
provided      for      equity
participation  of
citizen  shall  not  own  land
in Zambia and shall only be
entitled  to  lease  land  from
a citizen  as provided by an
Act of Parliament.

(6)  Parliament  shall  enact
legislation   to   provide   for
the    categories    of    non-
citizens        and        locally
incorporated  foreign
companies       that       may
sublease      land   and   the
conditions     under     which
they may do so

It  is  proposed that  Article
295 of the NCC be inserted
in   Article   294      of   the
current draft as follows –

(4)  Rights  of  ownership  in,
searching  for,  mining  and
disposing  of,  minerals  and
petroleum        wheresoever
located   in   Zambia   shall
belong   to   the   people   of 16

individuals  or  landowners
in  the  mineral  resources
and   petroleum.      This
provision  be  restated  so
as   to   ensure   that   the
people  of  Zambia  benefit
from  its  natural  resource
as     currently     mineral
resources     have     been
exploited to the detriment
of  persons  holding  land
which  is  the  subject  of  a
mining right.

(5)         A  person
holding  land  which  is
the     subject     of     a
mining     right     shall
have       an       equity
participation    in    the
mining  which  is  the
subject of the right in
addition  to
compensation.      The
rights        of        local
communities  living  in
an  area  subject  to  a
mining  right  and  who
may   be   affected   by
any  mining  processes
shall be recognised.

(6)         Minerals,
mineral     ores      and
petroleum    shall    be
exploited  taking  into
account  the  integrity
of   the   environment,
interest        of        the
individual 17

landowners,         local
communities  and  the
Government,         and
issues    of    equitable
sharing   of   royalties
arising,    indemnities,
and    restoration    of
derelict land.

Article  295
Classification of land
“All   land   in   Zambia
shall  be  classified  as
State  land,  customary
land,  and  such  other
classification  as  may
be    provided    by    or
under     an     Act     of
Parliament,  and  shall
be      delimitated      in
accordance   with   an
Act of Parliament”
Are classifications such as
reserve  land  envisaged?
There  is  need  to  put  in
place     safeguards     to
ensure  that  the  process
of  classification  of  land
does   not   in   any   way
disadvantage  the  people
of  Zambia.    Therefore,  it
is proposed that there be
only two classifications of
land,  namely  State  land
and customary land so as
to ensure that the people
of     Zambia     are     not
disadvantaged in any way
in relation to land and its
It  is  proposed  that  Article
295 be amended to include
the following –

295.  (1)  All  land  in  Zambia
shall  be          classified  as
State   land   or   customary
land,          and     shall     be
delimitated   in   accordance
with  an  Act  of  Parliament
and    it    shall    take    into
account   the   principles   of
land   policy   under   Article

(2)      A   classification   or
conversion of land shall not 18

use.  disadvantage the people of
Zambia      or      any     local

Article 296 (d)
State land
State  land  is  –  (d)  land
on    or    under    which
minerals, gas and mineral
oils are found
It    is    imperative    and
desirable    that    for    a
people  driven
constitution,  should  vest
ownership  of  the  natural
resource in its citizens as
a natural resource is part
of a common heritage for
its   citizens.      Therefore
adequate        safeguards
should   be   put   in   the
constitution  on  use  and
ownership   issues   of   a
natural resource.
The      position      above
represents  a  major  legal
shift     from     what     is
currently          pertaining
through  the  Mines  and
Minerals      Development
Act, Lands Act.
The current law does not
adequately  deal  with  the
Therefore   it   is   proposed
that   Article   296   (d)   be
deleted  and  its  provisions
amplified and elaborated in
Article 294 as stated above


equitable  transfer  of  this
natural  resource  in  that
mineral    resources    are
vested    in    the    State
despite  use  of  the  land
through a lease.
There    should    be    a
fundamental     shift     in
principle  in  that  once  a
person  has  user  rights  in
the land everything below
would also belong to that

It   is   proposed   that   a
person  should  have  an
equity    stake    in    the
natural  resources  found
on a person’s land, and if
it  is  declared  a  public
good  or  interest,  there
should  be  an  equitable
manner  of  alienating  the
resource  through  equity
participation  and
compensation or payment
of  some  form  of  royalty
to such a person. 20

Issues      of      equitable
sharing      of      royalties
arising   from   mining   or
exploration        activities,
indemnities,    restoration
of derelict land, minerals,
mineral       ores       and
petroleum      shall      be
exploited     taking     into
account  the  interest  of
individual      landowners,
local   communities   and
the Government.

