MADAGASCAR COUNTRY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PROMOTING GREEN, RESILIENT, AND INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis © 2022 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photo credits: Natia Tsiky; Javarman/Shutterstock.com; Nataliya Derkach/Shutterstock.com Cover design: Roots Advertising Services 2 MADAGASCAR COUNTRY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PROMOTING GREEN, RESILIENT, AND INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT Photo credit : Javarman/Shutterstock.com CONTENTS Executive Summary  10 Chapter 1. Overview and Objectives  16 Wealth Accounts for Madagascar  16 Role of Natural Resources and Environment in the Economy  19 Climate Change Challenges  20 Objectives and Scope of CEA  21 Chapter 2. Integrated Landscape Management  23 Status of Madagascar’s Landscapes  23 Integrated Landscape Management: Making the Case  26 Implementing ILM: Addressing Tenure and Governance Challenges  30 Implementing ILM: Addressing the Key Driver of Deforestation and Degradation  34 Implementing ILM: Learning from Recent Project Experiences  39 Conclusions and Summary of Recommendations  41 Chapter 3. Blue Economy  44 Madagascar’s Ocean Assets  44 Madagascar’s Oceanic Sectors  45 Potential new Oceanic Economic Sectors  50 Maximizing the Value of the Ocean Economy: a Blue Economy Approach  52 Institutional Structudre and Support for a Blue Economy Approach in Madagascar  53 Opportunities and Challenges for a Blue Economy Approach  54 Recommendations to Advance the Blue Economy Approach  55 Chapter 4. Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism  58 Madagascar’s Biodiversity: Importance and Major Threats  58 Evolution and Management of Madagascar’s Protected Area System  60 Learning from Past Experience: Challenges in Biodiversity Conservation  65 Financing of Protected Area Management  66 Tourism in Protected Areas: Challenges and Potential  67 Moving Forward  72 Conclusions  76 Chapter 5. Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges  80 Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development  81 Environmental Impact Assessment  81 Ambient Air Pollution  82 Solid Waste Management  85 Sustainable Tourism Development  87 Conclusions and Summary of Recommendations  91 Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations  95 Adopt Integrated and Participatory Landscape Management Approaches  96 Transition to a Blue Economy Approach  97 Develop the Potential of Nature-Based Tourism and Tourism in Protected Areas  98 Tackle Emerging Pollution Challenges and Strengthen Environmental Management 98 Conclusions  99 References  100 Annex 1. Integrated Landscape Management Projects  105 Annex 2. Map and List of Madagascar’s Protected Areas  107 Annex 3. Laws, Decrees, and Orders on Pollution and Solid Waste Management  110 Annex 4. Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement  113 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. Change in Total Wealth for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018  17 Table 1.2. Change in Total Wealth per Capita for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018  17 Table 2.1. Summary of Recommendations  42 Table 3.1. Distribution of the Benefits of Transitioning to a Blue Economy in Madagascar  53 Table 3.2. Summary Table for Recommendations  56 4 Contents Table 4.1. Terrestrial Protected Areas and Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar and Peer Countries  63 Table 4.2. Summary Table of Recommendations  77 Table 5.1. Waste generation rates for Madagascar and peer countries adjusted to 2016  85 Table 5.2. Waste Estimation in Madagascar (in metric tons)  86 Table 5.3. Recommendations for Environmental Impact Assessment  92 Table 5.4. Recommendations for Ambient Air Pollution  93 Table 5.5. Recommendations for Solid Waste Management  93 Table 5.6. Recommendations for Sustainable Tourism  94 Table A2.1. Number and Area of Protected Areas in Madagascar  108 Table A2.2. Madagascar and IUCN Protected Area Categories, Objectives and Resource Use  108 Table A2.3. Revenues from Tourist Fees to Protected Areas  109 Table A4.1. Weighted Matrix for Factors Related to Loss in Hydropower Production  119 Table A4.2. Sediment Trapping Efficiency for Dams in Madagascar  120 Table A4.3. Relevant Citations and Methodology  121 Table A4.4. Biophysical Table for Sediment Delivery Ratio  126 Table A4.5. Biophysical Table for Sediment Delivery Ratio, with ILM Implemented  126 Table A4.6. Biophysical Table for Seasonal Water Yield Model  127 LIST OF FIGURES Figure ES.1. Total Wealth per Capita Trends in Madagascar and Peer Countries from 1995 to 2018 11 Figure ES.2. Change in Natural Capital Wealth per Capita for Madagascar between 1995 and 2018 11 Figure ES.3. Land Degradation Trends in Madagascar 1990 – 2020 12 Figure ES.4. Madagascar Overall Capture Fisheries, Marine Fisheries, and Aquaculture Production 14 Figure 1.1. Total Wealth per Capita Trends in Madagascar and Peer Countries from 1995 to 2018  18 Figure 1.2. Change in Natural Capital Wealth per Capita for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018  18 Figure 2.1. Forest Cover Change Between 2000 and 2020 in Madagascar  24 Figure 2.2. Land Degradation Trends in Madagascar 1990 – 2020  25  hanges in Land Productivity and Population Growth by Regions (based on analysis Figure 2.3. C of annual net primary productivity, NPP)  26  rend of Fodder Productivity in Grazing Areas over the 30-year Period (based on analysis Figure 2.4. T of annual net primary productivity, NPP)  27  and Degradation Impacts on Water Yield and Sedimentation for Major Irrigation and Figure 2.5. L Hydropower Dams  27  and degradation trends (center), and examples of priority land areas where Integrated Land Management Figure 2.6. L (ILM) can enhance baseflow and reduce soil erosion in highly degraded lands (left) and protected areas (upper right) and improve the lifespan of reservoirs (lower right).  28  otential Sediment Reduction to the Andekaleka Hydropower Dam from Implementing Figure 2.7. P Improved Land Management Practices, Primarily in Croplands and Grazing Lands  29  rimary Cooking Fuels in Madagascar (nationwide, urban, rural)  Figure 2.8. P 35  adagascar Overall Capture Fisheries, Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture Figure 3.1. M Production (tons) from 1950 to 2020  46 Figure 3.2. International Tourist Arrivals and Revenue in Countries Bordering the Mozambique Channel  49 Figure 3.3. Trend of Tourist Arrivals in Madagascar from 2015 to 2020  49 Figure 4.1. Terrestrial and Marine Protected Area Percentages Per Country  62  op 10 Risks Contributing to Total Number of DALYs in 2019 and Percent Change Figure 5.1. T (2009 – 2019, all ages combined)  82 Figure 5.2. Average Annual Populated-Weighted Concentration of Ambient PM2.5  83 Figure A1.1. Location of the Five PADAP Landscapes  106 Figure A2.1. Map of Madagascar’s Protected Areas  107 Figure A4.1. Madagascar Land Degradation Index based on Historical Trends from 1992 to 2020  115 LIST OF BOXES Box 1.1. Integration of the Focus Areas of the Madagascar CEA with the Key Pillars of the PEM 2023  22 Box 2.1. Status of Decentralization in the Government of Madagascar  33 Box 2.2. Increasing Uptake of Ethanol  37 Box 2.3. Stimulating Smallholder Cultivation for Woodfuel: Learning from Success in Madagascar  38 Box 4.1. The Protected Area Code (Codes des Aires Protégées, COAP) 2015  63 Box 5.1. Air Pollution Trends in Antananarivo  84 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The World Bank Country Environmental Assessment (CEA) for Madagascar was led by Urvashi Narain (Lead Economist, SAEE3) and Erik Reed (Natural Resource Management Specialist, SAEE3). Key members of the task team, in alphabetical order, were Carolina Giovanelli (Operations Analyst, SAEE3), Julien Million (Sr. Natural Resource Management Specialist, SAEE3), Laza Rakotondrasoa, Natural Resource Management Consultant, SAEE3), Min Ji Sohn (Environmental Analyst, SAEE3). Lead consultancy contributions were made by Marjory-Anne Bromhead and Benjamin Garnaud and further contributions were made by Evariste Rutebuka, Adrian Vogl, Harifidy Ratsimba, Jaqueline Alder, Amy Chamberlain, and BRL Ingénierie. The report was reviewed by Nigel Ross Hughes (Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist, SAEE2), Andre Aquino (Lead Environmental Specialist, SEADR), Giovanni Ruta (Lead Environmental Economist, SEAE1), and Natsuko Toba (Economist, CERCD). Special thanks to Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough (Country Director, AECS2), Africa Olojoba (Practice Manager, SAEE3), Marie-Chantal Uwanyiligira (Country Manager, AEMMG). Valuable contributions were also made by World Bank colleagues, in alphabetical order, including Mampionona Amboarasoa (Agriculture Economist, SAEA2), Raymond Bourdeaux (Manger, Operations AECS2), Stephen D’Alessandro (Sr. Agriculture Specialist, SAEA2), Prisca Mamitiana (Private Sector Development Specialist, EAEF2), Michel Matera (Sr. Disaster Risk Management Specialist, SAEU2), Alisha Pinto (Clean Energy Consultant, IEEES), Cristian Quijada Torres (Sr. Private Sector Specialist, EAEF2), Jingyi Wu (Energy Consultant, IEEES), Yabei Zhang (Sr. Energy Specialist, IEEES). Diana Styvanley (External Affairs Officer, ECRAE) provided communications support for the CEA, and Andrianina Rafamatanantsoa (Sr. Program Assistant, SAEE3) and Diane Ratiarisoa (Team Assistant, AEMMG) provided invaluable administrative support for the team. Contributions to the CEA were supported in part by funds from PROBLUE, PROGREEN and the Climate Support Facility. The report was edited by Claire Elizabeth Baumann and Zoe Ann and was designed by Roots Advertising. 6 ACRONYM ADES Association pour le Développement de l’Energie Solaire Suisse AFARB Action en Faveur de l’Arbre AFD Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency) AfDB African Development Bank ANGAP Association National pour la Gestion des Aires Protégées (National Protected Areas Management Association) BE Blue Economy CASEF Projet de Croissance Agricole et de Sécurisation Foncière (Madagascar Agriculture Rural Growth and Land Management Project) CEA Country Environmental Analysis CLP Comité Local du Parc (Local Park Committee) CMCS Centre Malgache de la Canne et du Sucre (Malagasy Sugarcane Center) CNEB Comité National de l’Economie Bleue (National Committee of the Blue Economy) COAP Code sur les Aires Protégées (Protected Areas Code) COBA Communauté de Base (Community Based Organizations) COMATSA Corridor Marojejy-Anjanaharibe-Sud-Tsaratanana (Marojejy-Tsaratanana-Anjanaharibe Corridor) COSAP Comité d’Orientation et de Soutien à l’Aire Protégée (Protected Area Orientation and Support Committee) COVID-19 Coronavirus-19 CTDs Collectivités Territoriales Décentralisées (Decentralized Territorial Units) CT-PNEC Cellule Technique du Programme National d’Ethanol Combustible (Secretariat of the Fuel Ethanol Program Technical Unit) DWT Deadweight tonnage EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EGEDEN Etablissement de Gestion des Déchets de Nosy-Be (Nosy-Be Waste Managemenet Facility) ERS Electronic Reporting Systems ESIA Environmental and social impact assessment ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program FAPBM Fondation pour les Aires Protégées et la Biodiversité de Madagascar (Madagascar Biodiversity Trust Fund) FEE Foundation for Environmental Education FILDD Fond d’Investissement pour le Développement Durable (local investment fund for sustainable development) FVP Floating Photovoltaic Power GCET Global Code of Ethics for Tourism GCF Gestion Contractualisée des Forêts (Contractualized Forest Management) GDP Gross domestic product GELOSE Gestion Locale Sécurisée (Secure Local Management) 7 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis GHG Greenhouse Gas GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (German Society for International Coorperation) GRID Green, Resilient, and Inclusive Development GSTC Global Sustainable Tourism Council GWH Gigawatt hours HAP Household Air Pollution ICBG International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups ICS Improved Cookstoves IDDRI Institut du Développement Durable et des Relations Internationales (Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations) ILM Integrated Land Management ISO International Organization for Standardization IUU illegal, unreported and unregulated LMMA Locally Managed Marine Areas LOFM Laboratoire d’observation de la Foret à Madagascar (Forest Observation Laboratory in Madagascar) LPG Liquefied petroleum gas MAL Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage (Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock) MATSF Ministre de l’Aménagement du Territoire et des Services Fonciers (Ministry of Land Planning) MECIE Mise en compatibilité des investissements avec l’environnement (Making investments compatible with the environment) MEDD Ministère de l’Environnement et de Développement Durable (Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development) MICC Ministère de l’Industrialisation, du Commerce et de la Consommation (Ministry of Industrialization, Trade and Consumer Affairs) MID Ministère de l’Intérieur et de la Décentralisation (Ministry of Interior and Decentralization) MNP Madagascar National Parks MSP Marine Spatial Plans MTF Multi-Tier Framework MTPLM Ministry of Territorial Planning and Land Management MWSH Ministry of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene NDC Nationally Determined Contribution NEAP National Environmental Action Plan NFD National Forest Domain NGO Non-Governmental Organization NMC Northern Mozambique Channel 8 Acronym NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation NPP Net primary productivity NVDI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index OLEP Organe de Lutte contre les Évènements de Pollution (Organ for the Control of Pollution Events) ONE Office National pour l’Environnement (National Office of the Environment) ONTM Office National du Tourisme de Madagascar (National Tourism Office) OTEC Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion PADAP Projet d’Appui à une Agriculture Durable par une Approche Paysage (Sustainable Landscape Management Project) PAGS Plan d’Aménagement et de Gestion Simplifié (Simplified Planning and Management Schemes) PEM Plan Emergence de Madagascar PES Payments for Ecosystem Services PIC1 first Integrated Growth Poles project PM Particulate Matters PPNT Propriétés Foncières Privées non Titrées (Untitled private property) PRCPB Projet de Résilience Climatique pour la Préservation de la Biodiversité (Climate Resilience for Biodiversity Preservation Project) REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation RFR Réserves Foncières pour le Reboisement (Land Forest Reserve Strategy) SAC Schéma d’Aménagement Communal (Municipal Development Plan) SAIC Schéma d’Aménagement InterCommunal (Intermunicipal Development Plan) SCD Systemic Country Diagnostic SESA Strategic Environment and Social Impact Assessment SLMP Sustainable Land Management Plans SMA Autonomous Maintenance Service of the City of Antananarivo SOP Series of Projects SWIOFish2 Second South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Governance and Shared Growth Project SWM Solid waste management UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VOI Vondron’Olona Ifotony (grassroot community) WDPA World Database on Protected Areas WTTC World Travel and Tourism Council WWF World Wide Fund for Nature ZODAFARB Zone Délimitées pour l’Action en Faveur de l’Arbre (Area of Action for the Protection of Trees) 9 Photo credit : Mamy Razafindrakoto EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Madagascar remains one of the poorest countries in sustainable landscape management, the Blue Economy, the world. The country has endured stubbornly high and nature-based tourism. Additionally, the CEA poverty rates and limited economic growth for decades. highlights the persistent and emerging environmental Madagascar sustained modest Gross Domestic challenges confronting the country, from air pollution to Product (GDP) growth between 2013 and 2019, but waste management, and the need to manage these to by 2020, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, ensure sustainable development. the country’s export revenue and private investment plummeted, triggering a GDP contraction of 7.2 percent. That economic deterioration resulted in an all-time high DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES, poverty rate of 80.7 percent in 2021. NATURAL ASSETS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION While the island nation struggles with economic Between 1995 and 2018, Madagascar was one poverty, Madagascar is rich in natural resources. With dense forests surrounded by almost 5,000 km of of only 22 out of 146 countries where wealth per coastline, multiple economic sectors have the potential capita decreased. Total wealth, defined as the sum to grow and contribute to poverty reduction. Tapping of natural, produced, and human capital along with into and investing in the development of Madagascar’s net foreign assets, increased by 91 percent between natural resources offers the country a path toward 1995 and 2018 in the country. At the same time, a 94 sustainable economic development. To do so will percent increase in population triggered a two percent require careful management to ensure these resources decrease in total wealth per capita, the measure of the are not degraded or destroyed in the process. sustainability of growth. Among its five peer nations – Bangladesh, Cambodia, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda The Country Environmental Analysis (CEA) report – Madagascar’s total wealth per capita dropped from assesses three areas that are key to promoting Green, the second highest in 1995 to the lowest in 2018 Resilient, and Inclusive Development in Madagascar: (Figure ES.1). 10 Executive Summary Figure ES.1. Total Wealth per Capita Trends in Madagascar and Peer Countries from 1995 to 2018 Total wealth (constant 2018 US$), per capita 20 k 15 k 10 k 5k 0 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Bangladesh Cambodia Madagascar Rwanda Tanzania Uganda Source: The Changing Wealth of Nations, 2021. Managing Assets for the Future, Washington D.C.: World Bank. This drop was largely due to a decline in natural assets include varied ecosystems, unique biodiversity, capital wealth per capita. Between 1995 and 2018, forests, fisheries, and agricultural lands. Agriculture, produced capital per capita remained mostly production forestry, and fisheries are dominant constant, and human capital per capita increased. economic sectors, accounting for approximately 25 Meanwhile, Madagascar’s renewable natural capital percent of GDP and 75 percent of employment. But per capita (the sum of forest lands, agricultural lands, these sectors have had minimal growth in productivity, pasture lands, terrestrial protected areas, mangroves, due to limited access to the technology and and fisheries) dropped in value by 31 percent infrastructure necessary for growth. Without improved (Figure ES.2). management and leveraging of Madagascar’s natural wealth, it will be harder for the country to unlock the Despite its abundance, Madagascar’s natural capital green, resilient, and inclusive development necessary remains undervalued and underdeveloped, limiting to alleviate poverty and promote social and economic its contribution to the country’s development. These growth. Figure ES.2. Change in Natural Capital Wealth per Capita for Madagascar between 1995 and 2018 Natural Capital Per Capita - Madagascar 4,000 Forests, non timber 3,500 Constant 2018 US$ per capita Forests, Timber 3,000 Protected areas 2,500 Mangroves 2,000 Fisheries 1,500 Cropland 1,000 Pastureland 500 Fossil fuel energy 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 Minerals Source: World Bank. 2021. Changing Wealth of Nations: Managing Assets for the Future. 11 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Madagascar’s varied natural assets provide vital Figure ES.3. Land Degradation Trends in Madagascar services to households and sectors across the country. 1990 – 2020 Healthy landscapes provide key watershed protection Regions functions, sustaining and regulating water flows for Land Degradation Index irrigation, electricity generation, and water supply, Categories and limiting downstream flooding. The coastline and Very degrading marine ecosystems offer significant potential for Blue Moderately degrading Economy sectors such as fisheries, aquaculture, and Less degrading shipping. And the country’s rich biodiversity, of which Less improving an estimated 80% can only be found on the island, Moderately improving represents an opportunity for growing nature-based Highly improving tourism offerings. No change Despite the critical services its environment provides, widespread degradation is imposing significant costs on people and the economy. From deforestation to overfishing, the mismanagement and degradation of Madagascar’s natural assets are taking an environmental, social, and economic toll. Additionally, the country faces emerging environmental challenges, such as insufficient solid waste management infrastructure. To advance sustainable, lasting economic growth, these issues must be addressed through careful management. MAINSTREAMING LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0 100 200 km Madagascar’s landscapes have been uniquely impacted Source: World Bank Team Estimation. by land degradation. Degradation has been particularly severe in the western and southwestern regions, but landscapes across the country have been affected. Reliance on biomass is another leading driver of For example, the country’s forests have been greatly deforestation. The high dependence of much of diminished. Accounting for an estimated 29 percent the population on fuelwood for cooking causes of land area in 2000, Madagascar’s forests now cover degradation, and has severe health and productivity only 21 percent due to deforestation for grazing and impacts, particularly on women and children. Air agricultural lands, which contribute to some of the pollution– largely indoor– is the third largest risk factor highest rates of erosion and downstream flooding in for death and disability in Madagascar, causing nearly the world (Figure ES.3). 17,000 deaths and 850,000 days lost to illness annually. Despite Madagascar’s natural abundance of water, land degradation has caused declines in water yield since The economic cost of land degradation since 2000 1990. While a decrease in annual rainfall has been a is estimated at over US$6.7 billion, amounting to key contributing factor in the over 65,000 million m3 1.78 percent of GDP per year. This is a conservative decline, changes in land use and declining vegetation estimate, only considering lost yields of main crops cover have also reduced landscapes’ ability to capture due to erosion, lost energy production due to declining and store rainfall, increasing runoff and the potential water availability for hydropower, potential cost of for flooding. Moreover, sediment loads from erosion dredging reservoirs, and the opportunity cost of have greatly reduced the usable storage and capacity unrealized carbon credits on the international market.1 of dams across the country to generate electricity or Likewise, losses in crop production due to erosion and deliver water for irrigated agriculture. land degradation are estimated at US$4.1 billion, with 1 This is a partial estimate as it leaves aside sectors that are also affected by the depletion of natural capital, for example tourism, and some crops due to data limitations. 