The Swaziland National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 1999

[ Contents | Executive Summary | 1.0 Introduction | 2.0 The Status of Biological Diversity in Swaziland | 3.0 Assessment of Current Conservation and Management of Biodiversity in Swaziland | 4.0 Strategy and Action Plan | 5.0 Implementation of BSAP | 6.0 Monitoring and Evaluation | 7.0 References ]

1.0 Introduction

1.1 General Introduction

Swaziland, despite its small size, supports a diverse assemblage of habitats which are home to a wide range of organisms. Although the information base on Swaziland’s biodiversity is still incomplete, survey work has shown that a significant portion of southern Africa’s plant and animal species occur here. The eastern region of Swaziland, for example, forms part of the Maputaland Centre of Plant Diversity (one of the World’s "hotspots" of floral, as well as faunal, species richness and endemism), while the western region falls within another area of global significance, the Drakensberg Escarpment Endemic Bird Area. 

The value of Swaziland’s biodiversity has long been recognised by Swazis who make use of it on a daily basis for various reasons including: traditional medicine, food, building material, traditional attire. Traditional systems of conserving biodiversity also exist but have not been documented and are currently being eroded.

The International Convention on Biodiversity (Article 2) defines biodiversity as 'the variability amongst living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part'. 

Put more simply, biodiversity is the variety of plants, animals and other life forms, the genetic material they contain and the ecosystems which they form. Biodiversity can be seen as three distinct components which includes:-

• Genetic diversity: the genetic variations within a species, that usually results from environmental selection pressure or from genetic mutations in reproductive cells. Genetic variations can result in distinct populations within the same species, often resulting from the diversity of habitats which are occupied by a single species.
• Species diversity: the variety of different species which have emerged from evolutionary processes. The processes which generate genetic variation also create species, except the magnitude of differences is larger that in the case of species. When two organisms’ genetic material differs to the extent that they are unable to produce fertile off-spring, then they may be considered different species.
• Ecosystem diversity: the different communities of plant and animal species that create the numerous habitats in Swaziland. The various combinations of different plant and animals species create different ecosystems as the various organisms interact with each other and the physical environment (minerals, water and climate) around them.

1.2 The Importance of Biodiversity to Swaziland

Biologists have long realised the immense value of global biodiversity to humanity. Putting a monetary value on biodiversity, however, is not a simple or straightforward process. However, the use of plant extracts in the manufacture of commercial medicines (and other products) has been well documented and provides insight into their potential value. 

A number of Swaziland’s plant genetic resources have been used or been targeted by the international community. For example, certain herbaceous plants such as Vigna (e.g. tinhlumayo), Stomatanthes, and various bulbous species are being used or tested by other African countries for commercial purposes (Braun and Dlamini 1993). Although the economic value of these Swaziland resources have not yet been quantified, a Namibian example illustrates well their potential value.

The Namibian trade in the plants Harpagophytum procumbens and H. zeyheri (devil’s claw) is based on the pharmaceutical potential of their chemical extracts harpagosid, harpagid and procumbens in the treatment of rheumatism and arthritis. In 1995 Namibia exported some 234 tonnes of Harpagophytum procumbens and H.zeyheri to Germany, UK, USA, Belgium, Spain, France and Japan (Mander et al, 1996). The value of these genetic resources, that is, the chemical compounds found within the plants’ chemistry was worth some E1.15m in export revenue to Namibia. However, these materials would be processed and resold, with prices in the USA reaching some US$18 per 100g, or US$180 per kg. The value of the stock sold in the US would be worth some US$42m or E189m for the plants traded in 1995. The genetic material contained in the harpago chemistry thus has considerable value as a trade product. The value would be further increased if the increased welfare associated with the healing benefits derived from harpago compounds was also valued.

With the large number of plant species present in Swaziland and used in traditional healing (Dlamini 1981), there may be similar opportunities to identify and trade high yielding varieties of local medicinal plants.