Article 296 (1)
State land
“State  land  is  –  (f)  land
occupied  by,  or  through
which,      any      natural
resource passes including
gazetted or
declared  national
forests,  game  reserves,
river  basins  and  water
catchment  areas,  rivers
and other natural flowing
water  resources,  national
parks,  animal
There  are  private  animal
sanctuaries,  game
reserves.   These   should
not   be   considered   as
state  land  as  they  may
fall     under     customary
The    intention    of    this
provision   is   to   protect
fragile  eco-systems  such
as  river  frontages,  river
sources.  The  details  of
It  is  proposed  that  Article
296(1)(f)  be  redrafted  as
follows –

(f)  land    occupied  by,  or
through which, any natural
resource that is required to
be     protected     due     its
ecological fragile nature; 21

sanctuaries,  natural  and
cultural heritage sites and
specially protected areas

determination    of    such
fragile  eco  systems  etc
and     other     processes
including  the  role  local
communities      in      the
management   of   natural
resources       can       be
addressed  under  an  Act
of Parliament.

Article 296 (1)
State land
State  Land  is  (g)  land
that  is  designated  as  a
multi   facility   economic
Is this a category of land
or a type of land use. It is
superfluous and does not
need       to       be       in
It   is   proposed   that   this
sub-clause be deleted.

Article 300
Functions      of      land
The   functions   of   the
Lands  Commission  shall
include  the  following  –
(a)  administer,  manage
and   alienate   land   on
behalf of the President
It  should  be  made  clear
that  all  land  belongs  to
the people of Zambia and
that  the  President  is  a
mere  custodian  and  that
the   Lands   Commission
exercises  the  powers  to
administer   and   manage
State      land      through
delegated  authority  from
the President.
Secondly     the     Lands
It   is   proposed   that   the
Article   be   re-drafted   as
follows –
(a)         exercise
through       delegated
authority    from    the
President  the
management         and
alienation    of    state
land   in   Zambia   on
behalf  of  the  people 22

Commission  should  also
deal  with  customary  law
for        purposes        of
developing selected areas
of    Zambia    found    in
customary   land.      This
provision  was
recommended     in     the
Mung’omba   Constitution
under Article 337 (c).
of Zambia

Further, it is proposed
that     a     new     sub-
clauses    be  inserted
as follows –

(d)  advise
Government and local
authorities on a policy
framework    for    the
development  of
selected     areas     of
Zambia and to ensure
that  the  development
of  customary  land  is
in    accordance    with
the development  plan
for the area.
(e)      consult      with
chiefdoms     on     the
alienation  and
development  of
customary land;



Article 302 (1)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
“The   management   and
development  of  Zambia’s
environment  and  natural
resources,      shall      be
governed       by       the
following principles – (c )
the  party  responsible  for
polluting   or   degrading
the      environment      is
responsible for paying for
the  damage  done  to  the
It  is  important  that  the
environment  and  natural
resources  are  protected
and  conserved  and  this
should  be  emphasized  in
the  opening  clause.    The
use     of     the     words
“management’           and
“development”  may  not
necessarily     incorporate
protection  and
conservation     from     a
natural  resource  point  of
view      unless      clearly

Polluter-pays-principle   is
applied but does not give
clean   up   or   remedial
measures   arising   from
the  pollution.    It  should
also  promote  the  use  of
clean  “green”  technology
in line with the principles
of   using   best   available
technology  or  techniques
It  is  proposed  that  Article
302    be    amended        as
follows –

302  (1)  The  management,
protection,       conservation
and        development        of
Zambia’s  environment  and
natural  resources,  shall  be
governed  by  the  following
principles – …….

It  is  proposed  that  Article
302   (1)   be   amended   as
follows –
(c)   the   party   responsible
for  polluting  or  degrading
the  environment  shall  use
the         best         available
techniques  in  its  processes
and  activities,  and  shall  be
responsible  for  paying  for
the  damage  done  to  the
environment   and   natural
resource     and     shall    be
required  to    clean  up  the
damage   and   restore   the 24

area     in     question     and
compensate   the   affected

Article 302 (1)(d)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(d)  the  conservation  and
protection  of  ecologically
sensitive  areas  shall  be
conducted   in   a   sound

The  restoration  of  those
ecologically        sensitive
areas is important and in
line  with  the  principle  of
sustainable  development.
It  is  proposed  that  there
should  be  management,
reclamation  and
development  of
ecologically        sensitive
areas.    The  transfer  of
user   rights   should   be
stated  and  the  principle
recognised  for  enhanced
environmental           and
natural  resource
management  and

It  is  proposed  that  Article
302(1)(d)  be  amended  as
follows –

(d)       the       conservation,
protection,     management,
development  and
reclamation  of  ecologically
sensitive   areas   shall   be
conducted  in  a  sustainable
(i)  transfer  of  user  rights
shall be recognised;

Article 302 (1)(e)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(e)    the    integrity    of
natural   processes   and
ecological    communities,
including  conservation  of
habitats and species shall
The   use   of   the   word
“respected”  in  the  text
does   not   carry   much
It  is  proposed  that  Article
302  (1)(e)  be  amended  as
follows –

(e)      the      integrity      of 25

development  be respected;

ecological   processes   and
ecological  systems,
including   conservation   of
habitats  and  species  shall
be valued;