12 Executive Summary a yearly average of US$141.4 million, equivalent to five FULLY REALIZING THE POTENTIAL OF percent of agricultural GDP. The economic impact is THE BLUE ECONOMY mirrored by significant social consequences as well, with threats to food security, biofuel availability, and Madagascar has the longest coastline in Africa (5,600 loss of income. km) and the fourth largest Exclusive Economic Zone in the world (over 1.22 million square kilometers), an area nearly double its landmass. Uniquely positioned with Integrated landscape management can help reverse the open Indian Ocean on one side and the protected land degradation, restore ecosystem services, and waters of the Mozambique Channel on the other allows contribute to economic development. To leverage land for a rich diversity of marine habitats, ecosystems, and and water resources for economic growth, Madagascar flora and fauna. The vast coastline and biodiverse- needs to: marine ecosystems– including over 250,000 hectares of mangroves– support both large-scale and local • Mainstream landscape approaches into larger marine sectors. scale investments. These include investments in water resource development for hydropower However, these ecosystems and the services they and irrigation. Maintenance of upstream provide are at risk, which in turn threatens the watershed ecosystem functions, such as water development of the industries that depend on them. Pollution, overexploitation, and anthropogenic flow regulation and sediment retention, is key pressures have started to degrade these natural to their sustainability. Mainstreaming needs resources, effects that are further exacerbated by the to be complemented with adapting landscape impacts of climate change: increased sea-surface approaches to specific contexts, including through temperatures, frequency and intensity of extreme simplified project design, while exploring the climatic events, and coastal erosion. scope for greater use of environmental finance instruments such as REDD+ and payments for Madagascar has yet to fully tap into the potential ecosystem services to finance these investments. contributions of its marine natural capital to economic development. The Blue Economy is just starting to • Promote land tenure security and improve the develop and is primarily focused on marine-related regulatory framework for community-based natural exports and fisheries. The latter is particularly robust, resource management. Despite efforts to modernize with an annual production capacity of US$750 million, equivalent to more than seven percent of the national and decentralize land administration, less than GDP. Unfortunately, the country’s marine fishery 8,000 formal land titles are issued annually, and resources are poised to be fully overexploited in most around 10 million plots are unregistered. The coastal areas, with evidence of overfishing in all legislation regulating specific statutes on new segments of the sector. categories of forest lands and community rights to these lands has yet to be fully detailed. Land Madagascar needs to build on its ongoing efforts to access and property rights incentives related to transition to a Blue Economy, leveraging its blue assets for economic development. Since 2015, efforts have reforestation need to be effectively enforced, and been made to create the necessary framework for there must be greater consistency between the this transition, including the creation of a Ministry of legislation for community-based natural resource Fisheries and the Blue Economy in 2021. In addition to management, the forest law, and the land tenure these efforts, there is a need to: law to promote effective management. • Finalize, adopt, and implement a Blue Economy • Invest in productive forestry and upscale support strategy. An effective strategy provides the for transition to more energy-efficient and cleaner framework to enhance the sustainability of oceanic cooking. To reduce deforestation, Madagascar sector development through identifying best must facilitate the transition to clean, energy- practices, prioritizing key sectors to integrate, and determining the appropriate locations for the efficient cooking. These efforts will also improve development of future industries. This will require the health of women and children. Investments a consultative and collaborative process and must be made in community woodlots, trees on will allow for the country’s vision for integrated agricultural land, and private sector plantations development of the maritime and coastal sectors to increase the supply of sustainably sourced to be realized while ensuring the ecosystems that woodfuel and charcoal for construction. support them are preserved. 13 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Madagascar Overall Capture Fisheries, Marine Fisheries, and Aquaculture Production (tons) from 1950 Figure ES.4.  to 2020 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Aquaculture production Capture fisheries Marine fisheries Source: FAO, 2022. • Formulate and implement Marine Spatial Plans (MSP) to guide the development of the Blue Economy BIODIVERSITY AND NATURE-BASED and private sector investments. An overarching TOURISM: AN UNTAPPED ASSET framework should be prepared for the development Madagascar’s biodiversity, some of the most robust on of subnational MSPs at the regional level. MSPs the planet, is an asset that offers major contributions will provide a mechanism to make early policy to domestic economic growth from tourism. The decisions on the use of the marine space for tourism industry leverages the country’s astounding activities of the blue sectors, avoiding conflicts biodiversity, landscapes, and unique culture to provide by looking at the necessary trade-offs ahead of jobs for communities living near protected areas, both time. They will also provide recommendations for directly (e.g., guides, drivers, and hotel and restaurant revisions to key marine sector policies for better staff) or indirectly (e.g., food and services to the alignment and implementation of Madagascar’s hotels and restaurants). Tourism is also a significant Blue Economy strategy. contributor to local, regional, and national value • Improve investment climates for emerging industries chains (e.g., hospitality, travel agencies, handicraft, and incentivize increases in compliance and mitigation and agriculture), as well as to park fees, tax revenues, of impacts on marine ecosystems. The regulatory foreign currency, and foreign direct investment. framework for investment in the sectors of the Blue Economy, including emerging ones, should Tourism is a growing sector in the country, with be reviewed. This will help identify how best to lift marine tourism appearing to be increasingly attractive barriers and support improved compliance within key to visitors. When compared to neighboring countries sectors, with measures for mitigating impacts on the in the region, the potential for tourism growth is environment. Capacity should also be built across significant in Madagascar, largely due to the high the legal system to facilitate investments and better interest in coastal tourism. In 2019, Madagascar’s enforce compliance within Blue Economy sectors at tourism sector, the majority of which is nature-based, national and subnational levels. contributed 12.7 percent2 of GDP and 9.9 percent of 2 WTTC: Madagascar: Research Highlights 2021. Available at: https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact/moduleId/704/itemId/153/controller/ DownloadRequest/action/QuickDownload. Updated from IFC: Creating Markets in Madagascar: Private Sector Diagnostic, 2021. Available at: https:// wbgeconsult2.worldbank.org/wbgect/download?uuid=31e955b4-7aae-4b2c-9685-c3bdb613e044 14 Executive Summary employment. As it did around the globe, tourism in • Re-assess benefit-sharing arrangements with Madagascar declined sharply due to COVID-19, but it local communities. The present system lacks has the potential to play a major role in post-pandemic transparency and systematic methods for sharing recovery. The difficulty will be in ensuring that revenue with local communities. Benefit-sharing tourism in the country is inclusive and sustainable, can include fees and other charges, indirect contributing to economic growth while conserving benefits from employment generation, and public- biodiversity. private partnerships connected with tourism in protected areas. The assessment must balance the modest resources available for operations Protected areas, such as nature preserves and national and management with increased support for local parks, can offer solutions to biodiversity loss and land communities. degradation as well as successful tourist attractions. While the number of protected areas in Madagascar has increased significantly since the first national EMERGING CHALLENGES parks were created in 1927, many challenges to Production of waste is increasing, which needs developing nature-based tourism and conservation to be managed through investments in collection in tandem remain. The following actions can address and processing infrastructure. Much of the waste the constraints facing the development of sustainable produced is disposed of in open dumps that, if near nature-based tourism: water sources, can leach into the ocean. In addition • Increase financing for protected area management to pollution, open dumping contributes to health risks and operations. Current funding levels, between from pests and fumes from uncontrolled burning. US$6 - $8 million annually for the parks managed When solid waste accumulates in waterways it can also exacerbate the severity of flooding by blocking by Madagascar National Parks, are about a third drainage channels. of those generally considered necessary for a protected area system of Madagascar’s size. There is a strong case for increasing the endowment of Environmental impact assessment and management the Foundation for Protected Areas and Biodiversity plans must support resilient, green, and inclusive of Madagascar trust fund. NGOs and development development to avoid land degradation and health partners’ levels of funding, currently at about US$2 issues. These assessments need to be made million, could also be increased, both through more comprehensive and routine in connection to development plans at all public and private levels. development projects and expanded operations support, as could direct government funding. As nature-based tourism is developed, sustainability • Include a broader range of skill development must be considered at every level. Tourism can for park management. Traditionally focused create negative environmental impacts, such as the on protection and conservation, education generation of greenhouse gasses and pollution through and training programs should be reassessed transportation services, excessive water use by hotels, to increase opportunities in areas such as and large-scale solid waste generation. Planning and tourism management, interpretation, investment management of sustainability by individual tourism promotion, marketing, and administration. organizations as well as the larger sector will be Management plans for protected areas should critical. integrate tourism planning and action and could identify the required investments to meet and CONCLUSION maintain minimum standards. Green, inclusive, and resilient economic growth in • Finalize the legal framework for tourist concessions Madagascar cannot be achieved without improved in protected areas. The legal framework for management of Madagascar’s natural capital. concessions inside protected areas remains As discussed in this CEA, integrated landscape incomplete and lacks transparency. Tourism management, better leveraging and protection of operations and activities inside protected areas Blue Economy resources, mindful expansions of that could potentially contribute directly to nature-based tourism, and management of emerging conservation objectives are limited. The finalization environmental challenges will play a key role in the of the framework is expected to unlock private push toward sustainable development in tandem with investment in protected areas. restoring and protecting Madagascar’s natural assets. 15 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 1 OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES Photo credit : Michail_Vorobyev/Shutterstock.com 1. Madagascar experienced modest, positive the average for sub-Saharan Africa, underlying the growth in GDP from 2013 until the COVID-19 importance of effective policies for broad based pandemic, but poverty remains stubbornly high. economic recovery and growth. Cross-cutting Real annual GDP growth averaged 3.5 percent issues of low productivity growth and spatial over the 2013 to 2019 period, driven by a small inequality, governance, vulnerability to shocks, number of sectors, including mining, construction, as well as the rapid growth of Antananarivo, telecommunications, and financial services. which now accounts for 50 percent of GDP, are However, Madagascar is the only country in the key development challenges. world not to have known active civil conflict where per capita GDP has declined since 1960.2 Poverty WEALTH ACCOUNTS FOR and malnutrition are widespread. Moreover, the MADAGASCAR COVID-19 pandemic triggered a collapse in export revenues and private investment resulting in a 2. While there are a number of factors that explain contraction of GDP by 7.2 percent and of income the persistence and increase in poverty rates, part per capita by 9.8 percent, and an increase in the of the explanation lies in how Madagascar’s total poverty rate to an all-time high of 80.7 percent in wealth has evolved over the past few decades. 2021. A drought in southern Madagascar and a Total wealth — defined as the sum of natural, series of cyclones have caused further suffering produced, and human capital and net foreign in these regions, which have higher poverty rates assets — in Madagascar increased by 91 percent than the center and north. Evidence indicates a between 1995 and 2018 (Table 1.2), driven by a stronger correlation in Madagascar between real rapid increase in human capital, the largest asset per capita GDP growth and poverty reduction than category in 2018. 2 World Bank, 2022. Madagascar Systemic Country Diagnostic (SCD) Update. 16 Overview and Objectives Table 1.1. Change in Total Wealth for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018 Millions, constant 2018 USD 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 Total wealth 115,125 117,718 143,801 183,492 202,669 219,951 Produced capital 19,272 20,157 22,745 32,189 35,640 38,366 Human capital 52,814 59,480 81,272 94,188 108,373 122,051 Natural capital - renewable 49,562 44,160 40,928 62,458 65,885 66,222 Natural capital - nonrenewable 3 1 1 307 538 438 Net foreign assets -6,525 -6,079 -1,144 -5,650 -7,768 -7,126 Population (millions) 13.5 15.8 18.3 21.2 24.2 26.3 Source: World Bank, 2021. Changing Wealth of Nations: Managing Assets for the Future. 3. However, because Madagascar’s population grew per capita. Moreover, among the six countries, by 94 percent during the same period, total wealth Madagascar ranked second highest in terms of per capita, the measure of sustainability of growth, total wealth per capita in 1995, but the lowest in decreased by 2 percent (Table 1.3). Produced 2018 (Figure 1.1). capital per capita remained mostly constant and human capital per capita increased over the period 5. In Madagascar, while subsoil assets per capita of 1995 to 2018, and therefore the decrease in total increased marginally, renewable natural capital wealth per capita was driven by a decline in natural per capita (sum of forest lands, agricultural capital wealth per capita, with natural capital lands, pasture lands, terrestrial protected areas, defined as the sum of renewable natural capital mangroves, and fisheries) showed a drop of 31 and subsoil assets. percent in value from 1995 to 2020. The country is rich in natural capital with the longest coastline 4. The decline in total wealth per capita makes of any African country, substantial fisheries, Madagascar one of only 22 countries out of a varied and beautiful coastal ecosystems, unique total of 146 countries for whom wealth per capita biodiversity and forests, ample agricultural decreased between 1995 and 2018. Within the land, micro-climates suitable for a range of high same period, Madagascar’s peer group of countries value crops, and sufficient water resources - Bangladesh, Cambodia, Rwanda, Tanzania, overall. However, this vast natural capital is not and Uganda - experienced an increase in total highly productive. Declines in the value of forest wealth per capita, with Bangladesh, Cambodia, ecosystem services3-, croplands-, pasturelands- and Rwanda more than doubling their wealth and fisheries-wealth per capita have in fact driven Table 1.2. Change in Total Wealth per Capital for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018 Per Capita, constant 2018 USD 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 Total wealth 8,543 7,466 7,842 8,675 8,363 8,375 Produced capital 1,430 1,278 1,240 1,522 1,471 1,461 Human capital 3,919 3,772 4,432 4,453 4,472 4,647 Natural capital - renewable 3,678 2,801 2,232 2,953 2,719 2,522 Natural capital - nonrenewable 0 0 0 15 22 17 Net foreign assets -484 -386 -62 -267 -321 -271 Source: World Bank, 2021. Changing Wealth of Nations: Managing Assets for the Future. 17 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Figure 1.1. Total Wealth per Capita Trends in Madagascar and Peer Countries from 1995 to 2018 Total wealth (constant 2018 US$), per capita 20 k 15 k 10 k 5k 0 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Bangladsh Cambodia Madagascar Rwanda Tanzania Uganda Source: The Changing Wealth of Nations, 2021. Managing Assets for the Future, Washington D.C.: World Bank. a decline in natural capital wealth (Figure 1.2). fisheries, while catch increased during the period While per hectare value of forest ecosystem studied, rents showed a consistent decline. Low services increased between 1995 and 2018, productivity of the country’s natural asset base, total forest area declined, and combined with therefore, in large part drove the decline in total high population growth this led to a decrease in wealth per capita, contributing to the lack of forest ecosystem services wealth per capita. For economic growth and poverty reduction. Figure 1.2. Change in Natural Capital Wealth per Capita for Madagascar Between 1995 and 2018 Natural Capital Per Capita - Madagascar 4,000 3,500 Constant 2018 US$ per capita 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 Forests, Timber Forests, non timber Protected areas Mangroves Fisheries Cropland Pastureland Fossil fuel energy Minerals Source: World Bank. 2021. Changing Wealth of Nations: Managing Assets for the Future. 3 Three ecosystem services are included in Changing Wealth of Nations: recreation, non-wood forest products, and water services. 18 Overview and Objectives ROLE OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND agricultural lands contribute to erosion rates ENVIRONMENT IN THE ECONOMY that are among the highest in the world, and to downstream flooding. The Ministry of Environment 6. Agriculture, production forestry and fisheries are and Sustainable Development has oversight dominant economic sectors but face constraints for forestry, while Madagascar National Parks, to productivity growth. These sectors account for which manages protected areas, also reports to approximately 25 percent of GDP and 75 percent the Ministry. In addition to the aforementioned of employment. However, there has been little ministries, the Ministries of Land Development and productivity growth in these sectors between Land Administration and the Ministry of Interior 2013 and 2019. About 1.1 million hectares in the and Decentralization, also play important roles in country are equipped for irrigation infrastructure,4 land management. but much agricultural production still takes place at a semi-subsistence level with limited access 8. Madagascar has substantial water resources, but to inputs and “slash and burn” technologies spatial distribution is uneven. Annual average which contribute to deforestation and soil rainfall is 1500 mm per year, and total annual erosion. Moreover, the sector is vulnerable to renewable water resources are estimated at drought, cyclones, and locust infestations. There 13,000 m3 per capita.8 11 percent is withdrawn is potential for increasing productivity and for for economic use, mostly for irrigation, which value chain creation, but growth in agri-business accounts for 96 percent of water withdrawals. is also severely constrained by inadequate road However, the south is relatively water stressed infrastructure and connectivity, poor access to and drought prone and lacks rivers with perennial electricity, and a difficult business environment.5 flows, while the center and north are subject to Nonetheless, Madagascar has a long-established periods of extreme rainfall, flooding, and gully export industry in selected high value agricultural erosion. Current agriculture and rice cultivation products, which include vanilla (approximately 26 management methods have contributed to percent of export value), essential oils and cloves deteriorating water quality and loss of wetlands. (7 percent) and seafood products (5 percent).6 The Madagascar has substantial hydro-electric power Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock has overall generation potential but progress with ongoing oversight for this sector. investments is slow, partly for governance related reasons, including delays in finalizing contracts.9 7. Madagascar’s natural forests, comprising about The Ministry of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene 21 percent of land area, provide key ecosystem includes the Directorates for Integration of the services but are under threat. Madagascar’s Environment and Water Resource Management forests play a key role in watershed protection and and is in charge of the country’s water resources. in nature and biodiversity conservation, provide timber and non-timber forest products, and are the 9. With 5,600 kms of coast Madagascar has principal source of energy for cooking. Protected substantial fisheries resources and varied and areas form 12 percent of land area; Madagascar beautiful coastlines. Its Exclusive Economic harbors unique biodiversity both inside and outside Zone (EEZ) extends to more than 1 million km2; in protected areas but especially within forests. It is 2018 fisheries accounted for almost 7 percent of estimated that 90 percent of plants and 85 percent GDP10 and supported the livelihoods of 1.5 million of animal species are endemic.7 Deforestation people. However, overfishing, harmful fishing and related degradation of forest, grazing, and practices, and destruction of marine habitat have 4 World Development Indicators. Available at: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators 5 World Bank, 2022. Madagascar Systemic Country Diagnostic (SCD) Update. 6 Lloyds Bank, 2021. Foreign Trade Figures in Madagascar. Available at: https://www.lloydsbanktrade.com/en/market-potential/madagascar/trade-profile 7 Duke Lumur Center. Madagascar: A Biodiversity Hotspot. Available at: https://lemur.duke.edu/8-20-ll1/#:~:text=Because%20Madagascar%20has%20 been%20an,85%25%20of%20animals%20are%20endemic 8 USAID, 2021. Madagascar Water Resources Profile Overview. Available at: https://winrock.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Madagascar_Country_ Profile-Final.pdf 9 U.S. Department of State, 2021. 2021 Investment Climate Statements: Madagascar. Available at: https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-investment- climate-statements/madagascar/ World Bank, 2020. Madagascar: Balancing Conservation and Exploitation of Fisheries Resources. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/ 10  feature/2020/06/08/madagascar-balancing-conservation-and-exploitation-of-fisheries-resources#:~:text=The%20fishery%20sector%20plays%20 a,6.6%25%20to%20the%20total%20exports 19 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis played a role in the decline of fisheries. Monitoring 90 percent of households. Costs may also likely and methods for assessing sustainable yield be higher as the previous report did not account are lacking. The Ministry for Fisheries and Blue for the economic burden from time spent, largely Economy has broad oversight for the sector, but by women, in collecting fuelwood, or the costs of other government agencies and the private sector forest degradation (in addition to deforestation). also play a role. Ambient air pollution is an emerging issue as is solid waste management (SWM). Management of 10.  Tourism, a key sector of the economy, is environmental impacts of the tourism sector and dependent on Madagascar’s coastlines, the marine other development projects, such as infrastructure environment and unique terrestrial biodiversity. development, also remain relevant. Currently The sector recovered during the 2013 to 2019 environmental management responsibilities sit period. By 2019, its total (direct and indirect) within the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable contribution to GDP was estimated at 12.7 Development.13 The National Environment Office percent,11 and 9.9 percent of employment. Most (ONE) is responsible for collection and monitoring of environmental data, environmental regulations, tourists stay two weeks or more and over 60 and environmental impact assessment. percent visit at least one protected area, though the majority of visits are concentrated in only six relatively accessible parks. Poor infrastructure CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGES remains a constraint to growth. The sector was Madagascar is highly exposed to climate risks, and 12.  deeply impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic - its these are being exacerbated by climate change.14 total contribution to GDP fell to only 4.4 percent The country experiences an average of three to and 6.9 percent of employment in 2020 (WTTC, four cyclones per year, which cause widespread 2021). The Ministry of Tourism has overall coastal flooding, loss of life, and damage to oversight for the sector. infrastructure and livelihoods. Inland heavy rainfall also contributes to gully erosion, flooding in urban Madagascar has persistent and emerging 11.  