The services supplied by biodiversity in contributing to, and in association with, functional ecosystems, provides Swaziland society with a wide range of goods and services (Table 1.1). These services can generate a range of benefits for the Swaziland community. It is important to note that a wide range of the above services are not consumed as goods (such a medicine or fuelwood) but are services supplied to the wider community (such as pollination, erosion control and flood control). Many of these services, for example, disturbance regulation and genetic resources, will play a critical role in supplying the Swaziland community with future options. Valuing biodiversity in Swaziland is, as in any country, a considerable challenge due to the lack of appropriate data and human expertise. To date, only one biodiversity valuation study has been undertaken in Swaziland (Turpie & Albert, 1997). There is, therefore, an urgent need to ascertain the true value of these biological resources in Swaziland.

In Swaziland there is an active harvesting and trade (both local and exported) of medicinal plants.

Using the results of the KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga surveys (Mander et al., 1997; Mander, 1998), one can make some rough estimates for Swaziland. If we assume that the visitation frequencies for the Swazi people follows a similar pattern to Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal, then there may be 5.8 million consumption events of local medicinal plants a year in Swaziland. This implies that there may be as much as 219 tonnes of plant material consumed a year (excluding exports to South Africa). Using the Mpumalanga average price of plant medicines consumed (E124/kg), then the value of the medicinal plants consumed in Swaziland may be E27 million per year (based on 1997 prices). The plant and animal species traded within Swaziland thus make a significant, and increasing, contribution to the national economy.

The plants also have another value, which is the greater welfare and lives saved from the healing brought about as a result of making use of medicinal plants. Whilst there have been no local studies done on valuing welfare and life, there is no doubt that these benefits have considerable value. There is another way to look at the value of benefits, and that is by focussing on the replacement costs which society could bear in attempting to replace the service which the medicinal plant species provide.

Another example comes from the use of indigenous antelope species. In the past 20 years, game farming has replaced cattle ranching in many parts of southern Africa. This has occurred for purely economical reasons i.e. game farming is more profitable. Indigenous game (e.g. antelope such as impala and kudu) are far more suited to surviving in Africa’s drier, marginal landscapes (such as Swaziland’s Lowveld) than are cattle. Not only do these indigenous species survive better during droughts, which are a natural phenomenon in these areas, but they are less susceptible to diseases, require far less water and do not impact negatively on the vegetation. Cattle in these environments, in contrast, are a burden on society and the environment. The fact that game farming is potentially financially profitable, has encouraged title deed farmers to investigate this alternative option. Although, many privately-owned ranches have turned to game farming in Swaziland, this is only now happening on Swazi Nation Land.

In Swaziland rural communities rely to a great extent on the services which the ecosystems provide. These communities have limited access to outside resources and consequently the ecosystem meets most of their basic consumer goods and services. An impact study on the Maguga Dam (Turpie & Albert, 1997) estimated that the total value of aquatic and woodland ecosystem services to the households affected by inundation was between E8 110 and E19 003 per annum. However, when subtracting the mineral resources used from the above, the average annual value was E8070 per household.

Assuming that 68% of the Swaziland population is rural, and the average household size is 6 people, then there may be any many as 90 000 rural households in Swaziland. If 60% of these households are living in woodlands throughout the country, and we assume an average value of E8070 for the value derived per household in woodlands, then the total contribution of woodlands to Swaziland could be E436 million per year. This represents some 36% of the Swaziland GDP for 1996. Importantly, this amount is not incorporated into the conventional estimation of GDP, and thus represents a considerable subsidy to the economy. Without access to the services supplied by woodlands, Swaziland would need to generate an additional E436 million per year to supply basic consumer goods such as housing material, medicine, fencing, cooking energy, etc to meet the requirements of the rural communities. Ecosystems have considerable value to both rural households and to governments. Households benefit from services which are provided at little or no cost, and governments benefit by not having to supply at considerable cost, the services which ecosystems provide.