Article 302 (1)(h)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(1) The management and
development  of  Zambia’s
environment  and  natural
resources,      shall      be
governed       by       the
following principles –

(h)  the  saving  of  energy
and the use of renewable
energy  sources  shall  be
The  gist  of  this  clause  is
to      promote      energy
efficiency  and  to  move
towards      an      energy
structure   that   is   less
dependant  on  fossil  fuels
and  promotes  renewable
energy    options    which
should  be  sustainable  in
line   with   the   general
principles  of  sustainable
development.   There   is
need  to  include  a  clause
that  adequate  resources
shall be allocated for that

It  is  proposed  that  Clause
302  (1)(h)  be  amended  as
follows –

(h)         the         use         of
environmental   sustainable
renewable  energy  sources
shall    be    promoted    and
adequate  resources
allocated for that purpose;
Article 302 (1)(i)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
(i)   adequate   resources
shall be allocated for the
purposes   of   reclaiming
and  rehabilitating
The  legal  subject  is  not
identified.      A   duty   or
responsibility   should   be
placed  on  a legal subject
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
302  (1)(i)  be  amended  as
follows –

management          and
degraded     areas     and
those  prone  to  disasters
in  order  to  make  them
habitable and productive
who  shall  be  responsible
for  meeting  the  costs  of
rehabilitating  and
degradation  activities  in
line with the polluter pay
principle.        Further    it
would   be   practical   to
qualify  the  disasters  by
stating “natural disasters”

(i) adequate resources
shall be allocated
for the purposes of
reclaiming and
degraded areas
and those prone to
natural disasters in
order to make
them habitable and
productive, and
any reclamation
and rehabilitation
costs shall be
borne by the
person whose
activities caused
the damage;
Article 302 (1) (j)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(j)    strategic    research
shall  be  undertaken  in
order    to    ensure    the
enhancement  of  natural
Research  is  key  in  the
development     of     any
nation     and     adequate
resources     should     be
allocated for this purpose
It  is  proposed  that  Article
302  (1)(j)  be  amended  as
follows –

(j)  strategic  research  shall
be  undertaken  in  order  to
ensure the enhancement of 27

natural      resources      and
adequate   resources   shall
be allocated.

Article 302 (1) (k)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(k)  unfair  trade  practices
in          the  production,
processing,    distribution
and  marketing  of  natural
resources      shall      be

This  is  a  matter  for  an
Act  of  Parliament.    It  is
proposed   that   the   sub
clause be deleted

Article 302 (1)(m)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(m)  equitable  access  to
environmental   resources
shall  be  promoted  and
the functional integrity of
ecosystems      and      to
prevent adverse effects
Sustainable  use  is  a  key
element  in  management,
conservation  and
protection  of
environmental   resources
and    this    should    be
reflected in the clause
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
302  (1)(m)  be  amended  as
follows –

(m)  equitable  access  and
sustainable         use         of
environmental  and  natural
resources         shall         be
promoted    to  ensure  the
functional      integrity      of
ecosystems  and  to  prevent
adverse impacts;

Article 302 (1)(n)
Principles  of
environmental       and
(n)  the  people  shall  be
involved  and  participate
in  the  development   of
Any  meaningful
development is one which
is people driven, and this
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
302  (1)(n)  be  amended  as
follows – 28

natural          resources
management          and
relevant   policies,   plans
and programmes
clause is seen to espouse
this welcome principle

(n)   the   development   of
relevant  policies,
legislation,      plans      and
programmes       shall       be
inclusive and participatory;

Article 302 (1)(o)
Principles  of
environmental       and
natural          resources
management          and
(o) the people shall have
access  to  environmental
information    to    enable
them   preserve,   protect
and       conserve       the

Management     of     the
environment       is      an
important       component
which should be reflected
in the clause.
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
302  (1)(o)  be  amended  as
follows –

(o)  the  people  shall  have
access  to  indigenous  and
scientific       environmental
information to enable them
manage,  preserve,  protect
and          conserve          the
environment   and   natural
Article 303
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of
A  person  has  a  duty  to
co-operate    with    State
organs       and       State
institutions    and    other
persons to –
(a) ensure  ecologically
development    and
The        principle        of
reciprocity    should    be
made  clear  in  that  each
legal  subject,  that  is,  a
person,  state  organs  and
state  institutions  should
have          corresponding
duties and responsibilities

It  is  proposed  that  Clause
303 be amended as follows

303.   Every  person  has  a
duty   together   with   State
organs          and          State 29

use     of     natural
(b) respect,      protect
and  safeguard  the
(c) prevent  or
discontinue  an  act
which is harmful to
the    environment;
(d) maintain  a  clean,
safe   and   healthy
living environment

in   the   management   of
the    environment    and
natural  resources.    This
provision  implies  a  basis
of  public  participation  as
a   primary   element   of
conservation,   protection
and     management.     It
reinforces  the  duty  on  a
citizen      to      conserve,
protect  and  manage  the
environment  and  natural
resources     as     already
stated  under  Article  22
(1)(c) and (d).