areas, and loss of connectivity. Conversely, Parts environmental challenges which result in large of the country, especially in the south, are highly health impacts and imposes heavy economic vulnerable to drought, which contributes to loss and social costs on the economy. The 2013 of crops and widespread hunger and malnutrition, Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis while the west is particularly vulnerable to erosion. (CEA)12 included an estimate of the economic Coastal erosion is also ongoing. These impacts are costs of environmental degradation. These totaled expected to become more severe over the course over 9 percent equivalent of GDP annually. The of the century due to climate change. principal contributors were unsafe water supply and lack of sanitation, and indoor air pollution 13. Nevertheless, Madagascar has a small greenhouse from burning solid fuel (both of which have gas emissions footprint. Emissions were health impacts), followed by cropland and soil estimated at approximately 57 million tons of degradation, natural disasters, and deforestation. CO2e in 2011, equivalent to 2.65 tons CO2e per These costs to the economy are likely to persist as capita.15,16 Emissions are dominated by land the underlying environmental and natural resource use, land use change and forestry (57 percent) challenges persist. Fuelwood and charcoal are and agriculture (41 percent), which together still the principal source of cooking fuel for over contributed 98 percent of total GHG emissions. World Travel and Tourism Council, 2021. Madagascar: 2021 Annual Research, Key Highlights. Available at: https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact/ 11  moduleId/704/itemId/153/controller/DownloadRequest/action/QuickDownload World Bank, 2013. Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis: Taking Stock and Moving Forward. World Bank, Washington, DC. Taken from Chart 4. 12  Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33934 Republic of Madagascar, 1997. Updated in 2020. Decree No. 2020-206. Available at: https://www.environnement.mg/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ 13  ORGANIGRAMME-MEDD.pdf Climate Change Knowledge Portal. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/madagascar/ 14  vulnerability 15 Climate Watch, 2020. GHG Emissions. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Available at: climatewatchdata.org/ghg-emissions WDI has much lower emissions figures (0.14 CO2E per capita in 2018) available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?locations=MG 16  but not including LULCF or agriculture. Overall, data and monitoring systems are in their early stages of development in Madagascar. 20 Overview and Objectives 14.  Madagascar’s Nationally Determined Contribution17 13, the Malagasy government aims to ‘Preserve (NDC) submitted to the UNFCCC in September Natural Resources and the Environment’, and 2016,18 emphasized that the country’s priority is ‘Promote Blue Economy’, among other areas resilience and adaptation. Adaptation measures of focus.19 To ‘Preserve Natural Resources and include multi-hazard early warning systems, the Environment’, PEM sets out priority actions climate resilient agriculture, livestock, fisheries and including establishing green infrastructure mangrove restoration, water resource management, networks to promote resilience to risks and coastal protection, ecosystem-based adaptation, disasters, promoting reforestation actions, scaling and restoration of natural habitats. The NDC up landscape and forest restoration, coordinating stated that Madagascar intends to reduce its GHG different options for developing forest resources, emissions by 14 percent by 2030 compared to and promoting value chains from natural resources. Business as Usual, conditioned on financial support To ‘Promote Blue Economy’, priority actions include from the international community. Proposed strengthening the Fisheries Surveillance Center mitigation actions include reforestation, enhanced (Centre de Surveillance des Pêches, CSP), creating forest and grassland monitoring, climate-smart dedicated landing sites and rescue stations in rice farming techniques, increased hydropower and all selected ports, placing luminous beacons on solar energy, sustainable cook-stoves, and energy wrecks, and modernizing the port of Toamasina and efficiency. Many proposed actions contribute to rehabilitating secondary ports. both adaptation and mitigation. Policy and actions on climate change are coordinated by the National The CEA aims to deepen knowledge of natural 17.  Bureau for Climate Change. resources and environmental challenges and their development impacts, highlight opportunities for OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE CEA Green, Resilient, and Inclusive Development (GRID) with the purpose of informing government policies Madagascar faces many environmental, natural 15.  and programs, and World Bank engagements. resource management, and climate change With an emphasis on improving the productivity of risks that are impeding development and need natural capital, the CEA is structured as follows: to be addressed. Tackling the multiplicity of environment, natural resources, and climate (i) Identification of opportunities to promote change risks in the context of numerous green, resilient, and inclusive growth, with a development challenges, limited financial focus on sustainable landscape management, resources and governance issues is challenging. the Blue Economy, and nature-based tourism Yet, given the dependence of people and the (Chapters 2, 3, and 4, respectively), economy on sustainable natural resource Analysis of environment sector challenges, (ii)  management, and the costs of environmental institutionsandgovernanceframeworks(Chapter5); degradation, it is essential that these challenges and be addressed for Madagascar to achieve green, resilient and inclusive economic growth. Identification of environment-development (iii)  priorities, and actionable recommendations for the The Government of Madagascar’s strategy for 16.  country (Chapter 6). economic growth, 2019 - 2023 Plan Emergence de Madagascar (PEM), recognizes the need for The CEA does not, however, address climate 18.  sustainable management and conservation of change in depth to keep the scope manageable. natural resources. The PEM presents a longer- Many of the recommendations of the CEA will be term vision up to 2030 and comprises four pillars: relevant to resilience and mitigation issues, which good governance, human development, economic will be developed in the upcoming Country Climate development, and the environment. Under Objective and Development Report. Government of Madagascar, 2016. Available at: https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/Madagascar%20First/Madagascar%20 17  INDC%20Eng.pdf 18 The 2016 NDC is under review and an updated NDC is yet to the submitted. 19 Initiative Emergence Madagascar, 2018. Available at: http://iem-madagascar.com/ 21 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Box 1.1. Integration of the Focus Areas of the Madagascar CEA with the Key Pillars of the PEM 2023 The CEA seeks to directly address eight of the thirteen objectives highlighted in the PEM. Under the governance pillar, recommendations support increased empowerment at decentralized level; under the human development pillar, recommendations support improved health and urban development; under decent jobs and the more rapid and inclusive sustainable growth pillar, recommendations support development of the tourism industry and food self-sufficiency; and under the environment pillar, recommendations support access to clean energy and water for all, and sustainable management and conservation of natural resources. Pillar Objectives Direct Link with CEA Good Governance 1: Peace and security …. 2: Zero tolerance of corruption ….. 3:  Increased autonomy in decision-making for Yes decentralized authorities Human Development: 4: Education for all ….. “Hiadana Syo Finaritra” 5: The right to good health Yes 6: Decent jobs for all Yes 7: Housing and modern urban development Yes 8: Sport and culture as a basis for national pride ….. More Rapid, Sustainable 10: Industrialization …. and Inclusive Economic 11: Development of the tourism industry Yes Growth Yes 12: Food self-sufficiency Environment 9: Energy and water for all Yes 13:  Sustainable management and conservation of Yes natural resources 22 2 INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT Photo credit : Natia Tsiky STATUS OF MADAGASCAR’S and grazing lands. Quantifying land degradation LANDSCAPES using a composite index based on four key indicators — vegetation health (measured using Madagascar’s forest area has declined from 29 19.  the normalized difference vegetation index21: percent of land-area in 2000 to 21 percent in NVDI), land productivity (measured by net primary 2020 (Figure 2.1).20 Deforestation during this productivity22 (NPP), soil retention capacity and period was particularly acute in the southwestern dry season water flow23 — suggests that roughly regions of Menabe and Atsimo Andrefana and 35 percent of the country’s land area has been in the northwest Sofia region, where in some degrading over the last 30 years (Figure 2.2). districts nearly half of the remaining forest was Degradation has been particularly severe in the converted to cropland and/or grazing land (e.g., western region (especially Menabe and Bongolava, Belo Sur Tsiribihina, Morondava, Manja, Morombe, along with parts of Itasy, Vakinankaratra, Amoron’i Ankazoabo, and Port-Berge). Mania, and Haute Matsiatra) and southwestern region (Atsimo Andrefana, Ihorombe, Anosy, Madagascar’s landscapes have been subject to 20.  and parts of Androy). There are also hotspots of degradation for decades. There has also been land degradation in Boeny, Melaky, and Alaotra widespread degradation across principal land Mangoro. On the other hand, northern regions of uses – including forestlands, agriculture lands, Diana and Sava saw improvements in land quality. Global Forest Watch. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/MDG/?category=forest-change& 20  location=WyJjb3VudHJ5IiwiTURHIl0%3D&map=eyJjZW5 Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) quantifies vegetation by measuring the difference between near-infrared (which vegetation strongly 21  reflects) and red light (which vegetation absorbs). Overall, NDVI is a standardized way to measure healthy vegetation. High NDVI values indicate healthier vegetation. Net primary productivity is a measure of plant growth; it indicates how much carbon dioxide vegetation takes in during photosynthesis minus how much 22  carbon dioxide the plants release during respiration. The latter two were modeled using the InVEST suite of tools along with data on soils, topography, climate, and land cover and management. 23  23 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Figure 2.1. Forest Cover Change Between 2000 and 2020 in Madagascar Change in forest cover from 2000 - 2020 Madagascar Legend Forest Loss 2015 - 2019 Loss 2010 - 2015 Loss 2005 - 2010 Loss 2000 - 2005 Non forest Water Mangrove Forest gain Mangrove loss Mangrove gain Cover in 1953 Change 2000 - 2020 Source: World Bank team estimation based on data from LOFM, 2022. Land degradation also took place in protected 21.  over the last 30 years, including COMATSA Su, areas. Unique landscapes experiencing severe Mahimborondr, Bemanevika, and the Complexe des degradation included Ambararata Londa and AP Ambohimirahavavy Marivorahona. Analavelona in northern Madagascar (99 percent and 97 percent of land area degraded, The cost of land degradation over the 30-year 22.  respectively), the Alliances des Baobabs (98 period is estimated at over USD $6.7B, which percent area degraded), the Complexe Lac Forest amounts annually to a cost equivalent to 1.78 Ambondrobe (63 percent area degraded) and percent of GDP per year. This is a conservative the Complexe Zones Humides Mangoky Ihotry in estimate that only considers lost yields of main western Madagascar (49 percent area degraded). crops due to erosion, lost energy production due Some protected areas, primarily in the north, to declining water availability for hydropower, experienced an improvement in land condition the potential cost of dredging reservoirs, and the 24 Integrated Landscape Management Figure 2.2. Land Degradation Trends in Madagascar 2.3). Eighteen districts, including many in the 1990 – 2020 southwestern region and Igonko in the southeast, tripled their population in the last 20 years while Regions their NPP shows a declining trend. Some northern Land Degradation Index districts in Sava (Vohemar) and Diana (Antsiranana Categories II, I) also show declines in productivity, despite the Very degrading increasing rainfall recorded over the same time Moderately degrading period and generally increasing trends in NPP Less degrading in those regions. These declines in productivity Less improving reflect both declining crop productivity and the Moderately improving rural population’s access to biofuel and fodder Highly improving resources. Losses in crop production due to No change erosion and land degradation over the 30-year period are estimated at US$4.1B, with a yearly average of US$141.4 million equivalent to 5 percent of agricultural GDP. In regions of high erosion and agricultural importance the impact is especially important. Haute Matsiatra, for example, suffered crop yield loss due to land degradation equivalent to over US$500 million over the last 30 years. The southern regions of Atsimo Andrefana, Androy, Anosy, and Ihorombe lost 27 percent of remaining forest cover since 2000, and 54 percent of land area has been degrading since 1990. This combination of deforestation and land degradation has resulted in over US$240 million in losses to the agricultural sector in this region. The livestock sector has also been affected. While 0 100 200 km some districts, primarily in the central regions, have seen improvements in productivity in grazing areas, much of the southwest, northwest, and Source: World Bank Team Estimation. northern Diana region show a decline in grazing land productivity (Figure 2.4). opportunity cost of unrealized carbon credits on Land degradation reduced the capacity of the 24.  the international market.24 If the global social cost land to store water, leading to water scarcity. of unrealized carbon absorption is considered, the Madagascar is water abundant overall, but national cost of degradation in Madagascar is over USD annual water yield has declined from 346,000 $8.1B, equivalent to 2.15 percent of GDP per year.25 to 280,000 M m3 since 1990, mostly because of declining rainfall, but also in part because Land degradation threatens food security, and 23.  changes in land use and declining vegetation biofuel and fodder availability. Net primary cover have reduced landscapes’ ability to capture productivity (NPP), a measure of plant growth, and store rainfall, increasing storm runoff and the showed a declining trend in 43 percent of the land potential for more flooding. While the north has area. In the last two decades, 14 of 22 regions seen increasing water availability, the south and recorded an annual negative increment in NPP. southwest have seen declines of over 50 percent, Areas hardest hit in many cases corresponded to increasing water scarcity in this already drought- areas with the highest population increases (Figure prone region. This is a partial estimate as it leaves aside sectors that are also affected by the depletion of natural capital, for example tourism, and some crops due to 24  data limitations. UNCCD (2018) measured the Total Economic Value of ecosystem services, that include values that are not part of GDP estimation and found much higher 25  values for land degradation - 23% of annual GDP. UNCCD, 2018. Madagascar Country Profile. Investing in Land Degradation Neutrality: Making the Case. An Overview of Indicators and Assessments. 25 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Changes in Land Productivity and Population Growth by Regions (based on analysis of annual net primary Figure 2.3.  productivity, NPP) Historical NPP annual increment (+,-) and population change over the last 20 years 300 3.1 200 Population growth rate : 2020 and 2000 population ratio 1.5 100 Annual NPP increment (Tonnes of Carbon) 0 0.0 Atsimo Andrefana Menabe Boeny Melaky Sofia Betsiboka Haute Matsiatra Vakinankaratra Bongolava Amoronl Mania Androy Itasy Anosy Ihorombe Alaotra Mangoro Diana Atsimo Atsinanana Sava Analamanga Vatovavy Fitovinany Atsinanana Analanjirofo -100 -1.5 -200 -3.0 -300 -4.5 -400 -6.0 -500 -7.5 -600 -9.0 -700 -800 -10.5 -900 Annual Change in NPP (Tonnes of Carbon) 2020/2000 population ratio -12.0 Source: World Bank Team Estimation. Land degradation and erosion also adversely 25.  to irrigated agriculture of sedimentation of the impact reservoirs constructed for hydropower Amboromalandy dam at US$13.8 million annually, and irrigation. Sediment loads from erosion while other calculations yield an annual cost upstream of dams have reduced their usable of US$9.8 million for potential dredging costs. storage and capacity to generate electricity or Riverbank erosion also contributes to the severity deliver water for irrigated agriculture. Erosion of downstream flooding, leading to loss of homes also fills irrigation channels and reduces the and urban infrastructure. effectiveness of irrigation infrastructure. Figure 2.5 illustrates the impacts on a number of key INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE facilities: the Andekaleka dam, for example, has MANAGEMENT: MAKING THE CASE 91 MW of installed capacity, but sedimentation has increased by 61 percent while its water yield Historically siloed approaches to rural 26.  has declined by 34 percent. As a consequence, the development have had limited success. Three dam, which provides 71 percent of the generation key rural sectors – agriculture, water, and forests for the Antananarivo Interconnected Network, has – have traditionally approached challenges of suffered losses in power generation of US$109 agricultural production, irrigation and water million since 1992. Dredging its reservoir of provision, and forestry/biodiversity conservation accumulated sediments would have cost US$158 independently. Such approaches often did not million. The situation is similar for irrigation dams: achieve their objectives of rural development, A study by the World Bank estimated the costs improved livelihoods, or protection of the 26 Integrated Landscape Management Trend of Fodder Productivity in Grazing Areas Figure 2.4.  environment, because they failed to account for over the 30-year Period (based on analysis of the multi-functionality and diversity of demands annual net primary productivity, NPP) on the landscapes. Improving the productivity of the agriculture sector requires addressing forest District boundaries and non-agricultural land management, both of Protected Areas which contribute to soil loss. Similarly, it will be Protected Areas harder to fight against deforestation and loss of Grazing biodiversity with the continued dependence of Annual increment (+ -) rural households on traditional forms of slash and Kg C/Ha/Year burn agriculture — a leading cause of forest and -83 - -37.2 land degradation — along with the dependence -37.2 - -16.3 of 99.3 percent of Madagascar’s population on -16.3 - -10.5 fuelwood or charcoal for cooking. -10.5 - 0 0 - 15.3 There has been increasing recognition of the need 27.  15.3 - 78 to adopt an integrated landscape management approach to rural development. This involves supporting forests and natural ecosystems, agriculture and water resources development in ways that sustain the natural resource base, recognizing interactions throughout watersheds, enhancing ecosystem functions and livelihood resilience and adopting a people-centric and economy-led approach. 0 100 200 km Source: World Bank Team Estimation. Figure 2.5. Land Degradation Impacts on Water Yield and Sedimentation for Major Irrigation and Hydropower Dams 61% 350 Sediment Water yield 250 800 Change in sediment (thousand tons) Change in water yield (M m3) 150 300 12% 56% 50 171% -1% 4% 11% 4% -18% -18% -19% -200 -50 -2% -45% -60% -19% -40% -150 -34% -700 -250 -350 -1200 -32% Amboromalandy Andelaleka Antelomita Sahamoloto Tsiazompaniry Antanifotsy Ambilivily Mandraka Mantasao (Irrigation) (Hydroelectricity) (Hydroelectricity) (Irrigation) (Irrigation) (Irrigation) (Hydroelectricity) (Irrigation) (Hydroelectricity) Source: World Bank Team Estimates 27 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 28.  Integrated landscape management can, in many agriculture, water, and forest- can work together parts of the country, reverse land degradation in these areas to improve the flow of these and restore ecosystem services such as erosion ecosystem services. Improving landscape control, water regulation and purification, flood conditions through implementation of these mitigation, carbon storage, and biodiversity. measures is estimated to bring benefits of Figure 2.6 shows areas where land degradation US$46 million annually to the agriculture sector. (Figure 2.6, center) coincides with places Regions with the highest potential benefits where investments in nature-based solutions to agriculture productivity on an annual basis can simultaneously enhance erosion control include Sofia (US$7.4 million) Itasy (US$7.2 and water regulation (Figure 2.6, right and left million), Alaotra Mangoro (US$5.0 million), panels). Integrated land management programs Analamanga (US$4.9 million), and Boeny that incorporate activities and priorities from (US$3.4 million). Land degradation trends (center), and examples of priority land areas where Integrated Land Management Figure 2.6.  (ILM) can enhance baseflow and reduce soil erosion in highly degraded lands (left) and protected areas (upper right) and improve the lifespan of reservoirs (lower right). Integrated Land Management Land Degradation Trends Priority Areas: 1990-2020 For baseflow enhancement For sediment retention Protected areas Rivers Reservoirs: Hydropower Irrigation Land Degradation Trend No change Large decline Moderate decline Low decline Low improvement Moderate improvement Large improvement Source: World Bank Team Estimation. Note: Priority ILM areas highlighted in the thumbnail maps are those with the highest potential for integrated landscape management to control erosion and improve dry season streamflow within the given area. Scores are calculated using the InVEST26 sediment and seasonal water yield models under 2020 baseline conditions and a scenario where integrated landscape management is implemented to improve vegetation and soil health in croplands, grazing lands, and other degraded areas. Sharp, R., Douglass, J., Wolny, S., Arkema, K., Bernhardt, J., Bierbower, W., Chaumont, N., Denu, D., Fisher, D., Glowinski, K., Griffin, R., Guannel, G., Guerry, A., 26  Johnson, J., Hamel, P., Kennedy, C., Kim, C.K., Lacayo, M., Lonsdorf, E., Mandle, L., Rogers, L., Silver, J., Toft, J., Verutes, G., Vogl, A. L., Wood, S, and Wyatt, K, 2020. InVEST 3.9 User’s Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund. 28 Integrated Landscape Management 29.  Controlling sedimentation through investing in land management in the Alaotra Mangoro and better land management can make hydropower Analamanga regions, in addition to the agriculture more resilient. As noted, land degradation has sector benefits listed above, would also benefit the resulted in higher discharge of sediments and existing major hydropower dams in the country, a lower reliability of water availability from with a total savings of US$1.8 million in avoided watersheds that feed the reservoirs of some yearly costs. of the most important hydropower plants in Madagascar. Yet there is potential to significantly Implementation mechanisms for integrated 30.  decrease sedimentation by 324,000 tons/year landscape management can vary but are expected (36 percent reduction) by implementing soil and to use broad stakeholder participation, conflict water conservation practices in the catchment management, negotiation around objectives and area (Figure 2.7), saving an estimated US$1.3 strategies, and adaptive management based on million annually in dredging costs. Improved shared learning. Potential Sediment Reduction to the Andekaleka Hydropower Dam from Implementing Improved Land Figure 2.7.  Management Practices, Primarily in Croplands and Grazing Lands Andekaleka Dam Legend Hydropower dam Catchment area Rivers Rivers Potential Sediment Reduction tons/ha 0 - 0.63 0.63 - 1.9 1.9 - 5.4 5.4 - 81 Source: World Bank Team Estimation 29 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis IMPLEMENTING ILM: ADDRESSING been developed by farmers can be titled by a TENURE AND GOVERNANCE written document – the land certificate – issued by the commune. The process is coordinated by CHALLENGES local land offices (“guichets fonciers”) opened in Land and Forest Tenure Challenges rural municipalities. Land and forest tenure is a key aspect of 31.  The land reform has the potential to yield 33.  