An important direct, but non-consumptive, use of ecosystems is nature-based tourism or ecotourism. Between 1989 and 1995, over 250 000 tourists have visited Swaziland per annum. The proportion of these tourists that are nature-based tourists is unknown. Swaziland, however, is generally recognised as a country of great scenic beauty. It is likely, therefore, that a large proportion of the tourists visiting Swaziland are (at least partially) drawn by the country’s biodiversity. Visitation rates to, and expenditure in, Malolotja Nature Reserve are presented as a rough approximation of the current revenue earned from nature-based tourism in the country. Approximately 7 000 people enter Malolotja Nature Reserve per annum, spending roughly E250 000.00 in park fees. If visitation rates and expenditure are similar across all of Swaziland’s reserves, then tourists spend about E2 million per annum in the eight largest reserves. This is almost certainly an underestimation as fees are higher in the private reserves. Furthermore, this does not take into account the spin-off benefits of nature-tourism (e.g. money spent on handicrafts, restaurants, etc), nor does it reflect the number of jobs that are created.

Finally, too much emphasis should not be placed on monetary value of biodiversity. Swazi Culture is strongly rooted in the Kingdom’s environment. Therefore a loss of biodiversity could adversely affect the perpetuation of Swazi Culture. For example, the National Hunt (Butimba) is a tradition which takes place once a year at an area adjoining the Hlane National Park. The Butimba is a traditional hunt, with great ceremonial value, which is ordered by the King and is open to all Swazis. Therefore, the extermination of antelope species from the hunting area would signal the end of this deep-rooted ceremony. Several other examples to illustrate the socio-cultural relationship between Swazis and biodiversity are presented in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Some important plants and animals used in Swaziland

These a just a few selected examples. A very large number of plants and animals fit into most of the categories below. The examples provided simply illustrate this point. Further details on the value and uses of Swazi plants and plant products can be found in Dlamini (1981) and Makhubu (1978). Also included as some examples of goods and services supplied by biodiversity (Mander, 1998).

1.3 The Swaziland Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP)

The need for BSAP

The Swazi environment is rapidly changing as a result of rapid population growth, industrialisation, urbanisation and increasing agricultural demands. Many of these changes are negatively affecting the natural environment. The Government of Swaziland responded to this challenge by initiating the development of a Swaziland Environment Action Plan (SEAP) which was completed in 1997 (Government of Swaziland, 1997). The objectives of SEAP were to:

• Provide a state-of-knowledge overview of the environmental conditions in the country.
• Identify, prioritise and where possible quantify environmental problems.
• Propose solutions to immediate environmental problems in the form of programmes and projects, and institutional and legislative reforms.
• Establish a clear indication of government’s priority areas with respect to the environment so as to guide and give proper orientation to donor intervention in this field.
• Establish a framework which provides coherent direction for the process of environmental monitoring and action planning in the future.
• Provide a framework for continuous development and environmental policy dialogue within the country and with donor partners.

One of the five major programme areas identified by SEAP is the "Management and Use of Biodiversity". It is within this context that Swaziland embarked on the development of a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP). Furthermore, Swaziland signed and ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1994. By developing BSAP, Swaziland is complying with one of Her obligations to the CBD.

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) guidelines and objectives

While the CBD confirms that each State is sovereign over its biological diversity, contracting parties have agreed to support the three basic objectives of the Convention which are:

• the conservation of biological diversity.
• the sustainable use of its components.
• the equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources.

Furthermore, Article 6 of the Convention defines some of the key obligations of the Parties:

Each Contracting Party shall, in accordance with its particular conditions and capabilities:

a) Develop national strategies, plans or programs for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity or adapt for this purpose existing strategies, plans or programs which shall reflect, inter alia, the measures set out in this Convention, relevant to the Contracting Party concerned; and

b) Integrate, as far as possible and as appropriate, the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans, programs and policies.

It is clear, therefore, that the development of a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan is a key obligation of each Contracting Party to the CBD. Although the Convention defines the basic objectives and principles of a strategy, it has been left to the Conference of Parties (COP) to interpret the framework of the CBD and to develop specific guidance for its application. A review of COP guidance (Hagen, undated) shows that the following elements should be incorporated into national biodiversity strategies and action plans:

• Strategies for biodiversity conservation.
• Strategies for sustainable use of biological resources.
• Strategies for equitable sharing of benefits derived from genetic resources.
• Strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of agro-biodiversity.
• Strategies for biosafety.