Institutions      and      other
persons to –
(a)         ensure
development  and  use
of natural resources;
(b)         respect,  protect
and    safeguard    the
(c)          prevent  or
discontinue    an    act
which  is  harmful   to
the environment; and
(d)         maintain           a
clean,       safe       and
healthy  living
environment; and
(e)         ensure           the
sustainability  of
cultural  and  spiritual
values  as  far  as  they
relate         to         the

Article 303   (d) maintain a clean, safe   It is not clear what “living  There   is   need   to   define 30

Protection  of
environment           and
natural resources
and      healthy      living

environment” means. Is it
environment,     that     is
human   access   to   and
sustainability  of  drinking
water,    breathable    air,
safe    soil,    OR    is    it
biocentric           ensuring
biodiversity          species
protection  and

environment as follows –

“environment’   means   the
natural      or      man-made
surroundings  at  any  place,
comprising air, water, land,
natural  resource,  animals,
buildings        and        other
Article 304 (c )
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of
(c)  establish  systems  of
environmental      impact
environmental  audit  and
environmental monitoring

Enshrining  the
requirements  of
environmental       impact
assessment,   audit   and
monitoring       of       the
environment  underscores
the       importance       of
integrating environmental
and  development
concerns  and  interests  in
decision-making.       The
detailed  requirements  of
EIAs  are  set  out  in  the
Management Act, 2011

It  is  proposed  that  Clause
304   (c)   be   amended   as
follows –

(c)   establish   systems   of
strategic       environmental
assessment,  environmental
impact  assessment,
environmental   evaluation,
accounting,      audit      and
environmental monitoring

Evaluation  and
accounting  of
environment  and  natural
resources   is   important.
Strategic    environmental
assessment      is      also
cardinal  and  should  be

Article 304 (d)
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of

“A  person  has  a  duty  to
co-operate    with    State
organs       and       State
institutions    and    other
persons to  –
(d)    encourage    public
The      Government      is
obligated   to   encourage
public participation.   This
forms   a   basis   for   the
introduction    of    public
participation  components
in  legislation  or  statutes
relative  to  environmental
management.      This   is
already  contained  in  the
Management     Act     of
It  is  worth  noting  that
citizen    participation    is
cardinal  in  environmental
particularly     that     the
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
304   (d)   be   amended   as
follows –

(e)         encourage
public participation in
the         management,
protection  and
conservation   of   the
environment          and
natural resources;

responsibility  of
managing  our
environment  is  on  each
one    of    us    and    not
Government alone. To be
effective       participants,
however, citizens must be
well-informed   and   have
access  to  accurate  and
reliable   information   as
well  as  opportunities  to
present  their  views  and
to question and challenge
decisions    which    have
adverse     environmental

Article 304 (e)
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of

(e)  protect  and  enhance
the  intellectual  property
in,      and      indigenous
knowledge  of,
biodiversity  and  genetic
The  State’s  promotion  of
all   forms   of   traditional
knowledge  and
recognition  of  intellectual
property   rights   of   the
people  of  Zambia  under
Article  63(4)(c)  is  in  line
with  international
conventions  such  as  the
Convention  on  Biological
It  is  proposed  that  Clause
304   (e)   be   amended   as
follows –

(e)  preserve,  protect  from
biopiracy  and enhance the
intellectual property in, and
indigenous   knowledge   of,
biodiversity    species    and
genetic  resources,  and  to 33

Diversity  (CBD)  and  the
Agreement     on     Trade
Related      Aspects      of
Intellectual         Property
Right     (TRIPS)     which
promotes  the  protection
and     enforcement     of
intellectual         property
rights  in  a  matter  that
benefits   the   producers
and   users   of   genetic
resources.    This  would
also   be   in   line   with
international      principles
envisaged  under
subparagraph  (g)  which
states  that  it  shall  apply
international  best
practices.      The   overall
goal  is  to  enhance  the
preservation  and
protection   of   traditional
knowledge   and   genetic
resources,       and       to
promote their sustainable

promote  their  sustainable
Article 304 (f)  (f)    ensure    that    the   Re-emphasize           that   34

Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of

environmental  standards
enforced  in  the  Republic
are of essential benefit to
all citizens
environmental   standards
be  developed  and  then
(f)      ensure      that      the
environmental      standards
are developed and enforced
in    the    republic    are    of
essential   benefits   to   all

Article 304 (g)
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of

(g)   apply   international
best practices
Include          appropriate
national best practices as
not  all  international  best
practices      could      be
appropriate for Zambia.