integrated landscape management. Effective significant development gains, but its and sustainable landscape management implementation remains slow. By 2021, 16 years implementation relies on the inclusive and after the reform, 520,000 land certificates had been consensual design of the land use planning, issued through local land offices and 300,000 files and the capacity of stakeholders to ensure that were being processed. However, despite these assigned land use would be maintained over time. ongoing efforts to modernize and decentralize land For this purpose, clarifying and securing tenure administration, fewer than 8,000 formal land titles appears to be a prerequisite. The formalization are issued per year and around 10 million plots of land rights is expected to lead to increased remain unregistered. agricultural investments (especially at the local level), improving yields and generating larger There are significant issues surrounding tenure 34.  incomes, reduce conflicts over land and resources, of forestland. Since 1960, forests are considered and contribute to securing the property rights of domanial, meaning the property of the state. vulnerable households and women.27 Forest estate comprises: (i) the domanial forest, including all forest grown on domanial land, and Madagascar led an innovative reform of its 32.  (ii) the national forest domain encompassing all land tenure system in 2005 with the aim of demarcated forests that are classified under a democratizing land ownership. Since colonial ministerial order for a specific purpose.29 The land rule, the land tenure system assumed that all land reform of 2005, and specifically the Law 2005–019, belonged to the state (the presumption of state introduced a new land regime called “areas under ownership, “présomption de domanialité”) except specific land statutes,” which moved the forest for private land with a title issued by the state land from being considered domanial to a third regime services.28 Obtaining land titles was (and remains) of specific statutes to be regulated under a new cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive, law. Yet, the legislation regulating specific statutes and therefore out of reach of rural populations has yet to be fully detailed. While the law on non– who relied on customary ownership, based on titled private property presumes that long-lasting de facto occupation and development of land. occupation and development of domanial land can This dualism in land ownership, combined with result in property rights, it is unclear how far such population growth and increasing demand for land, occupation rights would be recognized on domanial contributed to widespread land insecurity. In 2005, forest.30 Community rights on forestland also a major land reform was launched to allow more remain to be re-addressed. Until now, communities citizens, especially farmers and rural populations, have been granted the rights of use and to obtain legal recognition of their land rights. Law occupation.31 A bill on customary community land 2005-019 on land status replaced the presumption rights has been under development for four years of state ownership with the presumption of but has not been promulgated for formal adoption. ownership (“présomption de propriété”) and created a new land status: untitled private land property Land access and property rights incentives 35.  (“propriétés foncières privées non titrées”, PPNT) related to reforestation need to be effectively governed by law 2006-031. Plots of land that have enforced.Madagascar started to develop coherent 27 Ex-post assessments of the impacts of the reform on rural livelihoods were not included. 28 A legacy of this recent history, most forest lands and all of the official protected areas are on State owned land (“domaine de l’Etat”). The concept of NFD – National Forest Domain – qualifies forest cover subject to classification, delineation, and management by the ministry in charge 29  of forestry. It encompasses strict Nature Reserves (RNI), Special Reserves (RS), National Parks (PN), Forest Stations (SF), Classified Forests (FC), Forest Reserves (RF), Perimeters of Reforestation and Restoration (PRR), and mangroves. The three first categories are labeled as Protected Areas. However, the legal arrangement is clearly not allowing private acquisition of forestland under National Forest Domain, unless the parcel is declassified. 30  The concepts of Controlled Occupation Zone (ZOC) and Sustainable Use Zone (ZUD) are used to qualify the human settlements inside Protected Areas or 31  in forestland under natural resources management transfer (GELOSE). The communities are only granted restricted land and resources rights of use. 30 Integrated Landscape Management strategies in the 1980s with the institution of the to manage the resources and receive the benefits AFARB and ZODAFARB (Zone Délimitées pour directly but without being granted the ownership l’Action en Faveur de l’Arbre)32 areas designations of the resources or the land. These benefits can to promote reforestation. Since 2000, Land include the sustainable harvesting of a broad Forest Reserve strategy (RFR) was introduced to range of resources that contribute to subsistence promote restoration of degraded lands through and household income: food (e.g., fruit, honey, individual- and community-driven reforestation, bushmeat, wild tubers), firewood, building particularly within watersheds and sensitive zones materials, cattle grazing and shelter, and traditional on state-owned lands. The strategies include the medicines. Commercial exploitation is potentially promise of land title provided that the operator had authorized but usually limited (e.g., commercial effectively fulfilled the reforestation prerequisite. production of charcoal and wood planks).33 The ZODAFARB requires midterm evaluations in years three and eight, upon which the operator Madagascar has also adopted laws to transfer 37.  is to be awarded a land valuation certificate by the management of natural resources to the local the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable populations. In 1996 Madagascar adopted the Development. The certificate would further law on Secure Local Management, or Gestion support a land titling application at the operator’s Locale Sécurisée (GELOSE), and in 2001 adapted initiative. Collective titling on behalf of community this to forest management through the law on reforestation is allowed through formal registration Contractualized Forest Management, or Gestion that requires the constitution of members into a Contractualisée des Forêts (GCF). The GELOSE legal association (as per the Ordinance 60–133). and GCF allow the transfer of natural resource To date, several parcels remain reserved under management from the public domain to local ZODAFARB but few have been effectively titled to populations. Communities are granted exclusive the operator, due to administrative procedures. management rights over the space on which they claim traditional rights. Between 1996 and 2014, almost 1,250 contracts transferred the Madagascar was one of the first countries 36.  management of forests (95 percent of contracts), in Africa to formalize community-based mangroves (3 percent) and fisheries (2 percent) natural resource management. In the 1990s to the surrounding populations. These contracts Madagascar embarked on decentralization of cover 5 percent of the Malagasy territory and 30 natural resource management, with the aim of percent of the current forests, including 20 percent delivering environmental benefits while supporting within protected areas (around core conservation local livelihoods. The management transfer areas). The use of community-based natural is implemented through a contract among a resource management is heavily donor driven grassroots community (Vondron’Olona Ifotony in Madagascar: 93 percent of contracts were (VOI); Communauté de Base (COBA), the commune, facilitated by an external actor.34 and the deconcentrated forest authority. The VOI is responsible for the implementation of Thirty years of expansion of community-based 38.  a sustainable management plan (also called natural resource management have not slowed Sustainable Planning and Management Scheme deforestation or biodiversity loss as much as – see section on Governance) and has the power anticipated.35,36,37,38 The country has lost close 32 Zone d’action en faveur de l’arbre (demarcated area for action in support of trees). Decree 3145 – 87. Pollini, J., Hockley, N., Muttenzer, F.D., Ramamonjisoa, B.S., 2014. “The transfer of natural resource management rights to local communities.” In: Scales, 33  I.R. (Ed.), Conservation and Environmental Management in Madagascar. Routledge, London. Vogel, A., Fétiveau, J., Groeber, S., Desbureaux, S., 2017. “Gouvernance partagée des aires protégées à Madagascar. Quel contenu donner à la cogestion ?” 34  Comprendre, Agir et Partager, n°1. Editions du GRET. Desbureaux, S., Aubert, S., Brimont, L., Karsenty, A., Lohanivo, A.C., Rakotondrabe, M., Razafindraibe, A.H., Razafiarijaona, J., 2016. “The Impact 35  of Protected Areas on Deforestation: An Exploration of the Economic and Political Channels for Madagascar’s Rainforests (2001–12).” Etudes et Documents, n°3, CERDI. Desbureaux, S., Damania, R., 2018. “Rain, forests and farmers: Evidence of drought induced deforestation in Madagascar and its consequences for 36  biodiversity conservation.” Biological Conservation, 221:357-364. Eklund, J., Coad, L., Geldmann, J., and Cabeza, M., 2019. “What Constitutes a Useful Measure of Protected Area Effectiveness? A Case Study of 37  Management Inputs and Protected Area Impacts in Madagascar.” Conservation Science and Practice, 1 (10). These assessments have mostly focused on the historical protected areas, those managed by MNP for which long-term data exists. There is a consensus 38  among stakeholders (including promoters of new protected areas) that new protected areas do not perform better. One of the promises of management transfers is that communities will improve their livelihoods by directly receiving the benefits of well-managed natural resources on which they rely (e.g., food, firewood, building materials, and traditional medicines). Estimate the impact of community forest management impacts on household living standards, as measured by per capita consumption expenditures. The estimated impact is positive, but small and not statistically different from zero. 31 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis to 20 percent of its forest cover since 1990. Nonetheless, the central government retained the Although the shift to shared governance and prerogative for sector and public policy design, co-management should in principle result in as well as budget decisions. Territorial structures more effective improvement of human well- were effectively only assigned responsibility for being, this has not yet substantially materialized execution. Political willingness to assign more systematically, reducing incentives to halt responsibility to Communes emerged in the 1990s degradation. VOIs (village organizations) have had with the adoption of the pioneer laws 94–007 limited capacity to implement GCF (management and 94–008. The laws introduced a system of contracts) and dina rules39,40 further limit their “proximity governance” with the creation of 22 authority. There have also been issues with Regions, replacing the six Provinces, and the migrants moving in from other areas, distrust ability for regional planning was transferred to this between stakeholders, and concerns with the level.42 Delegation of responsibilities from central effectiveness of power transfer.41 ministries to Communes was triggered by Law 96–025 which promoted the transfer of natural Governance Challenges resources management to local level communities (as noted above; See Box 2.1 for more information Landscapes, by definition, span multiple 39.  on the status of decentralization). Current jurisdictions and require strong governance decentralized territorial administration comprises arrangements for effective management. While two main effective levels: 23 regions and landscape approaches often operate within approximately 1,700 communes, in addition to geographical boundaries, recognizing, for 18,250 localities (fokontany).43 example, that upstream degradation can impact the productivity and sustainability of activities downstream, the effectiveness of landscape The country has developed several institutional 41.  approaches is also dependent on effective arrangements to make its decentralization policy governance, especially at the decentralized level. more effective, which are relevant to integrated Often, administrative boundaries do not neatly landscape management.44 These include: follow geographical boundaries, complicating decision making regarding integrated landscape • Several land-use planning instruments that approaches. Nested planning is needed to identify promote the use of landscape approach in priority areas for intervention at the landscape level relevant ministerial departments and in local with more detailed plans at the micro-catchment authorities: National Land Use Planning Scheme level with details of specific interventions. (Schéma National d’Aménagement du Territoire), Regional Land Use Planning Scheme (Schéma 40.  Following independence, Madagascar opted Régional d’Aménagement du Territoire), and for the adoption of a decentralization model of Communal Land Use Planning Scheme (Schéma governance, and created territorial structures d’Aménagement Communal, SAC), with separate (Provinces, Prefectures later named Districts, approaches for urban and rural area: for rural, and Communes) as well as democratic popular the Intercommunal Land Use Planning Scheme assemblies – fokonolona – at the village level. (Schéma d’Aménagement InterCommunal, SAIC), Vogel et al., 2017. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297962919_Using_the_dina_tool_as_governance_of_natural_resources_ 39  lessons_of_Velondriake_southwestern_Madagascar In order to reduce conflict between national laws and local customs and social norms (known as dina), the government of Madagascar has progressively 40  decentralized the governance of natural resources to local levels. The ‘dina’, which can be translated as social pact, is a customary institution defined as a traditional local convention used to establish common rules for the purpose of social cohesion, mutual aid or security, and which includes sanctions for non-compliance. Rules regarding resource use within contractual management transfers and co-managed protected areas are defined within dina, which can be legally recognized. Jones, J.P.G., Rakotonarivo, O.S., Razafimanahaka, J.H, 2021. Forest Conservation in Madagascar: Past, Present, and Future. In S. M. Goodman (Ed.), The 41  New Natural History of Madagascar. Princeton University Press. The regions are also subdivided into 119 districts, headed by a chief, who is the representative of the State at the district level. He oversees the 42  implementation of the general policy of the State within his territorial jurisdiction, has authority over the heads of the decentralized State services located in his territorial jurisdiction and is responsible for the control of legality of the acts of the decentralized territorial authorities, particularly the communes. The fokontany are basic administrative subdivisions of the state at the commune level. The fokontany chief is appointed by order of the district chief to 43  ensure (i) the development of his locality; (ii) the maintenance of security; (iii) the mobilization of communities for health, education and culture; and (iv) supporting the State in carrying out activities that directly affect the population. Harilanto Ravelomanantsoa and Rajaonario Andrianarivelo, 2021. Politique ouverte : structures locales de concertation dans les municipalités de 44  Sahanivotry et Masindray, Madagascar. UNESCO. 32 Integrated Landscape Management Box 2.1. Status of Decentralization in the Government of Madagascar Government was traditionally highly centralized but has been undergoing a decentralization process over the last two decades. The objective is to increase the capacity for decision making at sub-national levels, improving the responsiveness of policy implementation to local concerns, and involving citizens, through their elected representatives, in the management of local affairs. Decentralization is taking place at two levels: (i) Through Decentralized territorial collectivities (Collectivités Territoriales Décentralisées (CTD), made up of communes (including municipalities with elected mayors), regions and provinces. CTDs receive (i) a share of the taxes and duties collected for the state budget, but also (ii) taxes and duties voted by their Board. CTDs at the communal level are responsible for delivering local infrastructure and environmental services such as water supply, and sanitation and solid waste management, as well as land-use planning. (ii) Through Deconcentrated Technical Services, or Services Techniques Déconcentrés (STD), branches of sectoral ministries at the regional and sub-regional level which constitute the ‘technical de- concentration’ of the State and whose purpose is to the strengthen the ‘action capacities’ of the CTDs. Deconcentrated services also oversee national policy and undertake state administrative functions at sub-national levels. and for urban, the Urban Masterplan (Plan National de la Décentralisation et du Développement d’Urbanisme Directeur) and Detailed Urban Plan local) are responsible for strengthening the (Plan d’Urbanisme Détaillé). In addition, the Local capacity of local actors, the practical exercise Land Occupancy Plan (Plan Local d’Occupation of local democracy and accountability, and the Foncière) is a particular satellite imagery-based financing of investments at the local level to map used by Communes equipped with Communal improve the provision of public services. Land Offices. • Participatory budgets: About 100 communes have • At the community level, Simplified Planning and been implementing the participatory budget process Management Schemes (PAGS) have been prepared for the implementation of activities in the SAC. for at least three decades to promote community– based natural resources management and inclusive There isn’t a lot of information on the 42.  conservation strategies for protected areas. These implementation of these institutional are five-year plans that aim to balance community arrangements. These management instruments livelihood activities and sustainable use of natural have been created relatively recently, are not resources. applied systematically and are most often associated with donor-funded projects. For • Local consultation structures (Structures Locales instance, only 200 communes have a functional de Concertation) at the level of Communes aim to local consultation structure, according to the promote effective participation of stakeholders and government.45 SACs are predominantly prepared citizens in the management of public affairs and by projects funded by bilateral and multilateral development actions. donors. There is so far no public or broad • The Local Development Fund (Fonds de assessment of the implementation of these Développement Local) and the National Institute for different tools, including the land-use planning Decentralization and Local Development (Institut instruments, and their effectiveness. Studio Sifaka, 2021. Structure locale de concertation : quand participation et redevabilite vont de pair. Available at: https://www.studiosifaka.org/articles/ 45  actualites/item/4114-structure-locale-de-concertation-quand-participation-et-redevabilite-vont-de-pair.html 33 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Despite these efforts, Madagascar remains a 43.  use planning decisions for agriculture, water and highly centralized country. 86 percent of the forests are taken by three sector ministries: the state budget is implemented at the central level Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAL); the and 14 percent at regional levels. Less than 1 Ministry of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (MWSH); percent of the overall government budget is and the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable allocated to communes nationwide (US$7,500 per Development (MEDD). Each of these Ministries commune on average), leaving communes without has “deconcentrated” staff in regions and districts budgets or capacity to cover the expenses for to advise regional and communal governments. development, and hampering planning and service Communes are responsible for the preparation of delivery. Effective decentralization faces several the SAC and SAIC, and coordination of the SAC is barriers: lack of understanding and ownership assigned to the regional level. Other key ministries of the decentralization and local development include the Ministry of Territorial Planning and agenda by the population; unstable institutional Land Management (MTPLM) and the Ministry of anchoring and weak leadership in steering the Interior and Decentralization (MID), to which the implementation; failure to comply with the laws regional chiefs and communal mayors report. and regulation, and the absence of implementing The coordination among sectoral ministries decrees (a problem in many areas of government) and among levels of government is insufficient. that are needed to implement legislation; and Large development projects are decided at the insufficient consideration of decentralization in level of the sectoral ministries, while smaller sectoral policies. The recent imposition of a state initiatives (e.g., communal reforestation) are led by of emergency due to the COVID-19 crisis has added communes, and these efforts are not necessarily to the centralization of power within the executive coordinated. Not many staff from MAL, MWSH, branch.46,47 Advisory support to CTDs by the various and MEDD reported being aware of the National STDs is fragmented between sectoral ministries, Land Use Planning Scheme developed by the and inclusive citizen participation remains limited. MTPLM. The government, both at the central and The current government, as part of its commitment local levels, also lacks technical capacity to carry to improve the autonomy and accountability of out all the different steps required for land-use CTDs, has launched a process48 for improving the planning (e.g., collecting data and putting in place effectiveness of decentralization, and is currently the dynamic geospatial database, ensuring data finalizing a National Emerging Decentralization Plan, quality, conducting analyses and developing or Plan National de Décentralisation Emergente49 spatial models for scenario analysis, as well as (PNDE) . One aim is the ‘territorialization of public broad consultations).50 policies’ by improving coordination between the sectoral ministries and their technical services at IMPLEMENTING ILM: ADDRESSING the territorial level to improve the human, financial, THE KEY DRIVER OF DEFORESTATION technical and material resources available to CTDs AND DEGRADATION51 for carrying out their local development missions. Madagascar’s population is highly dependent 45.  44.  The current governance arrangements in on biomass for cooking.52,53 Traditional biomass Madagascar present challenges for improved (firewood and charcoal) accounts for more integrated landscape management. Most land than 99.3 percent of total primary energy use Ravelomanantsoa H., R. Andrianarivelo, 2021. Politique ouverte : structures locales de concertation dans les municipalités de Sahanivotry et Masindray, 46  Madagascar. UNESCO. World Bank, 2022. 2022 Systematic Country Diagnostic Update for Madagascar: Reducing Poverty by Strengthening Governance and Accelerating 47  Structural Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank. As such, national / regional / local consultations have been held with all the stakeholders in order to determine the major axes of a new Emerging 48  Decentralization Policy Letter (LPDE, Lettre de Politique de Décentralisation Emergente, Law No. 2021-011 of June 23, 2021 validating the Emerging Decentralization Policy Letter). Midimadagasikara, 2021. Decentralisation emergente : Un plan national en gestation. Available at: https://www.midi-madagasikara.mg/2021/07/06/ 49  decentralisation-emergente-un-plan-national-en-gestation/ World Bank, 2017. Madagascar—Sustainable Landscape Management Project. Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: World Bank. 50  This section is based on a recent analysis: Madagascar Cooking Sector – Initial Assessment Support to Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 51  (CEA), prepared by the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) for this report. World Bank, 2021. Beyond Connections: Madagascar Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on Multi-Tier Framework. According to the World Bank’s 52  Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) household survey data in Madagascar (2021). World Bank Group. Energydata.info. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://energydata.info/. 