Initiation of the BSAP process

The BSAP process was initiated with the following intentions:

• To reinforce awareness of the importance of policy reform with particular reference to the conservation of biological diversity.
• To prepare the ground and identify needs for activities to be undertaken by further biodiversity conservation projects.
• To draw upon local perceptions about environmental management and to explore alternatives to resource based livelihoods.
• To integrate these local perceptions with relevant international conventions and undertakings.
• To stimulate and maintain involvement in the planning of participatory methods of conservation both in situ and ex situ.
• To help the Government of Swaziland to formulate: 1) the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan; and 2) the country report to the Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

1.4 Methodology: the BSAP Process

Swaziland ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1994. In accordance with Article 6 of the CBD, and with funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Swaziland initiated the BSAP process in 1997. The Swaziland Environment Authority (SEA) is the government body responsible for the BSAP process. A Steering Committee was established to guide the development of BSAP. A National Coordinator was appointed for handling the day-to-day administration of the project. The National Coordinator was assisted by two international consultants, one regional consultant and seven local consultants (as well as a secretary and an assistant). All the SEA staff were involved in various capacities throughout the process. Finally, a participatory approach, involving all relevant sectors and levels of decision making, was used. The Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan approach was an ecosystem approach to biodiversity management in Swaziland. The following activities formed the basis of the BSAP process:

• Inventory of biodiversity information. Two consultants were assigned the duties of finding and synthesising the available information on Swaziland’s biodiversity.
• A First National Workshop was organised with the dual function of getting input from a wide range of technical and lay persons, and of publicising the BSAP process.
• A training and familiarisation course for local consultants (this course was presented by one of the international consultants).
• Four regional workshops were conducted for sourcing ideas, mainly from local communities.
• The establishment of five task forces, with each task force being headed by a local consultant.
• A technical workshop, involving more than 50 people, to review a draft biodiversity strategy.
• A Second National Workshop at which the draft biodiversity strategy was presented and assessed.
• Two Steering Committee retreats to review the BSAP document.

Reviewed by UNDP.

• Review and approval by the SEA Board and then by Cabinet.
• Preparation of the final report to be presented at the Conference of Parties (COP) of the CBD.

Constraints and problems experienced

There were a number of obstacles that hindered the development of BSAP, which are listed below:

• Coordination of the different sectors. Many people were not certain of what biodiversity really is (or how it impacts on the daily lives of most Swazis), nor were they sure of the purpose of the BSAP process. This made coordination of the different sectors difficult.
• Participation (both at Steering Committee meetings, and at the workshops) and could have been better.
• Lack of accessible data. Data on the status of Swaziland’s biodiversity are incomplete (this is especially true for data on the economic value of biodiversity). Thus, decisions often had to be made in the absence of quantitative information.
• Lack of technical expertise. Technical expertise were lacking in some important or key areas such as biotechnology and resource economics.

On the positive side, though, the BSAP process did tap the expertise and experience of a wide range of Swazi Society, and almost all local biodiversity "experts" were involved at some stage.

Documents arising from the BSAP process

The primary outcome of BSAP, to date, is the present document. As mentioned in the SEAP document, however, the process of developing a strategy is valuable in itself, independently of the final document. Other documents compiled during the BSAP process include: eight consultancy reports (seven by local consultants and one by a regional consultant), two reports by the international consultant, a first report to COP, reports from the two national workshops, the four regional workshops and the technical workshop and a concept note to the GEF (through the World Bank).

The following reports were developed as part of the BSAP (or SEAP) process and were valuable sources of information. The figures in brackets indicate the sections of the present document to which the reports pertain (all the reports contributed to the development of the strategy, section 5.0):

• Swaziland Biodiversity Working Group (SEAP). 1996. Issues pertaining to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
• Government of Swaziland. 1997. Swaziland Environment Action Plan. Vol. I & II.
• Monadjem, A. 1997b. A survey of information on the zoological biodiversity in Swaziland.
• Kunene, I.S. 1998. A survey of information on the botanical biodiversity in Swaziland.
• Mahlaba, T.A.M. 1998. Swaziland National Biodiversity Database.
• Sithole, V.M. 1998. Marketing and finance of nature-based tourism.
• Khumalo, K.P. 1998. Sociological perspectives on biodiversity in Swaziland.
• Masina, G.T. 1998. Institutional framework and community conservation of biodiversity in Swaziland.
• Earnshaw, D.M. 1998. Commercial biological resources/genetic wealth in Swaziland.
• Mander, M. 1998. The value and commercialisation potential of biodiversity in Swaziland: a preliminary discussion.