It   is   proposed   that   the
following be inserted –

(g)      apply      appropriate
national  and    international
best practices

Article 304
Utilisation   of   natural
resources  and
management  of

The State should promote
all   forms   of   traditional
knowledge  and  recognize
intellectual         property
rights  of  the  people  of
Zambia.    This  is  in  line
with  the  Convention  on
Biological   diversity   and
the  Agreement  on  Trade
Related      Aspects      of
Intellectual         Property
Right     (TRIPS)     which
promotes  the  protection

It  is  proposed  that  a  new
sub-  clause  be  introduced
as follows –

(h)  utilize the environment
and  natural  resources  for
the social, cultural-spiritual
development and benefit of
the people of Zambia”

and     enforcement     of
intellectual         property
rights  in  a  matter  that
benefits   the   producers
and   users   of   genetic
resources.    This  would
also   be   in   line   with
international      principles
envisaged  under
subparagraph  (g)  which
states  that  it  shall  apply
international  best

Without  the  environment
or    natural    resources,
which  are  our  common
heritage,   society   would
not live.  Importance has
not been attached to the
environment  as  can  be
seen  from  the  brevity  in
the  clauses  under  land,
environment  and  natural
resources.  It  is  not  as
explicit   or   detailed   as
other     parts     of     the
Constitution    despite    a
The proposal is to have the
following  clauses  inserted

There is hereby established
an     Environmental     Fund
which shall  be managed as
prescribed  under  an  Act  of

The  moneys  in  the  Fund
shall    be    used    for    the
development,     protection,
conservation  and 36

constitution     being     a
manifesto  or  a  document
where       a       people’s
aspirations  are  reflected.
In     order     to     attach
importance       to       the
environment,       it       is
proposed       that       an
Environmental   fund   be
established    under    the
Constitution  and  detailed
under  an  enabling  Act  of
Parliament  as  is the case
now         under         the
Management Act
Other  details  can  be
left    to    an    Act    of
management   of      natural
resources    in    accordance
with  environmental
principles and conventions.

Parliament   shall   enact   a
law  to  give  effect  to  the
functions,      powers      and
authority           of           the
Environmental Fund.

Article 311
It  is  important  to  have  a
clear   understanding   of
what  is  meant  by  the
following  words,  namely
–   environment,   genetic
material,  genetic
resources,  and  biological
It   is   proposed   that   the
following    definitions    be
inserted  in Article 311 –

“biological  diversity”
means       the       variability
among    living    organisms 37

diversity.  Some  concepts
in    environmental    law
maybe        vague        or
uncertain    and    should
therefore    be    defined.
The aim of defining some
of   the   principles   and
terms  used  in  the  text  is
to  provide  interpretative
clarity.    Some    of    the
definitions   are   defined
under  the  Convention  on
Biological   Diversity   and
since    they    are    used
internationally,  these  can
be adopted.

from  all  sources  including,
inter       alia,       terrestrial,
marine  and  other  aquatic
eco-systems     and          the
ecologies     complexes     of
which  they  are  part;  this
includes    diversity    within
species,   between   species
and eco-systems’

“environment’   means   the
natural      or      man-made
surroundings  at  any  place,
comprising air, water, land,
natural  resource,  animals,
buildings        and        other
constructions  and
processes     that     support
natural  resources

“genetic  resources”  means
genetic  material  of  actual
or potential value;

“genetic   material”   means
any    material    of    plant,
animal,  microbial  or  other 38

origin containing functional
units of heredity;

“sustainable    use”    means
the  use  of  components  of
biological diversity in a way
and at a rate that does not
lead     to    the     long-term
decline        of        biological
diversity,  thereby
maintaining its potential to
meet     the     needs     and
aspirations  of  present  and
future generations;

Executive Power

Article 90 (2)(e)
Executive  functions  of
(2) Without      limiting
clause  (1)  and  the
other  provisions  of
this    Constitution,
the  President  shall

(e)   establish   and
Ministries,   subject
to  the  approval  of
The alignment or creation
of  Government  Ministries
should  not  be  left  to  the
whims  of  the  office  of
President.  Such
alignment    or    creation
may  impact  or  affect  the
management     of     the
environment  and  natural
resources   including   the
implementation  of
It   is   proposed   that   the
provision   be   amended   to
read as follows –

(1) Without   limiting   clause
(1)     and     the     other
provisions       of       this
Constitution,  the
President shall –
(f) establish   and   dissolve
Government    Ministries, 39

the           National
environmental           and
natural  resources  plans,
programmes and policies.
It   may   also   lead   to
fragmented  line
ministries.  There  is  need
to   have   a   consultative
and  participatory
mechanism   for   relevant
stakeholders to input into
the alignment or creation
of  Government  Ministries
before  it  is  approved  by
the National Assembly.

subject  to  the  approval
of        the        National
Provided   that   relevant
stakeholders    shall    be
consulted    before    the
matter  is  tabled  before
the national Assembly;