53  34 Integrated Landscape Management in Malagasy households. Nationally, the most in the number of deaths from HAP during the common fuel used for cooking is firewood (74 same timeframe. Uganda achieved an 18 percent percent) followed by charcoal (25 percent). decrease in deaths from 28,100 in 2000 to 23,000 83 percent of households in rural areas and in 2019. Cambodia achieved a 22 percent drop 31 percent in urban areas use firewood as the from 18,000 to 14,000, and Rwanda a 30 percent primary fuel for cooking, while for 66 percent of decrease from 10,600 to 7,470. households in urban areas and 17 percent in rural areas, charcoal is the primary source. Three-stone Use of fuelwood for cooking has productivity 47.  stoves are the primary cooking solutions for rural and environmental costs, particularly for women households (71.6 percent). The use of Improved and children. The gender cost is estimated at Cookstoves (ICS) is prevalent in urban households US$4.71 billion annually, due to lost productivity (67.2 percent), compared with only 24.3 percent from extended time spent on cooking-related in rural areas (driven by lack of affordability and tasks, including fuel collection, cooking, and ready access to wood fuel and the materials for stove cleaning. In Madagascar, it is estimated basic stoves). The use of clean fuel stoves (LPG that women in rural areas spend around 14 hours and electric) remains very low in Madagascar, per week on cooking-related tasks, and women in with less than 1 percent of households nationwide urban areas spend nine hours per week. Finally, the reporting using one of these stoves. Use of ethanol climate-impact cost is estimated at US$1.44 billion has been supported but is still only used by a small per year (using a social cost of carbon of US$45.9 number of households. per ton), based on estimates of 22.09 million tons of CO2 emissions per year in rural areas, and 9.26 46.  The high dependence on traditional biomass million tons of CO2 emissions in urban areas. places a heavy health burden. Unlike Madagascar’s peer countries, the number of deaths attributable Heavy dependence on biomass for cooking 48.  to Household Air Pollution (HAP) did not decrease contributes to forest degradation and in the last two decades (see figure 2.9). Deaths due deforestation. Estimates from 200554 indicate to indoor PM2.5 pollution were at 21,600 in 2000 that while woody biomass removals for fuelwood and remained at 21,500 in 2019. Madagascar’s totaled 12.8 million m3 annually, those for industrial peer group countries such as Uganda, Cambodia, round wood were 0.238 m3 annually. A more recent and Rwanda observed a significant decrease study estimates national consumption of about 18 Figure 2.8. Primary Cooking Fuels in Madagascar (nationwide, urban, rural) Nationwide 7% 67% 25% Rural 7% 76% 17% 1% 1% Urban 9% 22% 66% LPG/ cooking gas Wood Purchased Wood collected Charcoal Electric Source: World Bank Madagascar Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) report, August 2021. Karin Buncht, 2015. Plantation Projects in Madagascar: Approaches, Objectives and Reflections for Fuelwood Production. Yale School of the 54  Environment. Available at: https://tri.yale.edu/publications/tropical-resources-bulletin/tri-bulletin-archive/tropical-resources-vol-34/plantation 35 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Figure 2.9. Number of Deaths Attributable to Household Air Pollution from Solid Fuels from 1990 to 2019 in Madagascar, Cambodia, Rwanda, and Uganda Number of Deaths Attributable to HAP from Solid Fuels 30k 27.5k Number of Deaths Attributable to HAP from Solid Fuels 25k Uganda 22.5k Madagascar State of Global Air 2020 20k 17.5k 15k Cambodia 12.5k 10k 7.5k Rwanda 5k 2.5k 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Source: Health Effects Institute. 2020. State of Global Air 2020. Data source: Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. IHME, 2020. million cubic meters total for firewood ‘green,’ having been produced efficiently and from (9 million m3) and wood as charcoal for cooking legal and sustainable forest resources. Several (8.6 million m3).55 Most of these removals are plans to scale up access to clean cooking solutions from natural forest and wooded areas, though have been prepared, such as regional strategies Madagascar has an estimated 312,000 ha of for energy including wood energy, and a national fuelwood plantations (primarily eucalyptus) that program to promote ethanol. Expansion of clean are used primarily as a source of charcoal for cooking solutions is included in the government’s urban areas. commitments under its NDC57 as well as in the 2019-23 Initiative for an Emergent Madagascar.58 The Government’s clean cooking policy is guided by 49.  the country’s overarching energy policy, ‘La Nouvelle Progress on adoption of cleaner cooking solutions 50.  Politique de l’Energie 2015-2030’.56 Cooking-related has been and is expected to continue to be slow, targets for 2030 include: (i) 70 percent access to and fuelwood and charcoal will remain dominant energy-efficient cookstoves, (ii) 50 percent of wood fuels in the coming decades. A 2019 study on to be sourced from legal and sustainable forest Energy Finance in Madagascar59 predicted that the resources, and (iii) 20 percent of charcoal to be use of clean fuels – LPG, biogas, and ethanol (see World Bank, 2011. Ethanol as a household fuel in Madagascar: health benefits, economic assessment, and review of African lessons for scaling- 55  up: summary report. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/ documentdetail/564801468055752320/ethanol-as-a-household-fuel-in-madagascar-health-benefits-economic-assessment-and-review-of-african-lessons- for-scaling-up-summary-report Republic of Madagascar, 2015. Lettre de Politique de l’Energie de Madagascar 2015 – 2030. Available at: https://rise.esmap.org/data/files/library/ 56  madagascar/Documents/Renewable%20Energy/Madagascar_Lettre%20de%20la%20Politique%20de%20l’energie_2015-30.pdf Republic of Madagascar, 2016. Madagascar’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution. Available at: https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/ 57  PublishedDocuments/Madagascar%20First/Madagascar%20INDC%20Eng.pdf Initiative Emergence Madagascar. Available at: http://iem-madagascar.com/ 58  SEforALL, 2019. Taking the Pulse of Energy Access in Madagascar. Energizing Finance Report Series. Available at: https://www.seforall.org/system/ 59  files/2019-12/Taking-Pulse-Madagascar_0.pdf 36 Integrated Landscape Management box 2.2 on ethanol program) – would increase to There have also been some initiatives with 51.  only half a million households by 2030, with further public-private partnerships in planted forests. growth constrained by affordability and logistical Investors have signed 30-year leases with the challenges (including very poor road infrastructure forest administration. Wood products have constraining distribution of ethanol/LPG containers/ been used in part for manufacture of briquettes, refills). There have been difficulties in producing including for textile companies in Antananarivo ethanol locally, and international prices are high and Fianarantsoa. The European Union is due to both the recent COVID-19 outbreak (ethanol assisting with a program to rehabilitate and is used in hand sanitizers) and global energy price expand fuelwood plantations in the area around inflation. Use of LPG is very limited60,61 compared Antananarivo.66 There are further opportunities with other East African countries, in part because to provide wood products from plantations to LPG must be imported. Biogas has benefited from clusters of users, such as textile producers in Norwegian NGO and Chinese support in the 2009 Antsirabe, that currently use a lot of energy with to 2015 period.62 The most recent figures available only limited sources of managed fuelwood. A indicate that 492 household biodigesters had been recent study summarizes the experience with built by 2015.63 There appears to have been little fuelwood plantations and draws some interesting progress since, although biogas is included as lessons (see box 2.3). a priority in the Ministry’s guidance for activities to be undertaken in 2019. The Energy Finance Madagascar’s government is committed to 52.  study estimates that nine million households will providing access to improved and cleaner cooking continue to use fuelwood or charcoal through solutions, but a comprehensive approach is 2030. The challenge will be to produce and harvest needed. In particular, support for improved energy these resources more sustainably, and to provide solutions needs to be combined with programs incentives for most households to use improved to increase fuelwood production and harvesting cook-stoves while gradually supporting increased from sustainably managed natural woodlands uptake of modern clean cooking solutions. and plantations, and incentives need to be in Box 2.2. Increasing Uptake of Ethanol The government has included prioritizing ethanol in the current five-year development strategy, and a recent decision to remove excise duty for ethanol fuel sent a positive signal to the market.64 The Ministry of Industry (Mol) is technically responsible for approving Ethanol Micro Distilleries (EMDs) and promoting ethanol clean cooking. There has been support to increase use of ethanol-based stoves through a World Bank supported program of US$10.7 million for an emissions reduction purchase agreement65 with Green Development AS, a private company focused on carbon financing, as part of the Carbon Initiative for Development (Ci-Dev). The agreement involves the purchase of 1.1 million certified emission reductions (CERs) to be generated by the end of 2024 through a range of activities, including ethanol cooking. Progress has been slower than expected for a number of reasons, but the project had distributed and registered 12,698 stoves as of December 3rd, 2021 – representing 36 percent of the end project objective – and reached 30 percent of the emissions reduction target. SEforALL, 2019. Energizing Finance: Taking the Pulse 2019. Energizing Finance Report Series. Available at: https://www.seforall.org/system/ 60  files/2019-11/EF-2019-TP-SEforALL-w.pdf Current storage capacity is sufficient for 100,000-125,000 households. 61  Oméga Razanakoto, Lars Kåre Grimsby, Guo Jing, Elisabeth Rabakonandrianina, 2015. Final Evaluation of the International NMS Biogas Partnership 62  Program. Multi-tier Access Report 2012. 63  Erik Reed, 2021. Disclosable Restructuring Paper - MG ethanol clean cooking climate finance program - P154440 (English). Washington, DC: World Bank 64  Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/796161623356999444/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-MG-ethanol-clean-cooking- climate-finance-program-P154440 World Bank. MG Ethanol Clean Cooking Climate Finance Program. Available at: https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/project-detail/ 65  P154440, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/395881468266106457/text/PID-Appraisal-Print-P154440-04-21-2016-1461259255237.txt USAID, 2021. Stimulating Smallholder Tree Cultivation for Woodfuel: Learning from Success in Madagascar. Available at: https://www.climatelinks.org/ 66  sites/default/files/asset/document/2021-02/ProLand%20Madagascar%20Woodfuel%20Case%20Study%20Final.pdf 37 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Box 2.3. Stimulating Smallholder Cultivation for Woodfuel: Learning from Success in Madagascar A recent study provides helpful lessons for wood-fuel cultivation in Madagascar. It notes that experience and approaches are differentiated by region. Antananarivo is a special case. For this large market, privately owned plantations (primarily eucalyptus) account for 74 percent of the charcoal market, pinewood plantations 22 percent and natural forests only 4 percent. Plantation owners have mostly inherited the plantations from families to whom they were transferred in the post-colonial period. It has been relatively easy to regulate wood-fuel and charcoal supply to the capital, which has deterred smaller, less well-connected producers. Other regions require different approaches. In the southern uplands (Antsirabe, Ambositra, and Fianarantsoa) there have been more constraints to sustainable fuelwood production and easier access to natural forests. Industrial enterprises (e.g., the Cotona fabric mill in Antsirabe and essential oil distilleries) are also large consumers. It is also more difficult for local farmers to obtain land tenure permits, and the local forest authorities are less resourced to prevent incursions into natural forest areas. But local farmers are integrating trees into production systems, and an ongoing local program is conditioning charcoal permits on replanting trees and provision of seeds. In the drier west the situation is more challenging, and the charcoal market drives deforestation, including of coastal mangroves. A series of programs have improved conditions for smallholder fuelwood production. A current GIZ supported program, the Program d’Appui à la Gestion de l’Environnement, Composante Bois-Energie, has trained individual farmers in transplanting seedlings and techniques to maximize tree health and the production of wood, and worked with local authorities to establish local land offices where farmers can obtain land tenure certificates. GIZ is also supporting the establishment and operation of green energy cooperatives, which allow producers to reduce transportation fees by aggregating their produce and, in operating within the law, avoid the heavy bribes inherent to illicit trade. The study has five principle recommendations for expanding sustainable fuelwood and tree plantations in Madagascar: • Overcome technical skills constraints, including tree propagation, transplanting, and maintenance and harvesting, and address the limited supply of seed stock. • Diversify the limited genetic supply of seed stock and overcome broader supply constraints. • Reduce competition from illicit trade through supporting governmental efforts to monitor supply chain and production trends, and exploring legislative and administrative alternatives to the current production and transport permitting system. • Improve land tenure security by supporting and expanding the local land certificate offices and support public education to reduce fire, theft and vandalism. • Improve market incentives through support for producer cooperatives to reduce transformation, transport and marketing costs, and support the certification of producers using planted wood produced from legal sources. Source: USAID, 2021. Stimulating Smallholder Tree Cultivation for Woodfuel: Learning from Success in Madagascar. Available at: https://www.climatelinks.org/sites/default/files/asset/document/2021-02/ProLand%20Madagascar%20Woodfuel%20 Case%20Study%20Final.pdf 38 Integrated Landscape Management place to support this. These two areas tend to be without a cross-sectoral planning effort. The addressed separately, through the energy or the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forestry lenses, in policies and programs, but they Degradation (REDD+) Atiala Atsinanana project69 need to be addressed together. More specifically, it similarly highlights the multiple benefits of forests is recommended that the government: and aims “to reduce deforestation and forest degradation through a landscape approach…”. (i) Prioritize access to clean cooking in national policies Nevertheless, the focus and funding of the by building institutional capacity and assigning project is on reduction of forest degradation and a lead agency to coordinate with other related deforestation to sequester carbon and secure agencies, = formalize cooking energy demand in related payments70 from the Forest Carbon national energy planning and develop of a strategy Partnership Facility Carbon Fund. for achieving universal access to clean cooking, (ii) Work cross-sectorally to ensure that woodfuel is The Sustainable Landscape Management Project 54.  produced sustainably, by supporting woodfuel (Projet d’Appui à une Agriculture Durable par une plantations and community woodlots, Approche Paysage, PADAP) was designed as a (iii)  Continue to support expanded use of improved prototype for integrated landscape management fuelwood and charcoal burning cookstoves, with in Madagascar. The PADAP integrates all the financial incentives if necessary; consider the use elements that should be part of a typical landscape of carbon finance instruments to support these; project. It is multi-functional, aimed at improving Continue to support gradual expansion of clean food production, biodiversity or ecosystem cooking alternatives (ethanol, in particular), solar conservation, and rural livelihoods. It works at a powered cookers, and biogas energy. landscape-level and coordinates across sectors and actors. It is participatory, supporting adaptive, Scale up public and private financing by working (iv)  collaborative management within a social with development partners and developing incentive learning framework. Coordination across sectors mechanisms to attract private investments. is led by an Inter-Ministerial Project Steering Committee and three regional committees. In each IMPLEMENTING ILM: LEARNING landscape, co-management is assured by multi- FROM RECENT PROJECT stakeholder platforms comprising (in principle) EXPERIENCES of mayors, fokontany chiefs, traditional chiefs, sectoral representatives, biodiversity conservation 53.  Madagascar’s experience in integrated landscape representatives, district-level technicians from management is relatively recent, with a number deconcentrated technical services, development of efforts still narrowly focused on forest organizations, churches, civil society, and migrant management despite their reference to landscape spokespersons. Members of these platforms approaches.67 In 2017 the country developed are responsible for preparing71 participatory a National Strategy for the Restoration of diagnostics, participatory zoning (Zonage à Dire Forested Landscapes under the international d’Acteurs),72 and activity proposals. In addition, AFR100 initiative.68 The aim of the program is to Sustainable Land Management Plans (SLMP) use transform four million hectares of deforested and the local administration levels (communes and degraded lands into resilient and multifunctional some representative fokontany) – major actors ecosystems by 2030. Forest restoration remains in local development – to consult landscape a sectoral endeavor spearheaded by the Ministry inhabitants and participate in the preparation and of Environment and Sustainable Development, implementation of SLMPs. There is rich experience to draw on from other countries, including through the Terrafrique program, which in many countries has been adapted, expanded 67  and evolved over the last 20 years. Ethiopia, Kenya, Zambia, Malawi and the Sahel, among others; the specific focus of each varies. Afr100. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://afr100.org/content/madagascar 68  World Bank, 2021. Madagascar – Atiala-Atsinanana Emission Reduction Program Project. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: https:// 69  documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/350501617311764540/pdf/Madagascar-Atiala-Atsinanana-Emission-Reductions-Program-Project.pdf World Bank, 2022. Advanced Draft Benefit Sharing Plan: ER Program Atiala-Atsinanana (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Available at: http:// 70  documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/142031644397335762/Advanced-Draft-Benefit-Sharing-Plan-ER-Program-Atiala-Atsinanana Guide pour l’élaboration du PAGDP, 2020. 71  Zonage à Dire d’Acteurs are a participatory spatialization tool for activities and projects. They are used to integrate physical, historical, and spatial data 72  on a map and, by facilitating stakeholder dialogue, allow users to understand landscape dynamics, identify issues, and propose future scenarios. 39 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 55.  The Support for Resilient Livelihoods in the on the altar of pragmatism. The SLMP South of Madagascar Project (Mionjo)73 project process could be more straightforward by design comprises some important aspects of adopting less ambitious but more visible integrated landscape management. It is multi- integration strategies, and using more functional, supporting activities in climate smart streamlined data collection but less intensive agriculture and irrigation, and local service stakeholder participation. Data collectors delivery including water supply and forestry could make better use of local knowledge and (though focused on drought management and available data, and only generate new data resilience rather than broader ecosystem and when critical. Landscapes should be less biodiversity conservation). It includes landscape numerous and smaller to promote visibility management elements, such as support for in landscape interactions and avoid diluting reforestation to protect the upstream of springs the effort. Hotspots of land degradation could feeding the Efaho and Mandrare rivers and be prioritized, with a view to addressing the securing breeding grounds for fisheries. It involves root causes of degradation. The context in some inter-sectoral coordination at the levels Madagascar (e.g., weak governance and of the inter-ministerial steering committee and low levels of investments in human and the local consultation structures, but less with physical capital) could be usefully regarded the deconcentrated agencies. It is participatory, as fixed constraints with which to design the working with established decentralized structures landscape approach, rather than aiming to and local groups at the commune level to identify solve them to implement a more ambitious investment priorities through the preparation of landscape approach. Simple initial designs the Local Development Plans.74 (including SLMPs) could be expanded over time using continual improvement processes. PADAP is the first step on the path toward 56.  Increase the use of existing planning (ii)  integrated landscape management in Madagascar. instruments. This is an advantage of the Despite implementation difficulties, integrated Mionjo project. The landscape approach landscape management remains a promising could make greater use of existing rural tool to support sustainable rural development planning tools in Madagascar to improve and increase climate resilience. In part due sustainability, increase regulatory power, to the PADAP project, there is now a shift in and avoid redundancy and frustration from the conceptualization of rural development in local stakeholders. Schémas d’Aménagement Madagascar with the government and its technical Communaux are obvious candidates, as are and financial partners referring increasingly to the Schémas d’Aménagement Intercommunaux need for integrated landscape management. and Schémas Régionaux d’Aménagement du Territoire. The PADAP is financing the Challenges in the implementation of PADAP, 57.  transcription of some SLMPs into Schémas however, highlight the need to invent a more d’Aménagement Communaux, but it could pragmatic integrated landscape management be systematic, and SLMPs could even be approach in the country. An early evaluation of designed as Schémas d’Aménagement the PADAP project reveals some lessons that Communaux to simplify the implementation of could be used to amend the design of future the landscape approach. landscape projects – in line with the increasing Enhance the synergy between planning and (iii)  adoption of integrated landscape management in investments. The drafting of SLMPs during Madagascar – and make them more successful project preparation instead of project and sustainable: implementation would leave more time (i) Simplify the landscape approach. Many for investments to be implemented on the elements of the gold standard of integrated ground during the life of the project. This landscape management should be sacrificed would increase the impact of the project and World Bank, 2022. Support for Resilient Livelihoods in the South of Madagascar. Available at: https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/ 73  project-detail/P171056 In addition, the Sustainable Landscapes in Eastern Madagascar project was approved in 2016, to be implemented by Conservation International and 74  co-financed by EIB and the Green Climate Fund through a landscape approach. Implementation has been slower than anticipated, in part because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 2021 EIB withdrew its funding. 