1.5 The Goals of Swaziland’s BSAP

Principal objectives

The principal objectives of the Swaziland Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan have been adopted from the Convention on Biological Diversity and are:

1. To conserve the biodiversity of Swaziland.
2. To encourage the sustainable use of biodiversity in Swaziland.
3. To ensure that benefits accrued from the utilisation of Swaziland’s biodiversity are shared equitably.

Basic principles

The following basic principles have been adopted by the Steering Committee to guide the implementation of the Swaziland Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.

1. The components of the biodiversity of Swaziland should continue to be identified, monitored and researched for the purposes of conservation, education, sustainable use, commercial use and leisure. Currently, very little is known about Swaziland’s biodiversity. Species lists (and even distribution maps) exist for some groups of animals and plants, but large gaps remain in our knowledge. These gaps can only be filled by survey work and research. Since biological systems are prone to change, survey work should be conducted on a continuous basis. The results of these efforts may be used for conservation purposes (eg. in providing information on the distribution and abundance of an endangered species), education (eg. informing the public about Swaziland’s biodiversity), sustainable use (eg. by providing information on sustainable harvesting rates), commercial use (eg. by identifying organisms with medicinal value), and leisure (eg. by the publication of books and other articles on the natural history of Swaziland).
2. The close link between the traditional Swazi way of life and biodiversity needs to be recognised and promoted in line with conservation principles. Swazi Tradition is firmly rooted in the Swazi environment. Biodiversity plays a central role in Swazi Culture and because of this, there are many traditional laws and beliefs which prohibit non-sustainable practices. Many of these traditional beliefs have recently fallen away and/or are being ignored. The traditional beliefs that contribute to the conservation of Swaziland’s biodiversity should be recognised and re-instilled into the people of Swaziland.
3. Participation and involvement at all levels is necessary for the conservation of biodiversity in Swaziland. All stakeholders should be involved in the decision-making process in matters concerning the management and utilisation of biological resources.
4. Benefits derived from technological advances based on the use of indigenous knowledge and genetic resources should be shared equitably. Certain industries manufacture goods derived from biological resources and indigenous knowledge systems. In these situations, profits must be shared fairly between the industry manufacturing the goods and the community from which the biological resource (or indigenous knowledge) was acquired.
5. Biodiversity is best conserved in-situ (both within and outside of protected areas), but where necessary ex-situ methods should be developed to support in-situ efforts. Due to the enormous variation present in biological systems, where possible, biodiversity should be conserved in the wild (in-situ). In cases, however, where a particular component of biodiversity cannot be conserved in the wild, efforts should be made to conserve it in captivity (ex-situ).
6. Threats to biodiversity should be addressed through an appropriate multi-disciplinary forum. Biodiversity affects, and is affected by, a large cross-section of society. Cooperation between these various sectors is essential for managing the threats to biodiversity. A multi-disciplinary approach will ensure that these diverse (and often isolated) sectors are brought together.
7. Access to genetic resources rests with the State. Access to genetic resources within Swaziland should be controlled by the Government.

Goals of BSAP

The following goals address the strategies identified by COP and the Steering Committee as critical to Swaziland’s BSAP (see section 1.3 above). The first four represent core goals, while the last two are cross-cutting goals necessary to achieve the preceding goals.

Core goals:

1. A viable set of representative samples of Swaziland’s full range of natural ecosystems are conserved through a network of protected areas.
2. Biological resources of natural ecosystems outside of the protected areas network are used sustainably.
3. The genetic base of Swaziland’s crops and livestock breeds is efficiently conserved.
4. Risks associated with the use of living modified organisms (LMOs) in Swaziland are minimized.