Article 211(2)(g)
System       of       local
(2) The  local
system shall  –
(g) encourage        the
involvement        of
communities    and
organisations      in
matters    of    local
Chiefs functions not clear
stated  as  it  also  affects
management  and
conservation      of      the
environment  and  natural
It   is   proposed   that   sub-
clause (g)  be  re-worded  as
follows –

(h)         encourage     the
involvement  of
communities          and
organisations  in
matters       of       local
government  including
matters    relating    to
environment          and 40

natural         resources
management,        and

Article 230 (a)
Functions  of  House  of
Notwithstanding     Article
229  (1),  the  House  of
Chiefs may –
(a) consider          and
discuss    any    Bill
referred   to   it   by
the         President,
dealing    with,    or
touching           on,
custom  or
tradition,  before  it
is  introduced  into
the  National
Issues   of   environment
and natural resources are
not  stated  as  a  function
of  the  House  of  Chiefs.
This  is  an  omission  as
chiefdoms   should   deal
with  such  issues  through
the traditional structures.
It  is  proposed  that  a  new
sub  clause  be  inserted  as
follows –

(e)   discuss   matters
relating  to
environment          and
natural         resources
management,        and

– Zambia CSO CBD COP 11 in India



Billy Lombe, Vincent Ziba and Mrs Chilwesa

The following are the update form the CBD CoP11 in India.

The first day was characterized by official opening and handing over of the presidency by Japan to India. The Japanese Former Environment Minister, Mr Ryu Matsumoto and former CoP 10 President expressed warm support from parties around the world during his term. He handed over the presidency to the Minister of Environment and Forest of India, Ms Jayanthi Natarajan who called for Cop 11 to come up with a road map for implementing the Nagoya outcomes.

The official opening was latter followed by two working group (WG) meetings. Working group one (WG1) focusing on discussing issues on the Island Biodiversity and Ecosystem while group two (WG2) focused on the implementation of the Strategic Plan and progress towards the Aichi targets.

Day two was characterized by two main working groups and various side meetings. Working group I addressed marine and coastal biodiversity, REDD+ safeguards and geoengineering. Working group Group  II continued discussions on implementation of the Strategic Plan and addressed issues related to financial resources and the financial mechanism.

This update will focus on discussions on REDD by WG1

REDD+: The AFRICAN GROUP represented by Ethiopia and MALAYSIA supported “taking note” of advice on the application of relevant country-specific biodiversity safeguards. The Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC) said that countries should develop national safeguard systems according to UNFCCC COP decisions. The EU supported advice on safeguards, highlighting that the COP should consider means of monitoring and assessing the impacts of REDD+ on biodiversity.

BOLIVIA said there is not a common understanding on what REDD+ is, suggesting to either avoid reference to the abbreviation or add reference to the Bolivian Joint Mitigation and Adaptation Mechanism for the Integral and Sustainable Management of Forests as an alternative non-market based approach. EL SALVADOR underscored the need to emphasize both adaptation and mitigation. BRAZIL and INDIA said information on safeguards has to be country-driven. BRAZIL further cautioned that the issue of forests is not reduced to REDD+.

INDONESIA favored a mandate for the conference Secretariat to compile information on potential effects of REDD+ activities on indigenous and local communities. The FAO reported on exploring synergies with the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade initiative. The GLOBAL FOREST COALITION lamented priority attached to REDD+ instead of other forest biodiversity issues.


STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND AICHI TARGETS: Establishment of national targets and NBSAP updating: Argentina called for a strong participatory process when reviewing NBSAPs. IUCN stressed that NBSAPs are essential to integrate biodiversity into broader societal goals. The FAO said its national focal points could contribute to designing NBSAPs.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND MECHANISM: Review of implementation of the Resource Mobilization Strategy: The Secretariat introduced the item and  Pavan Sukhdev, Chair of the high-level panel on global assessment of resources, introduced the panel’s report underscoring that implementation of some targets requires investment of several hundreds of billions of US dollars.

GRULAC highlighted the need for new, additional, predictable and adequate financial resources, and suggested that national trust funds complement the Convention’s financial provisions by channeling international resources. The AFRICAN GROUP called for a 20% annual increase in international financial flows to developing countries and for clarity on markets, offsets and innovative financial mechanisms. NORWAY underscored the need to combine efforts on resource mobilization, track biodiversity funding, and create enabling conditions. AUSTRALIA opposed setting quantitative targets specific to official development assistance.

CANADA stressed the need to monitor parties’ implementation of the strategy and the importance of national assessments to establish baselines, expressing readiness to discuss targets once parties have completed their data collection process. PERU highlighted the need for capacity building, and ARGENTINA for funding, for countries to undertake national assessments of needs and gaps. JAPAN considered it premature to adopt a baseline and targets at COP 12. KIRIBATI emphasized the importance of agreeing on funding targets at this meeting, noting that available data is sufficient. INDIA explained that setting targets now, even on an interim basis, would build confidence among parties. MEXICO said it would be a “serious mistake” to delay implementation. COSTA RICA called for guidelines for information collection and analysis.