40 Integrated Landscape Management improve disbursement ratios. The no-regret • Another stand-alone landscape investment investments planned in the PADAP project project financing, similar to the PADAP were an effective strategy to boost local approach and in line with the series of adherence to the landscape approach. They projects anticipated in PADAP’s project confirmed the importance of programming appraisal document but improved using early investments parallel to the planning the lessons described above. Shifting exercise. The programming of these early from an input-based to a long-term investments could be based on the prior performance-based approach in the identification of land degradation hotspots, financing of landscape projects could with a view to focusing investments in these provide additional incentive to the areas from the start and increasing the impact sustainable management of landscapes. of the project. Large-scale, international payments for environmental services (including REDD+) Invest in capacity building and knowledge. The (iv)  could also provide longer-term financing PADAP project revealed the difficulty for the than shorter investment projects. local population, technical experts, and the administration in moving away from a sectoral Collaborate to improve the landscape approach. (vi)  vision of rural development towards a more Most technical and financial partners in integrated, ecosystem-based approach. It could Madagascar are progressively implementing prove useful in the long term to invest in capacity- some form of integrated landscape building on the different aspects of integrated management in rural development projects. landscape management. In collaboration with They will be adopting different approaches, projects, universities are the most relevant trying different combinations of cross- partners to transfer cutting-edge knowledge on sectoral coordination, institutional setup and landscape and integrated approach. stakeholder participation, working in different contexts, and providing together a breadth of Commit to the long term. Like most natural (v)  knowledge that will be useful to all. It would be resources management processes that require essential that this knowledge is shared, and innovation, stakeholder participation, and the progressive design of a suitable landscape integration and do not yield immediate results, approach is collaborative. Other donors have integrated landscape management involves expressed their strong interest in setting up time scales that exceed typical project lengths such a collaboration mechanism. to have impact. Stakeholders – including donors – must commit to long term, iterative, bottom-up, negotiated processes. Investing CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY OF in integrated landscape management should RECOMMENDATIONS be seen as long-lasting commitments, There is increasing agreement that adopting a 58.  for example, through a series of projects, landscape approach, which recognizes the impacts supplying ongoing support in the form of of activities across space and sectors, is key to funding, technical backstopping, and/or other sustainable and resilient development. human resources. Within this long timeframe, Elements for success include inter-sectoral SLMPs should be revised regularly, as are most collaboration, local participation and use of local sustainable natural resources management knowledge, recognition of country contexts, the plans. There are two potential strategies: need for short term as well as long term benefits, • Mainstreaming the landscape approach and approaches which can be easily adopted into other rural development projects to where capacity is limited and there are data instill principles of integrated landscape limitations. Successful landscape approaches management with a view to improving will not only incorporate an understanding of their sustainability. This approach sees the spatial interactions (the impact, for example, of landscape approach more as a means toward upstream land degradation on the sustainability an end rather than an objective per se. The of downstream agriculture and irrigation Mionjo and the Rural livelihoods productivity developments), but will also recognize the and resilience projects could be interesting importance of using existing administrative candidates, as well as biodiversity, forest structures and local institutions to maximize management, and hydroelectric projects. ownership. 41 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table 2.1. Summary of Recommendations Policy Instruments Implementing Objective Agencies Assessment Policy and Capacity Building Investment Regulatory Reform Promote Detail the legislation Strengthen MEDD, MATSF tenure regulating the capacity of local potentially, in security for specific statues land offices collaboration forest and for forest lands to process with CASEF non-forest (including fuelwood backlog of land lands plantations around certificates. cities). Adopt the bill on customary community land rights. Clarify administrative procedures to title ZODAFARB parcels. Improve Address gaps in the Strengthen Help address MEDD, NGOs, regulatory legal and regulatory the capacity the financial CSOs (TAFO framework framework for of the state, constraints of VOIs MIHAAVO, for community-based both central and municipalities AVG,…) community- natural resource government and through supporting based NRM management regional services, expansion of and correct the to support performance-based inconsistencies community- payment schemes, between the based natural taking for example different forest and resource advantage of environment-related management. REDD+ projects laws (GELOSE, the and programs. forest law and the land tenure law). Strengthen Promote Strengthen Promote the use of MATSF, MEDD, governance institutional capacity of land-use planning MINAE, MEAH, arrangements mechanisms MEDD, MAL, instruments and Governors of for ILM to facilitate and MWSH other institutional regions, STD, coordination to apply land- mechanisms CTD, Projects: between CTD and use planning in World Bank Mionjo, PADAP, STD. instruments. operations. Madagascar Rural Livelihoods Strengthen Productivity capacity of CTD and Resilience and STD for land- Project use planning. 42 Integrated Landscape Management Policy Instruments Implementing Objective Agencies Assessment Policy and Capacity Building Investment Regulatory Reform Support Develop Strengthen Increase supply MEDD, MEH expansion strategy to enforcement of seed stock, working with of fuelwood incentivize mechanisms to and train farmers partners such lots and private sector limit illicit trade, on agro-forestry as GIZ, WWF, plantations investment including through practices. Fanalamanga, in fuelwood/ use of satellite- charcoal monitoring. Finance grants Should consider plantations, and provide other also companies including Promote producer financial incentives, using woods large scale cooperatives to including as source of productive build economies through use of energy, such as forestry. of scale for carbon finance, companies in community for fuelwood textiles. Examine woodlots. plantations potential for and community Projects: greater value woodlots. Mionjo, PLAE, creation from Madagascar charcoal Rural Livelihoods plantations for Productivity industries. and Resilience Project Support Further Provide financing, MEDD, MEH, expansion assessment including through MICC, Centre of efficient of potential for use of carbon Malgache de fuelwood local production finance, for la Canne et du stoves and ethanol efficient stoves; Sucre (CMCS), other clean (sugarcane) integrate into CT-PNEC cooking including ongoing landscape solutions opportunity programs; Project: MG cost of Clean cooking agricultural Continue and project, land use, and expand financial incentives ADES, options for for planting OPEC funds expansion sugarcane and implementing of biogas local production partners. digesters. of ethanol (carbon finance) and provide incentives for adoption of ethanol stoves; Note: Recommendations in green are for implementation in the short term (1-3 years); in blue for the medium term (3-5 years); and in red for long term (5-10 years). 43 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 3 BLUE ECONOMY Photo credit : Pierre-Yves Babelon/Shutterstock.com “The Blue Economy is sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods and job creation, while preserving the health of ocean ecosystems.” World Bank (2021) definition.75 MADAGASCAR’S OCEAN ASSETS provide fish nurseries, carbon storage and coastal protection, and timber; close to half a million Madagascar has vast and biodiversity-rich coastal 59.  hectares of coral reefs in the west, northwest, and marine natural assets. Madagascar is the and northeast and inshore coastal areas host fifth largest island in the world with an EEZ of a high diversity of fish resources important to over 1.22 million square kilometers, an area nearly coastal communities. The waters of Madagascar double that of its landmass. The country has the supports a large diversity of fisheries, including for longest coastline in Africa – 5,600 km – and its crustaceans (e.g., shrimp and crab), sea cucumber, EEZ is the fourth largest,76 following South Africa, demersal fish (e.g., groupers and snappers), small Seychelles, and Mauritius. The country’s location pelagics (e.g., sardines and anchovies) and large is unique, exposed to the open Indian Ocean pelagics, including all main tropical tuna species. on one side and to the protected waters of the The country’s waters, however, only benefit from Mozambique Channel on the other, providing a rich the effects of an upwelling in its southern-most diversity of marine habitats and ecosystems, and part and as a result, the marine ecosystems of supporting diverse marine flora and fauna. Over Madagascar, while rich in biodiversity, are relatively 250,000 hectares of mangroves on the west coast less productive. 75 World Bank, 2021. Riding the Blue Wave: Applying the Blue Economy Approach to World Bank Operations (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099655003182224941/P16729802d9ba60170940500fc7f7d02655 76 The surface of 1,812,300 km2 includes both the EEZ and the Territorial Waters of Madagascar. 44 Blue Economy This considerable marine natural capital, however, 60.  when they peaked at almost 120,000 tons, followed is threatened by climate change, pollution, by a decrease until 2015 when they fell to below overexploitation, and other anthropogenic 80,000 tons. In 2017, marine catches reached pressures.Coastal habitats are important their maximum at above 120,000 but have been economically to Madagascar, providing many declining again ever since (Figure 3.1). benefits and services ranging from important fish nursery grounds and habitats to tourist Madagascar’s marine fisheries resources are likely 63.  destinations, carbon storage and nature-based to be fully overexploited in most coastal areas. solutions for coastal protection. While annual There is evidence of overfishing in all segments trend data is not available for key habitats, various of the sector. In the Menabe region, research has studies provide insights into significant changes shown that within the small-scale fishery, for 13 that have been observed over the last few decades. of the 20 most common species, fishing mortality These studies indicate an overall decline in the exceeds natural mortality and a large proportion of area and/or quality of mangroves, coral reefs, fish are caught before reaching sexual maturity.80 seagrass beds, and beach areas. Within the domestic industrial shrimp fishery, landings were over 7,000 tons from 1986 to 2004, MADAGASCAR’S OCEANIC SECTORS with a peak in 2009 to around 9,000 tons, but have decreased by approximately 50 percent since Madagascar has yet to fully tap into the potential 61.  the mid-2000s and are now stable between 3,000 contributions of its marine natural capital to and 4,000 tons annually.81 In the offshore tuna economic development. The Malagasy ocean fisheries, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission has economy is only just starting to develop, and is assessed the Indian Ocean yellowfin tuna stock primarily focused on marine-related exports – as overfished since 2015, and both bigeye and primarily shrimp exports which represented 3.4 albacore Indian Ocean tuna stocks as subject to percent of the total value of exports in 2020.77 overfishing82 (IOTC, 2022). Tourism and shipping services are relatively underdeveloped (Bolaky, 202278). Marine resources are exploited by industrial, semi- 64.  industrial, artisanal, and traditional fishing fleets FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE operating inshore and offshore. Fisheries activities 62.  The fisheries sector plays a leading role in the range from subsistence to commercial, by both country’s economy. With an annual production domestic and foreign operators. Domestic catches capacity of US$750 million, equivalent to are made up predominantly of finfish, shrimp and more than seven percent of the national gross various invertebrates, while foreign catches are domestic product and a contribution of 6.6 made up largely of tuna, billfish and shark. percent to the total exports, the sector is an important contributor to economic development. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the sector, 65.  Fisheries and aquaculture production totaled in particular small-scale fisheries and coastal 124,537 tons in 2020, with marine fisheries communities. During the pandemic, restrictions on and aquaculture contributing 85 percent of the movements to urban centers and within regions, total.79 This accounts for approximately one curfews and lockdowns have all affected the percent of the total fisheries production in Africa, fishing sector, in particular small-scale fishers, and around 10 percent of the production in the fishmongers, and other economic actors in the region. Small-scale fisheries produced 72,000 sector. In 2020, the demand for fish, especially for tons in 2020 and provided livelihood support to export and the tourism market was significantly coastal communities. Overall, marine catches in reduced, possibly providing some stocks the Madagascar steadily increased from 1950 to 2007 opportunity to recover. While marine aquaculture 77 OEC, 2021. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://oec.world/en/profile/country/mdg 78 Bolaky, B., 2017. Operationalising Blue Economy in Africa: The Case of South West Indian Ocean. ORF Issue Brief No. 398. 79 FAO Statistics. Fisheries and Aquaculture. Available at: https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/statistics 80 Gough et al., 2020. 81 SWIOFISH, 2019. Rapport final « Appui à la réalisation du projet d’amélioration de la pêcherie crevettière à Madagascar » (DP Nº002/17-MRHP/SG/UGP- SWIOFish2 Crédit Nº Q979). 82 IOTC, 2022. Status Summary for Species of Tuna and Tuna-like Species under the IOTC Mandate, as well as other Species Impacted by IOTC Fisheries. Available at: https://iotc.org/science/status-summary-species-tuna-and-tuna-species-under-iotc-mandate-well-other-species-impacted-iotc 45 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Figure 3.1. Madagascar Overall Capture Fisheries, Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture Production (tons) from 1950 to 2020 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Aquaculture production Capture fisheries Marine fisheries Shrimp capture Shrimp aquaculture Source: FAO, 2022. production is much lower than that of marine real importance of the sector to local livelihoods, capture fisheries, its trend shows an overall as a significant number of households practice increase, with the COVID-19 pandemic having subsistence or seasonal fishing and are not impacted production only slightly. captured accurately in official statistics. Many of the country’s food insecurity hotspots are found in Accurate fisheries statistics are essential for 66.  coastal areas, highlighting the role that fisheries and effective fisheries management. While reliable coastal resources play for vulnerable communities fisheries are still lacking, Madagascar is currently as a means of subsistence and for food security. using new and innovative systems to improve data The total economic value of the fisheries sector is collection. For small-scale fisheries, an app-based not known precisely, both because of gaps in official system is currently being deployed in coastal regions, statistics and because so much activity in the allowing data to be compiled in near real-time and sector is either illegal or unreported. compiled in a central database at the ministry in charge of fisheries. In addition, Electronic Reporting Marine Ecosystem Services Systems (ERS) are being deployed onboard industrial fisheries targeting shrimps and tuna.83 Madagascar’s marine and coastal ecosystems 68.  provide direct and indirect economic benefits. 67.  The sector is an important source of livelihoods, These ecosystems provide a variety of services employing 170,000 people directly and 300,000 such as provision of fish, coastal erosion control, indirectly, and supporting an estimated 1.5 million carbon sequestration and tourism. Current people. These numbers, however, underestimate the marine and coastal ecosystem services from five The deployment of these systems is supported by the World Bank Second South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Governance and Shared Growth Project in 83  Madagascar. 46 Blue Economy selected ecosystems in Madagascar —- coral Mangroves provide valuable economic benefits. 70.  reefs, mangroves, seagrass beds, wetlands, Mangroves were estimated to provide over and beaches — have been estimated at US$192 US$82 million of Total Economic Value for the million per year. If these ecosystems, however, country, an average of US$578 per hectare were restored and conserved, these ecosystem per year (WWF, 2021), and are a rich source of services could double and increase to over blue carbon.91 This includes US$38 million in US$337 million annually.84 The region provided provisioning services, US$36 million in regulating the most ecosystem services is Diana. services, US$8 million in cultural services and US$0.38 million in supporting services. Revised Madagascar has abundant mangroves and 69.  estimates of mangrove service suggest a value of seagrass ecosystems. Mangroves in Madagascar US$110 million per year, which could increase to represent around two percent of the global total,85 US$186 million if mangroves were restored and and current mangrove coverage in Madagascar is sustainably managed. Globally, it is estimated approximately 2,600 km2 (Global Mangrove Watch, that mangroves can sequester six to eight mg 2016).86 Mangrove cover declined by around CO2 per ha (tons of CO2 equivalent),92 which would 14 percent between 1990 and 2000,87 but since suggest that the potential for carbon storage in 1996 trends in the total cover of mangroves have Madagascar could range between 15,000 and remained relatively stable. Decline of cover in the 20,000 mg CO2. ‘90s was mostly driven by increased sedimentation from upstream deforestation and over-farming, Seagrass beds are estimated to cover between 71.  conversion of aquaculture ponds and urban expansion.88 The slowdown in mangrove loss 2000 and 4500 km2 in Madagascar, but lack of since the early 2000s is likely due to efforts to available data prevents a precise assessment. In better manage, protect, and restore mangroves, addition to providing fish habitats, it is estimated including through the introduction of government that seagrass beds can store up to 140 mg regulations.89 Furthermore, Madagascar’s NDC CO2 per hectare93,94 around 15 times more than (2016)90 set an ambitious target of restoring over mangroves. Services from seagrass beds were 150,000 ha of forests, including mangroves, by valued at US$15.9 million annually, with the 2030 and restoration activities by the ministry potential to increase to over US$27 million if in charge of fisheries and Blue Economy and the restored and conserved, though these estimates Ministry of Environment, as well as by NGOs and are subject to large uncertainties due to date the private sector, are ongoing. constraints. These values are likely to be an underestimated, given that they only include five selected ecosystems, and because for a number of regions in the 84  southern parts of Madagascar, in particular Androy, Anosy, Atsimo-Antsinana, Vatovavy and Fitovinany, the selected ecosystems are virtually absent. Open-water non-reef fishery were not included in the analysis, and data are lacking or incomplete on tourism and sandy beaches. Western Indian Ocean Mangrove Network. Mangroves of Madagascar. Available at: http://wiomn.org/mangroves-of- 85  madagascar/#:~:text=Madagascar%20has%20one%20of%20the,2%25%20of%20the%20global%20distribution Global Mangrove Watch. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at: https://www.globalmangrovewatch.org/country/ 86  MDG?map=eyJiYXNlbWFwIjoibGlnaHQiLCJ2aWV3cG9ydCI6eyJsYXRpdHVkZSI6LTE5LjgzNTg4MDUxMzE1OTM0LCJsb25naXR1ZGUiOjM0LjQ4NzM1 MTE1MTcyMTU0LCJ6b29tIjo0LjA3OTg1ODY4Nzc0NTMyNCwiYmVhcmluZyI6MCwicGl0Y2giOjB9fQ%3D%3D Jones, T., L.Glass, S. Ganhi, , L. Ravaoarinorotsihoarana, A. Carr, L. Benson, . R. Ratsimba, C. Giri, D. Randriamanatena, and G. Cripps. 2016. Madagascar’s 87  Mangroves: Quantifying Nation-Wide and Ecosystem Specific Dynamics, and Detailed Contemporary Mapping of Distinct Ecosystems. Remote Sensing 16(8):106 Giri, C., & Muhlhausen, J. 2008 Mangrove forest distributions and dynamics in Madagascar (1975–2005). Sensors, 8(4), 2104-2117. 88  Republic of Madagascar, 2014. Ministerial decision no. 32100/2014 bans the cutting of mangrove wood. Available at: http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/ 89  pdf/mad147304.pdf Republic of Madagascar, 2016. Madagascar’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution. Available at: https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/ 90  PublishedDocuments/Madagascar%20First/Madagascar%20INDC%20Eng.pdf WWF, 2021. Policy Brief for Madagascar. Available at: https://www.mangrovealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/A4-document-Policy-brief- 91  Madagascar-1-3.pdf 92 The Blue Carbon Initiative. About Blue Carbon: What are blue carbon ecosystems? Available at: https://www.thebluecarboninitiative.org/about-blue- carbon#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20the,observed%20in%20mature%20tropical%20forests%20* 93 Mcleod, E. et al., 2011. A blueprint for blue carbon: toward an improved understanding of the role of vegetated coastal habitats in sequestering CO2. Front. Ecol. Environ. 9, 552–560 (2011). 94 Fourqurean, J. W. et al., 2012. Seagrass ecosystems as a globally significant carbon stock. Nat. Geosci. 5, 505–509 (2012). 47 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis The potential to monetize blue carbon services 72.  impact marine and coastal habitats in many ways: remains untapped. Madagascar drafted a decree (i) increasing sea surface temperatures will change declaring the government as sole owner of all oceanic conditions, affecting fish abundance and emission reductions and removals generated, with distributions and threatening food security and exclusive right to trade any carbon credits.95 At this livelihoods. It will also affect coastal habitats such point, however, no attempt to trade these rights mangroves as well as coral reefs through increases has yet been made.96 A moratorium on the sale of in frequency and intensity of coral bleaching carbon credits is in place, which has prevented the events, affecting the capacity of these ecosystems issuance of credits in a community-run protected to provide services such as fish nurseries or area for mangroves.97 habitats, as well as nature-based solutions against coastal degradation; (ii) sea level rise will increase Estimates of coral reef cover vary extensively, with 73.  coastal erosion, degrading beaches and ultimately an estimate of 3,934 km2 widely accepted (Burke threatening coastal industries, such as tourism, et al. 2011). Overall, coral cover has declined since and the jobs they provide, and will weaken the 1998, with the major bleaching event of 2015 coastal protection function of mangroves; and to 2016 resulting in more than 50 percent coral (iii) increasing frequency and intensity of climate mortality in 20 percent of monitoring sites.98 For events (e.g., cyclones and floods) will increase this study, ecosystem services provided by coral erosion and damage coastal assets. Pollution, reef was valued at US$42 million per year, with including plastic pollution, from upstream activities the potential to increase to over US$75 million if or other external sources, can impact coastal restored and conserved. habitats and ecosystems and the species that depend on them. Habitat destruction and pollution The health of coastal and marine habitats is 74.  limit the capacity of compromised ecosystems to increasingly at risk. The west coast of Madagascar deliver key services such as fisheries and coastal is vulnerable to coastal erosion with an estimated protection and to provide cost-effective nature- loss of 7-8 mm per year in some areas.99 Significant based solutions to address the impacts of climate storms will likely accelerate coastal erosion, as change. seen in 1997 when wave erosion removed 5.71 to 6.54 m of shoreline. Overall, Madagascar has Tourism an annual net loss due to shoreline erosion from coastal development, storms, and sea level rise.100 Tourism is a growing sector in Madagascar 75.  