Cross-cutting goals:

1. The institutional, policy and legal frameworks, as well as the human resources needed to implement the Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, are developed.
2. Public awareness of, and support for, biodiversity conservation in Swaziland is enhanced.

These goals, together with the associated objectives and priority actions are detailed in chapters 4 to 9, below.

1.6 Socio-economic Factors Affecting the Biodiversity of Swaziland

The implications of socio-economic factors for the Swazi environment have been thoroughly reviewed in SEAP (Government of Swaziland, 1997). Socio-economic factors pertinent to biodiversity have been summarised here. Swaziland is a member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC). The country accounts for less than a half of a per cent of the 166 million people living in the region, and it is ranked fifth in terms of gross national product (GNP) per capita. The World Bank provides basic indicators of all countries in the world and for some twelve SADC states the following indicators have been estimated (see Table 1.3).

By the standards of most of its neighbours, Swaziland has achieved a remarkable degree of economic development since gaining independence in 1968. This has occurred against a background of a rapidly rising human population. While Swaziland appears to be relatively prosperous, in the absence of major commercial mineral reserves it is dependent upon agriculture for its medium to long term growth. Most of the economic indicators for Swaziland do not show this very well. For example a typical data set for Swaziland published by the Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU) is presented in Table 1.4. The gross domestic product (GDP) is shown to have grown during the five years 1990 to 1994 with real GDP growth being the highest in 1990. This was a consequence of the substantial inward investment which took place due to economic sanctions imposed against the apartheid regime in South Africa. However, as South Africa moved towards democracy investment into Swaziland was cut back.

Further examination of Table 1.4 shows the country’s competitiveness and earning power weakened against an increased population. Apparently, agriculture’s contribution to GDP was 15% in 1992 and the share of exports in GDP was 77%. These figures understate the contribution of agriculture to the Swazi economy. For example, agriculture contributed just over 11% to GDP in 1993, compared to 42% contributed by industry, which itself is comprised predominantly of manufacturing and specifically by value-adding food industries, with sugar being the main raw commodity (Table 1.5).

Thus while agriculture in general is the cornerstone of the economy, sugar and citrus production are the real money earners. However, an important point to appreciate is that these high earning sub-sectors are dependent upon well managed and controlled land and water resources, centred on agricultural estates, located on Title Deed Land (TDL). In addition these estates only provide direct employment to a little over 20,000 people, or some 3% of the rural based population. Notwithstanding this, approximately 570,000 people are currently resigned to eking out a direct income from the traditional Swazi Nation Land (SNL) area. With population rising at an alarming rate, the pressure on the highly fragile land resource is likely to defeat attempts to maintain the status quo.

Another major draw-back to the existing structure of these export based agro-industrial activities is that they are predominantly financed by foreign capital. This means that the profits emanating from the activities are to a great extent repatriated off-shore. In consequence there is likely to be a move in the coming years to reduce this foreign control of the country’s productive base as more Swazis became involved in the high earning sectors of the economy.

Since 1990, gross domestic savings have dropped sharply, initially due to declining foreign investment and increased consumption. An increase in the size of the civil service and salary increases have contributed significantly to increased government consumption, and a consequent decline in gross domestic savings. Presently government expenditure is approximately 49% of the GDP. This is considered too high in the face of the slowdown in investment and reduced tax revenue.

Government expenditure considerably exceeds revenues. In 1992-93, there was a budget surplus of E21 million. In 1996-97, there was a deficit of E136 million, which is expected to grow to approximately E600 million within the next four years. The renegotiation of the SACU agreement within the next ten years, when Swaziland’s share of the customs revenue pool may be reduced, will put extra pressure on the budget and balance of payments positions.

Economic growth declined from an average of 4% in 1989-95 (in which the rate swung widely from 1 to 10%) to 2.7% in 1997-98, which is less than population growth rate (3.4%). This means that on the average, GDP per capita is decreasing and people are getting poorer. The 1993 Human Development Report classified 46% of the population as living in "absolute poverty".