The PHILIPPINES supported adopting the preliminary reporting framework for resource mobilization. BOLIVIA affirmed that the framework’s indicators should also consider collective action taken by indigenous peoples and local communities. Highlighting the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, CHINA noted the framework should be voluntary for developing countries.

GEF: The Secretariat introduced the item (UNEP/CBD/COP/11/4, 8 and 15/Rev.2). Delegates heard reports on GEF’s biodiversity-related activities during the first two years of GEF-5 and the expert panel’s analysis of funding needs for GEF-6.

GEF report: MEXICO proposed a simpler methodology to improve clarity on GEF’s rationale for allocating resources.

Guidance to the financial mechanism: COLOMBIA stressed stable funding for NBSAPs. The PHILIPPINES said national portfolio formulation infringed on states’ sovereignty and should be revised. GHANA, with many, said the COP should request GEF to improve the timeliness of financial support. JAPAN and NORWAY suggested extending the Nagoya Protocol Implementation Fund (NPIF) until COP 12. NAMIBIA and KIRIBATI urged streamlining of GEF processes, with NAMIBIA suggesting calling on GEF to “contract directly through recipients rather than with the usual GEF agents,” for disbursements from NPIF.

NAGOYA PROTOCOL: Janet Lowe (New Zealand) and Fernando Casas (Colombia), Co-Chairs of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Nagoya Protocol (ICNP), reported on ICNP 1 and 2 outcomes. The Secretariat introduced draft decisions (UNEP/CBD/COP/11/6).

NAMIBIA recommended the COP monitor implementation of CBD Article 15 (Access to Genetic Resources) by CBD parties that are not parties to the Protocol. MEXICO stressed that activities to promote the Protocol’s ratification and implementation be funded by the core budget. CAMEROON cautioned against delaying COP 12 to 2015, to increase momentum for ratification.

– ZCBNRM Forum applauds ZEMA’s decision

Friday 12th October 2012

Press Release: The Post and The Daily Mail


The Zambia Community Based Natural Resources Management (ZCBNRM) Forum would like to applaud the Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA)’s decision to reject the proposed Mwembeshi Resources Limited’s Kangaluwi mining project in the Lower Zambezi National Park.

As mandated by the Environmental Management Act of 2011, ZEMA rejected the project because the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) submitted by the developer fails to address serious environmental concerns such as the issue of Acid Rock Drainage (ARD), and the potential negative impacts of abnormal discharge of effluent in case of failure by the Tailing Storage Facility (TSF).

ZEMA noted that effluent discharge from the TSF and Acid Rock Drainage are a risk to the environment due to high surface run off from the escarpment which has a high potential to pollute both ground and surface water of the Lower Zambezi and the Mana Pools World Heritage site in Zimbabwe. ZEMA further noted that proposed site is not suitable for such a project as it lies on the Zambezi escarpment which is prone to earthquakes.

We agree with ZEMA that while the project provides short term economic benefits to the communities in the Lower Zambezi,  if allowed the project would have long term and permanent negative impacts to the communities and the environment.

ZCBNRM echoes ZEMA’s decision to reject the mining project as the site is not only environmentally sensitive but also lies in a national park. It is our shared view that there is need to protect our natural environment from harmful economic activities such as mining in protected areas and ecologically sensitive areas.

On behalf of the civil society organisations represented by the ZCBNRM Forum, we would like to appeal to all stakeholders including the developer to accept and respect the professional decision made by ZEMA on this matter.

ZCBNRM Forum further wishes to clarify the assertion by the developer in the quest to appeal ZEMA’s decision that various stakeholders including conservation groups were in support of the project. This is untrue as conservation groups and various research institutions raised serious concerns about the potential negative impacts of the project to the environment.



Biston Mbewe


Zambia Community Based Natural Resources Management Forum

About Zambia CBNRM FORUM

The Zambia CBNRM Forum is an umbrella organization for Community Based Natural resources management Organizations or institutions with interest in or supportive of Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in the country.   The Forum is a membership-based, voluntary and non-partisan organization with full legal status.  Membership of the Forum includes CBOs, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), regional and international NGOs, Faith-Based Organizations (FBOs), and inter-governmental institutions, the private sector, traditional authorities, community representatives, academic and research institutions.

– Press Release- Objection to proposed Kangaluwi Large Scale Copper Mining Project

Press Release

Release date: 14th June, 2012

Objection to the proposed Kangaluwi Large Scale Copper Mining Project By Mwembishi Resources Limited in Lower Zambezi National Park, Luangwa District, Lusaka Province.

The Zambia Community Natural Resources management Forum (ZCBNRM) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) on behalf of over 100 natural resources and environmental organiations and individuals in Zambia would like to reaffirm the objection to the proposed mining project in the Lower Zambezi national Park.