The loss of these ecosystems, and the services and marine tourism appears to be increasingly they provide, will have significant economic attractive to visitors. Particularly when compared impacts on all coastal and marine sectors and to neighboring countries in the region, the potential communities. Madagascar’s coastal and marine for tourism growth is significant in Madagascar ecosystems are under threat from climate change (Figure 3.2). A visitor survey conducted in and pollution, including from plastics, and other 2012101 indicated that 63 percent of tourists in anthropogenic pressures. Climate change will Madagascar spend time on the coast, broadly 95 The REDD+ Decree (e N° 2021-1113 of October 20, 2021 on the regulation of access to the forest carbon market) sets the legal basis of the benefit sharing mechanism and notes that carbon benefits are considered as “public resources” in Madagascar and as such they are subject to the specific provisions of applicable Malagasy law. Available at : https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/142031644397335762/pdf/Advanced-Draft- Benefit-Sharing-Plan-ER-Program-Atiala-Atsinanana.pdf 96 World Bank, 2022. Advanced Draft Benefit Sharing Plan: ER Program Atiala-Atsinanana (English). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/142031644397335762/Advanced-Draft-Benefit-Sharing-Plan-ER-Program-Atiala-Atsinanana 97 Rakotomahazo et al., 2021. Community Perceptions of a Payment for Ecosystem Services Project in Southwest Madagascar: A Preliminary Study. Land 10: 597. 98 GCRMN. 2020. Status of Coral Reefs of the World: Chapter 5. Status and trends of coral reefs of the Western Indian Ocean region https://gcrmn.net/ wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Chapter-5.-Status-and-trends-of-coral-reefs-of-the-Western-Indian-Ocean-region.pdf 99 Luijendijk, A., G. Hagenaars, R. Ranasinghe, F. Baart, G. Donchyts, S. Aarninkhof. 2018.The State of the World’s Beaches. SCIENTIFIC REPOrTS | (2018) 8:6641 | DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-24630-6 Mentaschi L., M. Vousdoukas, J. Pekel, E. Voukouvalas, L. Feyen. 2017. Global long-term observations of coastal erosion and accretion. SCiEntiFiC 100  REPOrTS | (2018) 8:12876 | DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-30904-w World Bank Group, 2013. “MADAGASCAR Tourism Sector Review: Unlocking the Tourism Potential of an Unpolished Gem.” Washington, DC: World Bank 101  Group. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/16709 48 Blue Economy concentrated in four areas: Nosy Be, Antsiranana, marine and coastal ecosystems, such as Nosy Sainte Marie, and Toliara. The COVID-19 Be and Sainte Marie (Figure 3.3), though slow pandemic significantly impacted tourist arrivals improvement appears to be underway, especially in Madagascar, and the impact was particularly given the recent reopening of Madagascar’s significant for destinations that rely heavily on borders in March 2022. Figure 3.2. International Tourist Arrivals and Revenue in Countries Bordering the Mozambique Channel 2500 2500 2000 2000 International tourism arrivals (‘000) Revenues (Mill current US$) 1500 1500 1000 1000 500 500 0 0 2001 2003 2006 2009 2011 2013 2016 2001 2003 2006 2009 2011 2013 2016 Comoros Madagascar Mozambique Seycheller Tanzania Source: Ghermandi et al. 2019102 Figure 3.3. Trend of Tourist Arrivals in Madagascar from 2015 to 2020103 Madagascar 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source: World Bank, 2022. Andrea Ghermandia, A., D.Oburab, C. Knudsenc, P. Nunesd., 2019. Marine ecosystem services in the Northern Mozambique Channel: A geospatial and 102  socio-economic analysis for policy support Ecosystem Services 35:1–12. 103 World Bank, 2022. The World Bank in Madagascar. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/madagascar/overview#1 49 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis An interesting example of Malagasy marine 76.  the NMC region amounts to US$5198.5 million tourism is whale shark watching as well as other annually.106 This study highlights the importance of megafauna (e.g., whales, manta rays) in Nosy Be, healthy ecosystems to support a vibrant tourism which almost doubled from 2015 to 2019. Revenue sector in Madagascar. from the three-month whale shark watching season has been estimated at US$1.5 million.104 Although Maritime Transport/Shipping this is a small and relatively niche sector in a broader, US$500 million sector, it does provide an Madagascar is home to 17 ports, six of which are 79.  important source of revenue for the local population open to international traffic.90 In 2020 the value engaged in tourism. This rapid growth in the sector of transport services trade was US$1.4 million, has led the operators to identify the need for with 40 percent accounting for transport of food. The national fleet consists of 27 flagged vessels improved management of such activities to avoid with a total of 3,000 DWT (UNCTADStat, 2022).105 overcrowding, provide regulations and training, and The two main ports are located in Toamasina on to bolster the sustainability of this activity.108 the west coast and Tôlanaro in the southeast, with 75 percent of international freight moving The cruise tourism segment is limited in Madagascar. 77.  through Toamasina. This is the country’s largest There are plans to try and capture a share of cruise port facility, serving several large urban areas and tourism by expanding or upgrading selected ports in particular Antananarivo. Other secondary ports (Tôlanaro and Saint Marie), though the environmental are mostly used for cabotage around the country, and social impacts of such developments need to as well as in the subregion, to transport goods be fully and properly assessed. The current state and passengers.106 Ports are characterized by of ports (discussed below), as well as relatively infrastructure obsolescence, lack of maintenance low service standards compared to other countries and insufficient modernization. 82 As a result, along the same cruise routes are likely to limit any port performance and capacity remain small development of this segment. compared to other ports in the region. Despite its geostrategic location in the Indian Ocean and its While accurate estimates of the current value 78.  proximity to important shipping lines, Madagascar of marine tourism across Madagascar are not is hampered by its low competitiveness, both available, there is information at the regional scale. regionally and internationally, which impacts Economic modeling from a study of the Northern maritime transport, international trade, and Mozambique Channel (NMC) ecosystem, which maritime tourism. includes the west coast of Madagascar, indicated that a one percent decrease in the number of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) would result in POTENTIAL NEW OCEANIC decreases in the number of international and ECONOMIC SECTORS domestic arrivals of, respectively, 1.44 percent The coast and EEZ of Madagascar hold 80.  and 0.3 percent. A reduction by one percent in the considerable potential for emerging sectors such length of beaches would result in 0.24 percent as mariculture, offshore renewable energy, and and 2.47 percent decreases in the number of marine biotechnology. international and domestic arrivals, respectively. Additional environmental degradation such Mariculture as reductions in wetland areas, lower bird and mammal populations, and bleached coral reef Currently, mariculture remains underdeveloped 81.  areas might have further negative impacts on with only a few farms in operation, but has the number of coastal arrivals. In aggregate, the significant growth potential. Mariculture in monetary estimate of coastal tourism values in Madagascar comprises three distinct components: Ziegler, J., S. Diamant, S. Pierce, R. Bennett, J. Kisaka., 2021. Economic Value and Public Perceptions of Whale Shark Tourism in Nosy Be, Madagascar. 104  Tourism in Marine Environments, 16(3):167-182. 105 UNCTADStat, 2022. Maritime Profile: Madagascar. Available at: https://unctadstat.unctad.org/countryprofile/maritimeprofile/en-gb/450/index.html Logistics Capacity Assessment. Madagascar Port Assessment. Available at: https://dlca.logcluster.org/display/public/ 106  DLCA/2.1+Madagascar+Port+Assessment 50 Blue Economy shrimp, seaweed, and sea cucumber. Economically, limiting loss of equipment. Seaweed production the most important mariculture sector is shrimp also has considerable potential, especially given farming, initiated in 1992 and with a production that it contributes to carbon storage, improving of 5,420 tons in 2020 worth over US$50 million.107 water quality and reducing pollution. Much of the production is exported, and generated 3.5 percent of export value in 2019 (IDDRI, 2019).108 Offshore Renewable Energy Madagascar is a significant producer in east Africa, and the only producer of farmed organic Madagascar’s current energy generation (1,849 83.  shrimp in the world. So far, much of this production GWH) is land-based, with much of it generated by has been carried out in mangrove areas, with some fossil fuels and hydro-electric facilities, and solar historical loss due to mangrove conversion to accounting for less than one percent of production shrimp ponds. (AFDB 2021).110 This capacity, combined with poor distribution infrastructure, means that only 82.  More recently, sea cucumber and seaweed 15 percent of the population has access to the cultivation has started, mostly in the southwest national electricity grid, and five percent in rural and involving local communities. Seaweed areas. Off-grid infrastructure provides additional production in Madagascar has now reached 17,410 access for many, but this remains largely small- tons (2,300 t of dried product) and sea cucumber scale.111 Renewable energy, including marine production (10 t of dried product) (SNDAM, 2021). renewable energy, therefore has considerable Both commodities provide income for many potential to improve access for many more. families, and particularly women who represent 50 percent of the labor force. An evaluation by Wind potential is highest in the northern part 84.  NORAD of aquaculture projects in southwest (around Antsiranana) and the southern part Madagascar from 2016 to 2019 concluded that (around Taolagnaro), with wind speeds suitable the introduction of seaweed and sea cucumber for electric production more than 7m/s (50 m farming increased family incomes by US$55.5 high).112 The current potential for offshore wind per month for sea cucumber and US$1.30 per day energy in Madagascar is estimated at 154 GW, with for seaweed.109 Although these figures remain 45 GW from fixed infrastructure and 109 GW from modest, many of the beneficiaries were laborers floating.113 A recent study114 examined six sources who had previously made US$1 per day or were of offshore renewable energy and concluded that unemployed. Both forms of mariculture can be Madagascar has high potential for wave and wind sustained, with minimal impacts, if best practices energy, and more moderate potential for ocean are implemented, including appropriate siting, current, Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) avoiding mangrove harvesting and conversion, and and Floating Photovoltaic Power (FVP). FAO, 2022. Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics. Global aquaculture production 1950-2020 (FishStatJ). In: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Division. Rome: 107  FAO. Available at: www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj/en Nandini Agarwal, Chiara Bonino, Ana Deligny, Luisa El Berr, Charlotte Festa, Manon Ghislain, Katarina Homolova, Ana Kuhn Velasquez, Ilyia Kurtev, 108  Alexandra Oliveira Pinto, Vincent Virat, Julia Serban-Penhoat and Marie Thomas, 2019. Getting the Shrimp’s Share: Mangrove Deforestation and Shrimp Consumption, Assessment and Alternatives. Available at: https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Rapport/ Getting%20the%20shrimp%20s%20share.pdf Joseph Mario Ray and Volaniaina Robsona, 2019. An Aquatic Industry for Madagascar: Increased and Diversified Sources of Revenue in Southwest 109  Madagascar (2016 – 2019). Available at: https://www.norad.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/publikasjoner-2020/ngo-evalueringer/final-evaluation- report-an-aquaculture-industry-for-madagascar-increased-and-diversified-sources-of-revenue-in-southwest-madagascar-2016--2019.pdf African Natural Resources Centre, 2021. Assessing the potential of Offshore Renewable Energy in Africa. A Background Paper. African Development 110  Bank, Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire. Republic of Madagascar, 2014. Expression of Interest to participate in the Scaling Up Renewable Energy In Low Income Countries Program. Available at: 111  https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/cif_enc/files/meeting-documents/madagascar_eoi_0.pdf Republic of Madagascar, 2014. Expression of Interest to participate in the Scaling Up Renewable Energy In Low Income Countries Program. Available at: 112  https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/cif_enc/files/meeting-documents/madagascar_eoi_0.pdf World Bank, 2020. Offshore Wind Technical Potential in Madagascar. Available at: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ 113  en/879871586853505752/pdf/Technical-Potential-for-Offshore-Wind-in-Madagascar-Map.pdf Technavio, 2022. Blue Biotechnology Market by Application and Geography – Forecast and Analysis 2021-2025. Available at: https://www.technavio. 114  com/report/blue-biotechnology-market-industry-analysis&nowebp 51 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Marine Biotechnology The Blue Economy approach in Madagascar 87.  should be based on healthy and sustainably Globally, marine biotechnology is expected to 85.  managed coastal and marine ecosystems. grow by US$2.5 billion by 2024.114 Africa’s marine Existing and new sectors of the Malagasy waters are a potential source of organisms with Blue Economy depend on or impact the health biotechnical applications.115 Several surveys of coastal and marine ecosystems, which in Madagascar identified 91 species of algae, are currently degraded and under threat from 10 species of seagrass, 276 species of hard anthropogenic pressures and climate change. coral, 271 species of fish and 19 echinoderms, Sustainably managing these ecosystems respectively.116 One of Madagascar’s longest is essential for the development of the Blue bioprospecting projects screened marine plants and microorganisms for potential medical development Economy approach, and associated with their (ICBG, 1998-2013). The project contributed to restoration, the value of the ecosystem services establishing the Ambodivahibe Marine Protected that they provide could at least double. The Area.117 Potential blue bioeconomy research expansion of management systems fully involving could be undertaken by the National Centre for coastal communities, such as manager transfers, Oceanographic Research and the University of co-management could be scaled-up at the Antananarivo,118 but such endeavors will require the national level. This could make the Blue Economy development of a supportive regulatory framework. a pillar of the Malagasy economy, while improving the well-being of coastal communities. MAXIMIZING THE VALUE OF THE Progress in transitioning to a Blue Economy 88.  OCEAN ECONOMY: A BLUE ECONOMY in Madagascar has been relatively slow so far, APPROACH for several reasons, including the COVID-19 pandemic. The benefits of a Blue Economy Madagascar’s marine and coastal areas deliver 86.  approach in Madagascar are important and can important economic and social benefits, both nationally and at the community level. There is be achieved in many of the current and emerging also, however, potential to deliver considerably ocean sectors (Table 3.1). Some of these benefits more benefits, not only through the development will come from the introduction of new policies of new sectors, such as renewable energy and regulations or the strengthening of existing and mariculture, but also by ensuring that the ones. Other benefits will result from the creation development of existing oceanic sectors is more of enabling conditions for public or private sustainable. To that end, Madagascar should sector investment in the various sectors, and consider speeding up its transition to a Blue from innovative financing, increased knowledge, Economy approach, where the development of training, and better access to finance and current and emerging marine sectors is integrated, technologies. Key to realizing these benefits is and where ecosystem health and services are having political commitment, a strategy, or policy sustained or improved, resulting in an economic framework built on Marine Spatial Planning growth that contributes to improved livelihoods (MSP), and a private sector willing to invest when and jobs. The integrated approach to the Blue the enabling environment has been developed. Economy provides a framework to deliver MSP is an important component of this transition economic and social benefits with minimal impact because it can help accurately value marine on marine and coastal resources, or in some cases and coastal ecosystems and the services they restoration. These benefits are not just accrued for provide, facilitate conflict resolution between coastal communities but also for urban and inland different users, and provide a degree of certainty rural communities. to investors to access marine resources or areas. Wetaya, 2022. Blue economy seen as catalyst for Africa’s economic resurgence. Alliance for Science. Available at: https://allianceforscience.cornell. 115  edu/blog/2022/02/blue-economy-seen-as-catalyst-for-africas-economic-resurgence/ Obura D, Di Carlo G, Rabearisooa A and Oliver T, 2011. “A Rapid Marine Biodiversity Assessment of the Coral Reefs of Northeastern Madagascar, Bulletin 116  of Biological Assessment.” Fort Dauphin. USDA, 2013. Biodiversity Conservation and Drug Discovery in Madagascar. Available at: https://reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/0215326- 117  biodiversity-conservation-and-drug-discovery-in-madagascar.html Dyer, J., 2019. Ensuring Ocean Sovereignty, Marine Resilience and Investment Opportunities for Africa and its Indian Ocean Rim Island Developing 118  States: The Economic Potential of Marine Biotechnology under Climate Change for Investors and Other Stakeholders. Blue Economy Future.org.za. 52 Blue Economy Table 3.1. Distribution of the Benefits of Transitioning to a Blue Economy in Madagascar Main Current and Emerging Ocean Sectors Benefits Fisheries Tourism Shipping Mariculture Renewable Marine Energy Biotech Improved livelihoods and jobs including diversification Safer working conditions Improved investment conditions and diversification Increased public-private investment partnerships Better food security and health Improved governance of marine resources Increased equitable rights to marine resources and areas Participation in decision making Enhanced sustainable food production Improved value chains Restored/enhanced coastal infrastructure Increase use of nature-based solutions Better access to energy from offshore renewables Reduced carbon emissions Improved climate resilience Enhanced climate adaptation Healthier marine ecosystems Better transboundary resource sharing Note: Darker cells indicate greater benefits. Source: UNECA, 2016119 89.  The transition to a Blue Economy approach can INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE AND be undermined if it is not well thought out and SUPPORT FOR A BLUE ECONOMY guided by a systematic and transparent strategy APPROACH IN MADAGASCAR or framework.123 Possible risks include the marginalization of stakeholders and ultimate The development of the framework of the Blue 90.  rejection of the necessary reforms, conflicts Economy in Madagascar began in 2015 with the over space and access to resources, increased formulation of the Blue Economy Policy Letter pollution or resource degradations, outsourcing within the Ministry of Fisheries.120 While this of skilled labor, reduced investments, policy letter was mostly focused on fisheries, it increased gender disparity, widening inequality, nevertheless set the country on a path toward a increased carbon emissions, increased climate Blue Economy approach. In 2016, the government vulnerability, maladaptation to climate change, established the State Secretariat in charge of the and increased conflicts and bureaucratic Sea under the Prime Minister’s office, followed complexity. The last two issues are important by Decree N° 2017-936, establishing the National as they will affect the willingness of the private Framework for the establishment of the Blue sector to invest. Economy in 2017 and the drafting of a National Blue Economy Strategy in 2018. 119 UNECA, 2019. Africa’s Blue Economy: A Policy Handbook. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: UNECA. Ministère des ressources halieutiques et de la pêche (MRHP), 2015. Lettre de Politique BLEUE. Available at: http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/ 120  mad163970.pdf 53 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 91.  In 2018, the Government of Madagascar also Fisheries benefited from direct support by the FAO to Many fisheries in Madagascar are overfished, 94.  organize consultations with stakeholders, but there are opportunities to improve the consolidate the strategy, and strengthen value of catches through better post-harvest commitments from oceanic sectors. Madagascar handling and processing, and to diversify fishing reiterated its commitment to the Blue Economy activities, including through synergies with at the High-Level Oceans meeting in Nairobi in the tourism sector (e.g., pesca-tourism/sports late 2018. Since then, the General Directorate of fishing). However, the bigger challenge to long- Presidential Projects has met with stakeholders term sustainability in this sector is improved in the Blue Economy to revitalize the National governance including accurate stock assessments Committee of the Blue Economy (CNEB). In 2019, to inform better management planning, and the Ministry in charge of Fisheries absorbed the enforcement of fisheries regulations. Climate General Secretariat of the Sea with the creation of change, and the impacts it has on stocks and the Directorate General for Oceans. In 2020, Decree marine and coastal ecosystems, also needs to be N° 2020-158 created the Department of the Sea front and center in the formulation or revision of and Blue Economy under the Directorate General fisheries management. of Fisheries and Aquaculture within the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries. In August 2021, a dedicated Ministry for Fisheries and the Tourism Blue Economy was created. Marine tourism in Madagascar is underdeveloped 95.  and opportunities abound to diversify the sector. The political will to commit Madagascar to a 92.  Potential growth has been identified in wildlife Blue Economy approach has thus been clear and tourism, diving (day and liveaboard) and cultural consistent. To date, however, this political will tourism. Many of the development challenges has not yet translated into measurable action highlighted in Chapter 4 also apply to the marine and more needs to be done, including with the tourism sector. Given the sector’s high reliance growing support from development partners. The on healthy oceans, a significant challenge is to African Development Bank (AfDB) is currently ensure that marine pollution, including from marine supporting Madagascar in finalizing its Blue debris, and water quality are well managed. Here Economy policy and developing an associated again, the impacts of climate change threaten the investment plan. This plan will inventory potential sustainability of this sector, and planning needs to innovative financing with recommendations account for challenges such as coastal erosion, to mobilize funds to support the promotion of coral bleaching, and shifting species distributions. the Blue Economy and identify the potential for The integrated nature of the Blue Economy investment in the Blue Economy in the 14 coastal supported by MSP can support the needed regions. Several partners, including the World response, for example, by facilitating synergies Bank, through the Second South West Indian between tourism managers and coastal port Ocean Fisheries Governance and Shared Growth and infrastructure managers, as well as disaster Project (SWIOFish2), are supporting MSP at the response agencies, to ensure tourism can recover regional level. quickly from cyclone events. OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Maritime Transport FOR A BLUE ECONOMY APPROACH If the necessary investments can be encouraged, 96.  93.  An effective Blue Economy strategy provides the Madagascar’s ports could become regional trade framework to enhance the sustainability of oceanic hubs, leading to further port developments and sectors development. It does so by identifying trading.82 The potential for trans shipping and best practices, prioritizing the sectors to integrate, for bunkering of decarbonized fuels, such as and identifying the appropriate locations for ammonia, could put Madagascar at the forefront development of future industries such as offshore of new regional efforts to decarbonize shipping. renewable energy, aquaculture, tourism, and As things currently stand, however, most ports are future ports for shipping. This Blue Economy in need of major upgrading to be competitive in lens, however, also needs to be applied to each the region. These upgrades and expansions, in the individual oceanic sector. context of the development of the Blue Economy, 54 Blue Economy must consider social concerns and environmental addition, other social and environmental concerns impacts on coastal ecosystems and their services must be addressed proactively. as well as on other oceanic sectors. Here again, these risks can best be addressed through an Marine Biotechnology integrated approach to managing marine and coastal resources, through MSP. The potential for biotechnology applications 99.  