About 25% of the population between the ages of 15 and 65 is formally employed (two thirds in the private sector and one third in the public sector). The rate of unemployment has been increasing rapidly (approximately 10% per annum), and formal employment opportunities are static or decreasing. Distribution of income, estimated at $1,100 per capita in the Poverty Assessment Report, is highly skewed, and human development is lagging behind economic growth.

Table 1.3: Basic economic and social indicators of twelve SADC countries

Source: SEAP, 1997

Table 1.4: Economic indicators for Swaziland 1990-94

Source: SEAP, 1997

Table 1.5: Origins of GDP 1993

Source: SEAP, 1997

Population growth

The real dilemma facing Swaziland at the current time is how to involve the rural poor in sustainable, productive activities which help reduce poverty, expand incomes and promote long term development against a rising population base. Under-pinning this is the need to promote actions in the Swazi Nation which emanate from an awareness of environmental sustainability, essential to maintain and improve the productivity of existing SNL and TDL areas.

Culture and traditions

In Swaziland, there exists a dualistic system of traditional and modern lifestyle which permeates all forms of economic, social and political interactions. The importance of traditional practices and customs provides cohesiveness and a strong sense of cultural identity. On the other hand, some traditional practices are not "environmentally-friendly". For example, the practice of investing in cattle results in overgrazing and consequent erosion. The traditional dispersed settlement patterns make the cost of provision of social and economic infrastructure and related services, prohibitive.

Women and the environment

In Swaziland women are responsible for approximately a third of all rural households and they are the main users of natural resources especially wood lots, grasses and wild fruits. Yet, women contribute very little towards the management of these resources.

Various community based indigenous social and religious groups have sought to improve the status of women as early as 1940. However, these efforts concentrated on addressing the special needs of women. Since 1991, both NGO and government efforts have been concentrating more on creating a gender equitable economy as a basis for national development.

The National Steering Committee of Women’s affairs (NSCOWA), now the Swaziland Committee on Gender and Women’s Affairs (SCOGWA), was launched in 1994 as the main technical coordinating body for the development of the gender programme. It has been working with the NDS Gender Sector Committee (GSC) to ensure the following:

1. integration of gender in the NDS;
2. formulation of a woman’s policy;
3. creation of an infrastructure for coordination of gender and development activities; and
4. development of a long-term implementation strategy. 

In addition a Gender Task Force has been appointed by the Prime Minister to develop a Gender Policy for the country. This task is under the Economic and Social Reform Agenda (ESRA), and scheduled to be completed by the end of 1997. In line with the African Platform for Action (APA) and the Global Platform for Action (GPA), Swaziland has identified critical areas of concern which are inter-related and collectively perpetuate the cycle of disadvantage and disparity between females and males. 

Those which have special implications for women participating in environmental management are:

1. participation in decision-making;
2. feminisation of poverty;
3. reproductive health;
4. education;
5. economic empowerment; and
6. natural resource management.

Property rights

By property rights is meant " ....all these rights, both personal and real, which confer on the holders inalienable and exclusive entitlement to them...". This means that property rights relate not only to land and houses, cars, machinery, or merchandise, but also to rental agreements, foreign currency certificates, and their free convertibility, and all sorts of credits..." (De Soto, 1990. P. 159).

One premise of this action plan is that clearly defined, enforceable and transferable property rights are fundamental to efficient market activity, and are therefore required for economic and social empowerment, and for application of the principle of free market environmentalism. Property rights can engender clarity and accountability: Mismanagement is seen as an inevitable result of the lack of such qualities. In short, if no one person is ultimately accountable for a resource, no-one is. For example, a significant proportion of environmental degradation can be seen as a process of dumping pollutants from areas where property rights are more clearly defined and enforced to those where such rights are less so (such as in public domain - air, water, communal lands, untended private lands). For reduction of poverty in both economic and environmental terms, a fundamental strategy is to deliver such property rights into the hands of as many citizens as possible.

Policy

Since Independence (1968), Swaziland has been developing National Development Plans with guiding policies and strategies for all socio-economic activities. The main national goals have been economic growth, sustainable development, self-reliance, equity and participation and social justice and stability. Late in 1996, a special incentive, the Economic and Social Recovery Agenda was developed for a two-year period. This policy document has identified the environment as one of its main areas of focus. Priority was given to the completion of the Swaziland Environment Action Plan (SEAP) and to several conservation initiatives.