This follows the application by Mwembeshi Resources Limited to establish a kangaluwi large scale Mining Project on Mining License 15547-HQ-LML in the Lower Zambezi National Park in the Luangwa District, Lusaka Province of Zambia and the submission an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

The ZCBNRM and its partners have observed that the EIA report submitted by GeoQuest Limited on behalf of Mwembishi Limited fails the professional and objectivity test as it does not highlight the socio-cultural and health costs the mining project will cause. Zambia will lose more than gain if this mining project is allowed to proceed for a number of reasons.

Allowing mining in the Lower Zambezi national Park will set a dangerous precedent where protected areas intended to preserve critical ecological processes and conserve biodiversity will be irreversibly damaged at the expense of the environment and the local community livelihoods. While we appreciate the role of mining in economic development, we strongly feel that it should not be allowed in protected areas especially those ecologically delicate like the Lower Zambezi national park which have been identified under local and international protocols and conventions as being of great cultural heritage and environmental value.

Apart from failure to elaborate on the negative impacts of such an investment on the health of local communities, the EIA fails to acknowledge the presence of rare and endangered species of national importance such as the African elephant, the African Wild dog including several bird and tree species found in the area.

The mining project which is intended to mine copper in an area with high levels of radon emissions, a radioactive gas from uranium, does not only pose a health hazard to local people including their livestock but to the entire ecosystem including freshwater life of the rivers in the lower Zambezi.

The fact that the copper ore from Lower Zambezi national Park in Luangwa will be transported to the Copperbelt for processing makes this project a health hazard to all the people along way, not to mention the increased road carnage, air pollution and accelerated damage to the roads it will bring.

The contamination and pollution of ground water and surface waters as well as riparian areas of rivers such as the Luangwa, Kafue and Zambezi which local people depend on for domestic consumption, their cattle, agriculture and fish as a result of mining activities presents a serious threat to community livelihoods. The problem is further compounded to a regional scale as it will affect the entire ecosystem and health of communities located downstream and upstream in the neighboring countries of Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, Botswana and Malawi who all depend on this shared watercourse of the Zambezi river.

After studying the EIA, ZCBNRM and its partners have also observed that two of the authors of the EIA are from government statutory bodies. This is clearly unethical and puts Government as the regulator in the compromised position.

The ZCBNRM, WWF and their partners would like to call on local communities and all stakeholders concerned about this ‘development’ to join this noble cause by opposing the mining project as posterity and the future generations shall judge us harshly if it is allowed to go ahead.

We are also calling upon the PF Government to uphold its commitment to supporting sustainable natural resource management by safeguarding environmentally sensitive areas like national parks from destructive economic activities.

Vincent Ziba

National Coordinator

– ZEMA Raises Concern Over Proposed Copper Project

The Post, Thursday September 13, 2012                                          Home News Pg5

ZEMA raises concern over proposed copper project:

By Gift Chanda and Kabanda Chulu

ZEMA yesterday rejected the environmental impact assessment submissions for the proposed US$494 million Kangaluwi copper project that was projected to be established in 2015 in the Lower Zambezi National Park.

Zambezi Resources, which is a Bermuda-registered and Australian securities-listed company, had projected to commence copper production in 2015 at its Kangaluwi project located near Luangwa district.

The Kangaluqi project’s mine life was estimated to be in excess of 25 years while the decommissioning and closure cost of the project was estimated at US$260,000.

However, Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA) spokesperson Irene Chipili yesterday said the project has been rejected, citing various environmental concerns.

“The Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) will be located in the Zambezi escarpment. The area is prone to earthquakes and it is therefore risky to put up a TSF as the chances of failure are high. If the TSF was to fail, the impact would be significant and would extend to neighboring countries,”  Chipili said. “The mine is located about 30 km from the Mana Pools world heritage site in Zimbabwe. Any possible failure of TSF or abnormal discharge of effluent would negatively affect the World Heritage site.”

She said the issue of Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) and metal leaching has not been addressed.

“The environmental impact statement (EIS) which was submitted states that levels 112 meters to 116 meters contain material that has the potential to generate acid and yet no mitigation measures both in the short and long term have been outlined. The impact of ARD would be significant especially after the mine has been closed,” Chipili said. “The proposed site is not suitable for the nature of the project since it is located in the middle of a national park and the adverse impact of open pit mining would therefore permanently destroy the landscape of the Park, thereby reducing the tourism value of the Lower Zambezi National Park, which is one of the four major national parks in the country.”

She said the footprint of the mine would increase when the road is widened and the power line is constructed.

“The integrity of the national park will therefore be compromised and in the long term the ecological value would be affected,” said Chipili. “The estimate of mine life is not based on verifiable facts as the EIS is full of contradictions and the benefits from the mining operations may be for a very short period of time but the consequences may be far more reaching.”

Recently, environmental activists, including the Earth Organisation, advised the government to thoroughly analyse the impact of mining on the environment and wildlife as a result of the proposed Kangaluwi copper project.