Present land use

Reliable information on the present land use is a prerequisite for the planning and implementation of programmes related to land and environment. Spatial and tabular land use information is available for Swaziland with the following main categories distinguished: crop agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, extraction and collection, nature protection, settlement and industry, and land not used. Several of these land uses are found in complex patterns, such as small-scale traditional farming in close association with communal grazing. Often there is a primary and secondary use of the same land, e.g. extraction and collection takes place in savannas and woodlands where animal husbandry is the primary use. The primary use of national parks is nature protection, but recreation is an important secondary use.

Table 1.6 gives an overview of the present main land uses in Swaziland based on the inventory available at a scale of 1:250,000 (Remmelzwaal and Dlamini, 1994). These categories are the most relevant subdivisions of the major land uses mentioned above. The large-scale commercial crop agriculture can be subdivided into the following: rainfed field cropping (92.0%, mainly cotton and pineapple), irrigated field cropping (3.7%, of which 3.5% sugarcane) and irrigated tree cropping (0.3%, mainly citrus).

The above figures are gross figures. Substantial reductions have to be applied to arrive at net percentages. For instance, about one third of the area occupied by subsistence cropping is used for grass strips and infrastructure, hence the estimated net percentage is 9. Part of the extensive communal grazing area is actually not utilized for grazing because of steep slopes and dense woodlands, hence an estimated net percentage of 42.

Land tenure

Land tenure arrangement plays an extremely important role in the management of land and biodiversity. The history of land tenure arrangements in Swaziland is very complex (Funnell, 1991). There are three main categories of land tenure:

• Swazi Nation Land (SNL)
• Crown Land
• Private Freehold or title Deed Land (TDL)

There is in fact a fourth category of Concession Land, which is minor (refer to the Land Partition Act. 1907). Swazi Nation Land is held in Trust by the King for the Swazi Nation. Crown Land is land over which Government holds title. Table 1.7 gives an overview of the main tenure categories based on a national inventory (Remmelzwaal and Vilakati, 1994). Title Deed Land is subdivided into rural and urban. Swazi Nation Land is subdivided into SNL sensu stricto, comprising all the land that was SNL at Independence, and SNL purchased, comprising all freehold land purchased after Independence and returned to SNL status. There is still, however, a title on purchased SNL. The subdivision of SNL is made on the basis of the control over the land.

The results of Table 1.7 can be summarized as follows. The total of TDL amounts to about 25%, and the total of SNL to about 74%. Of the combined total of SNL approximately 75% is controlled by Chiefs, 9% by MOAC, 4% by Tibiyo, 3% by SNTC and the remaining 9% is leased.

It is to be noted that although Table 1.7 presents the best figures available, recent investigations suggest that the percentage of Crown Land may be significantly higher than the 0.4% given.

Role of biodiversity in the national economy

The full economic value of Swaziland’s biodiversity has yet to be determined. However, indications are that its value is considerable. A recent review of the non-timber forestry sub-sector in Swaziland concluded that the economic value of annual consumption of four chosen product groups (foods and drinks, household items, medicinal plants and fuelwood) is estimated at between E129 million and E514 million (Olsen, 1999). The GDP for 1999 was E7 612 million (Central Bank of Swaziland, 2000) indicating that these few biodiversity goods can contribute up to 7% of GDP. These estimates were considered an absolute minimum value of non-timber forestry products as many product groups were excluded from the analyses and valuation was done using methods assigning a low value to products (Olsen, 1999). Furthermore, it must be borne in mind that non-timber forestry products make up only a small fraction of the overall utilisation of biodiversity (excluded products include, amongst many others, grazing lands, rivers and wetlands).

Table 1.6: Main land uses in Swaziland

Source: SEAP, 1997

Table 1.7: Land Tenure Types in Swaziland

Source: SEAP, 1997

Home | National Projects | Environmental Legislation | Policies and Action Plans | Documents

This page was last updated on 11 October 2005