from marine species in Malagasy waters is Mariculture considerable. A proactive strategy needs to be developed for the sector to establish the enabling The sector is clearly undeveloped and could 97.  conditions to attract necessary private sector be tapped to generate revenue — including for investments. The experience of bioprospecting the exports — to support livelihoods and improve food terrestrial flora and fauna of Madagascar provides security. Shrimp farming, in particular, could clearly many lessons on developing such a strategy and be further developed, with a 2013 study estimating building these enabling environmental conditions. the potential for shrimp production at estimated As such, marine bioprospecting should be included at 58,000 tons per year. Increasing production, in any Blue Economic strategy for the country. however, risks further impacting mangroves and even legislation and regulations currently on the books are not effectively implemented.112 RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADVANCE Farming of other marine species such as sea THE BLUE ECONOMY APPROACH cucumber and seaweed are in the early stages Madagascar is already well engaged on a path 100.  of development and the potential for expansion towards a Blue Economy approach, with a view to is considerable. This sector directly depends managing and generating more benefits from its on healthy ecosystems, and given the need for extensive marine space for such operations, the marine and coastal resources. However, stronger potential for habitat degradation and conflicts with cross-sectoral coordination and collaboration are current and emerging sectors is also great. Further required to make this vision a reality, including development should be considered within a through extensive consultations involving all broader Blue Economy approach, including relying stakeholders, such as the private sector and on extensive MSP. coastal communities. The implementation of a Blue Economy approach requires a strengthened institutional setup to ensure that cross-sectoral Offshore Renewable Energy coordination can take place effectively. At the 98.  The opportunities to develop offshore renewable sectoral levels, trade-off and compromise may be energy are promising. The challenges for the required since the development of one oceanic sector are in establishing the enabling conditions sector may limit the development of others. Early for private investment that delivers affordable planning, including through MSP, can allow such energy and creates decent work opportunities, yet policy decisions to be made early on and provide maintains marine ecosystem help and does not adequate guidance for public and private sector generate conflicts with other users of the same investments. A number of threats will likely hinder space. A Blue Economy approach can support the the development of the Blue Economy, including development of this sector, especially through a climate change and marine pollution, and these sector strategy that draws on MSP to best identify should be considered throughout development sites for new projects, thus building the enabling and implementation to adapt and mitigate their conditions for private sector investment. In impacts. Mamy Andriatiana, 2013. Field Report from Madagascar. SPORE. Available at: https://spore.cta.int/en/dossiers/article/shrimp-for-export-a-unique- 121  strategy-sid03dfdc39e-2317-42b0-bf3e-d3977b452852 55 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table 3.2. Summary Table for Recommendations Recommendation Study/ Legal/ Regulatory/ Capacity Building Investment Assessment Policy Change Environmental Assess current Review and Strengthen Encourage public-private Threats state of marine strengthen relevant capacity of sector investments in pollution, including policies and private sector to marine plastics waste plastic, threatening regulation to reduce uptake circular management and coastal ecosystems marine pollution economy recycling including from approach for land-based sources marine plastics and to establish and to better enabling conditions manage plastic for a marine plastics waste circular economy Blue carbon Assess blue Integrate blue carbon Identify emission carbon storage in potential into next reduction and removals mangroves and NDC revision markets for blue carbon seagrass beds credits to better protect them and leverage financial resources Review and Assess the Draft appropriate Build capacity amend regulatory regulatory barriers regulations to across the frameworks to to a) an integrated address the barriers legal system improve investment Blue Economy; b) at national and to facilitate climates especially the establishment subnational levels investments and for emerging of emerging sectors to better enforce industries and to (e.g., marine compliance increase compliance renewable energy); within Blue and mitigating c) compliance in Economy sectors impacts on marine key sectors at national and ecosystems subnational levels Finalize, adopt Institutional Assess ways to Build state Mainstream Blue and implement a functional review strengthen the actor capacity Economy activities into Blue Economy (BE) implementation of the to integrated marine sectors; strategy BE strategy across management of sectors marine sectors Formulate Blue Economy and implement BE progress monitoring strategy system; Evaluation of BE strategy progress and effectiveness after 5 years Review funding BE public Mainstream funding Improve Explore impact financing; needs for expenditure review; for BE coordination decision makers Blue Economy and monitoring; understanding of Establish long-term coordination and Assess options the benefits of the funding programs monitoring and and the regulatory Propose policy BE approach; to foster BE explore incentives changes needed for and regulatory entrepreneurship and and financing innovative financing changes to allow Strengthen innovation; options aligned and incentives for innovative financing small-medium the uptake of Blue mechanisms; enterprise Explore incentives to withblue finance Economy activities financial reduce pollution from principles and technologies Propose policy and capacities urban and industrial regulatory changes to access to sources; to facilitate access to financing for BE relevant incentives Explore incentives to activities improve or develop blue value chains 56 Blue Economy Recommendation Study/ Legal/ Regulatory/ Capacity Building Investment Assessment Policy Change Formulate national Assess the Draft national MSP Build capacity Prepare and fund MSP framework to compatibility of framework to guide with key sectors approved MSP guide subnational existing sector decision making and stakeholders implementation plans MSP efforts and link plans with BE and formulation of to effectively to sectoral planning strategy subnational plans; participate in with a focus on planning and engaging the private Review and make decision making sector recommendations aligned to for revisions to key Blue Economy marine sector policies approaches and regulations for better alignment and implementation of the BE Strategy Factor climate Review and assess Mainstream climate Build sector Allocate resources change in Blue the impact of consideration as part actor capacity to revise key sector Economy activities climate change on of any regulatory to integrate strategies to address Madagascar’s Blue review and revision climate change climate change impacts Economy adaptation and mitigation measures into sector activities Better understand Undertake capacity Explore the Prepare and implement the skills gap for needs assessment capacities of strategy to fill the Blue Economy across key sectors existing training knowledge gaps sectors and institutes to formulate plans to implement skills fill the gaps strategy and related costs to public and private sector Note: Where recommendations are in green they are for implementation in the short term (1-3 years; where they are in blue they are in the medium term (3-5 years). 57 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 4 PROTECTED AREAS AND Photo credit : Natia Tsiky NATURE-BASED TOURISM MADAGASCAR’S BIODIVERSITY: Madagascar’s marine biodiversity is also 102.  IMPORTANCE AND MAJOR THREATS outstanding. With 5,600 kilometers of coast – the longest in Africa – 1,400 kilometers of coral Madagascar is one of the most biologically diverse 101.  reefs and 3,300 square kilometers of mangroves, places on the planet. While the island is not Madagascar’s exceptional biodiversity is also exceptionally rich in the number of species, most marine. Marine biodiversity in Madagascar’s of its plant and animal species are endemic:122 Exclusive Economic Zone of over one million more than 90 percent of plant species, a third of square kilometers is the most marine diverse in the birds and all amphibians and lemurs are found Western Indian Ocean and one of the most diverse nowhere else. In addition, the many endemic in the Indian Ocean (CBD, 2022; CEPF, 2014b). The groups present on the island are ancient, having country’s marine waters are rich in coral species evolved from their closest relatives many million (380), reef fish (788), eight endemic species of years ago123 and therefore forming groups without sharks and one species of dugong. Humpback any close relatives elsewhere. Madagascar is also whales breed and three other species migrate large enough to have several very distinct biomes, through Madagascar’s EEZ (Botosoamananto allowing further species differentiation within et al., 2021; CEPF, 2014a). Madagascar’s marine the landmass. The island’s flora and fauna have waters are contained within the Agulhas Current evolved not only under isolation but under very large marine ecosystem which is characterized different conditions to mainland Africa, resulting in by warm waters (20-30 degrees Celsius) and low the globally unique ecosystems seen today.124 primary productivity, except a few small areas of 122. An endemic species is a species native to, and restricted to, a particular geographical region (IUCN definition). 123. Madagascar separated from Gondwana about 166 million years ago and from India about 88 million years ago. 124. Ganzhorn et al., 2014. 58 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism upwelling (CEPF, 2014a). This marine ecosystem the COVID-19 pandemic, tourism, including in supports the country’s marine biodiversity as protected areas, was a rapidly growing economic it contains the majority of coral reefs in the sector, providing one in 10 jobs globally.127 As Western Indian Ocean. Madagascar’s proximity to indicated in Chapter 1, in 2019 Madagascar’s continental Africa protects its west coast resulting tourism sector, the vast majority of which is in two marine ecoregions: Western and Northern nature-based, contributed 12.7 percent128 of Madagascar — the marine biodiversity hotspot GDP and 9.9 percent of employment (including — and Southeast Madagascar, where exposed both its direct and indirect contribution). A 2012 coastline limits biodiversity. visitor survey129 indicated that 64 percent of visitors to Madagascar visit at least one national 103.  Madagascar’s biodiversity and ecosystems are park, although just six national parks (out of 123 of global importance, but they especially make a protected area sites) account for 83 percent of major contribution to domestic economic growth, visits. Madagascar’s tourism products leverage resilience, and jobs, including from tourism. As the country’s astounding biodiversity, landscapes Chapter 2 illustrated, Madagascar’s forests, where and unique culture. Tourism provides jobs to the majority of protected areas and greatest communities living near protected areas, either biodiversity are located, also play a key role in broader directly (e.g., guides, drivers, hotel and restaurant watershed protection and flood management, staff) or indirectly (e.g., food and services to the including in prevention of erosion. They also help hotels and restaurants). Tourism is a significant to maintain water flows for hydro-electric power contributor to local, regional, and national value generation, fresh water, and irrigated agriculture. chains (e.g., hospitality, travel agencies, handicraft, Two national parks, for example —Montagne agriculture), as well as to park fees, tax revenues, d’Ambre and Ranomafana — provide hydropower foreign currency, and foreign direct investment. and drinking water to Antsiranana, Fianarantsoa, Furthermore, it ranks well in terms of female Ambalavao and Mananjary (a total population of participation in the tourism labor market (11th out 400,000). Marine biodiversity in Madagascar’s one of 136). Marine and coastal tourism is important, million km2 EEZ is the richest in the West Indian with 63 percent of tourists surveyed reporting Ocean. Its mangroves, shorelines and coral reefs spending time at a beach, although such visitation help protect coastal areas against storm surges from is concentrated in four main areas (Nosy Be, typhoons and other extreme weather events and Antsiranana, Sainte Marie Island, and Toliara). are important spawning grounds for a wide range of Given its pristine beaches, islands, and coral reefs, fish species. Madagascar has been classified one of the country has a comparative advantage in the the world’s highest conservation priorities,125 with region for the development of high-value luxury protected areas being the principal tool used for the marine and nautical tourism development in conservation of biodiversity. Sustainably managed addition to its traditional nature-based, terrestrial tourism in protected areas can also make a major products.130 In addition, Madagascar’s tourism contribution to economic development, as well as to attractions are spread throughout the island the continued conservation of the protected areas and extend beyond urban areas into some of the themselves. highest poverty regions. 104.  Nature-based tourism plays an important role in Tourists come to Madagascar for leisure, stay 105.  Madagascar’s economy. Globally, protected areas longer and spend more than in comparable receive eight billion visits a year126 and before destinations. Madagascar’s yield (average 125. USAID, 2022. Madagascar Environment and Climate Change. Available at: https://www.usaid.gov/madagascar/environment#:~:text=Madagascar%20 is%20one%20of%20the,culturally%2C%20and%20economically%20valuable%20resources 126. Balmford, Andrew, Jonathan M. H. Green, Michael Anderson, James Beresford, Charles Huang, Robin Naidoo, Matt Walpole, and Andrea Manica, 2015. Walk on the Wild Side: Estimating the Global Magnitude of Visits to Protected Areas. PLOS Biology 13 (2):e1002074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pbio.1002074. 127. WTTC, 2019. Travel and Tourism Performance, 2019. Available at: https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact 128. WTTC: Madagascar: Research Highlights 2021. Available at: https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact/moduleId/704/itemId/153/controller/ DownloadRequest/action/QuickDownload. Updated from IFC: Creating Markets in Madagascar: Private Sector Diagnostic, 2021. Available at: https:// wbgeconsult2.worldbank.org/wbgect/download?uuid=31e955b4-7aae-4b2c-9685-c3bdb613e044 129. World Bank, 2013. MADAGASCAR Tourism Sector Review: Unlocking the Tourism Potential of an Unpolished Gem. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/16709 130. IFC, 2021. Creating Markets in Madagascar: Country Private Sector Diagnostic. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/ wps/wcm/connect/publications_ext_content/ifc_external_publication_site/publications_listing_page/cpsd-madagascar 59 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis spent per visitor) in 2010 to 2017 was by far the weak governance with limited monitoring control highest among six comparative countries,131 with and surveillance has resulted in illegal fishing. US$2,626 earned per tourist in 2017. In addition, Moreover, licenses are issued to foreign vessels prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the country with little understanding of the stock status enjoyed a high average length of stay (15 days) for specific species.134 Habitat degradation, and high return visitor rates (40 percent) among including loss of seagrass135 and loss of coastal leisure tourists. Visitors are mainly European mangroves through logging and poorly managed leisure tourists and key markets are those development,136 has also contributed to declining with historical links to Madagascar. France is catches. Madagascar’s coral reefs have also historically the largest source market by far, shown a relatively rapid and significant decline in making up 24 percent of international arrivals in coral cover from 50 percent to 30 percent in the 2018. Other key markets are Italy (15 percent), last 20 years, losing 20 percent of cover, or around particularly for the northern island destination of one percent per year, driven by destructive fishing Nosy Be, and the United States (two percent). The practices, pollution, sedimentation from land- number of visitors has declined sharply as a result based activities and climate change. Ecosystem of the COVID-19 pandemic, but tourism has the deterioration is of concern not only because of potential to play a major role in the post COVID-19 the loss of globally significant species found in recovery. The challenge is to ensure that, moving no other country, but also because of the loss of forward, tourism is inclusive and sustainable, the regulating and protection services that intact and that it contributes to economic growth while ecosystems provide (e.g., climate resilience), as conserving biodiversity. well as the loss of assets which play a key role in Madagascar’s economy (e.g., ensuring livelihoods 106.  Madagascar’s ecosystems have deteriorated over for rural populations). the last five decades and their health and resilience are under threat. Most protected areas, and most EVOLUTION AND MANAGEMENT OF of Madagascar’s endemic flora and fauna, are MADAGASCAR’S PROTECTED AREA found exclusively in forests, which are shrinking and increasingly fragmented. Thus, forest loss SYSTEM and threats to the integrity of protected areas Madagascar’s protected area management has 108.  – and their ability to generate tourism revenues expanded rapidly over recent decades. Its first – are closely linked. This deterioration has been national parks were created in 1927, and by the largely due to increased pressure on the land from mid-1980s, the network included 36 protected population growth,132 combined with poverty-driven, areas whose main focuses were conservation and low productivity subsistence agriculture based research. In 1991, with the assistance of the World on shifting cultivation, livestock rearing, firewood Bank, Madagascar launched Africa's first National collection and charcoal production, as well on the Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), whose objective logging of precious woods, cash crop cultivation, was to “reconcile the population with its environment artisanal mining, and hunting.133 to achieve sustainable development,” conserve the country’s critical biodiversity, and by doing Marine and coastal ecosystem health has, 107.  so, improve the livelihoods of local communities similarly, been damaged by poor management dependent on natural resources. This was followed and unsustainable practices. Marine resources by an ambitious, multi-donor program of support are over-fished by both small-scale fisheries which provided considerable external financing to the and mostly offshore industrial fisheries, where conservation of biodiversity. By 2003, the protected 131. Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. 132. WDI, 2022. Madagascar’s population was 4.1 million in 1950, compared with nearly 28 million in 2022. 133. IFC, 2021. Creating Markets in Madagascar: Country Private Sector Diagnostic. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/ wps/wcm/connect/publications_ext_content/ifc_external_publication_site/ publications_listing_page/cpsd-madagascar 134. WAVES, 2013. The Global Partnership on Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services. Washington DC, World Bank Group. Available at: https://www.wavespartnership.org/sites/waves/files/images/WAVES-Annual-Report-2013.pdf 135. Sieglind Wallner-Hahn, Malin Dahlgren, and Maricela de la Torre-Castro, 2022. Linking Seagrass Ecosystem Services to Food Security: The Example of Southwestern Madagascar’s Small-scale Fisheries. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356541216_Linking_seagrass_ecosystem_ services_to_food_security_The_example_of_southwestern_Madagascar’s_small-scale_fisheries 136. Vyawahare, Malavika, 2020. “An Export Boom Threatens to Put Madagascar’s Mud Crabs in Hot Water.” Mongabay Series. Available at: https://news. mongabay.com/2020/07/an-export-boom-threatens-to-put-madagascars-mud-crabs-in-hot-water/ 60 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism area network had expanded to 46 sites covering created, such as the National Environment Office 1.7 million ha and has since grown to include 123 (Office National pour l’Environnement, ONE) and the sites covering 7.1 million ha, or 12 percent of the National Agency for Protected Area Management national territory. Since most of these are in forests, (Association National pour la Gestion des Aires and natural forests cover 14 percent of the country, Protégées, ANGAP, now Madagascar National approximately half of the natural forest area is now Parks, MNP), in charge of the management of all under protected area management. protected areas. ANGAP (MNP) was created as a parastatal organization, outside the direct control 109.  Marine protected areas emerged more recently but of the government, and took over the management have also expanded rapidly. With 5,600 kilometers of protected areas from the ministry responsible of coast – the longest in Africa – 1,400 kilometers for the environment. The NEAP also supported of coral reefs and 3,300 square kilometers of the national law requiring environmental impact mangroves, Madagascar’s marine biodiversity is assessment and impact mitigation for new exceptional. Marine conservation was limited to developments, and legal frameworks allowing a handful of marine protected areas and some co-management of natural resources with local promising experiences of Locally Managed communities. Marine Areas (LMMAs) until the 2003 Durban Vision, after which the network expanded rapidly, In parallel, new objectives were laid out for 111.  driving an expansion in marine conservation the protected areas network involving shared efforts. As of 2022, NGO-supported initiatives governance approaches. Management approaches have helped expand marine protected areas — to the new protected areas have increasingly including LMMAs, 22 protected areas covering followed the “Durban Vision” laid out during the 1.25 percent of Madagascar’s EEZ, and 0.8 million Fifth World National Parks Congress in 2003,144 ha, with one percent under full protection — while which aspires to make local populations the LMMAs covered 18 percent of the coastline.137, partners and beneficiaries of conservation. Access 138, 139, 140 Many of these rely on community-based to protected areas existing before 2003 was fisheries management that targets the recovery restricted to biodiversity conservation, research, of fast-growing species to help fishing-dependent and recreational purposes (IUCN categories I and communities derive meaningful livelihood benefits II). Almost half of the country’s protected areas are from resource management while avoiding now gazetted under IUCN categories III through VII, resource depletion and habitat destruction. In categories that permit sustainable extractive use of some communities, these efforts are restoring natural resources according to a zoning plan (e.g., stocks and marine biodiversity. livestock grazing, fuelwood collection, charcoal production, commercial artisanal fishing, and the 110.  The NEAP helped transform environmental harvest of wood, non-timber, and marine products). management in Madagascar. By 2015, a series The principle of shared governance was articulated of three World Bank-led investment projects in recent strategies, including the 2014 MNP in support of the NEAP had disbursed US$450 Strategic Plan, and subsequent legislation, including million from several donors.141,142,143 Key national the 2015 Protected Area Code145 and its subsequent institutions for environmental management were implementing decrees. (See Box 4.1 below). 137. Marine Conservation Institute, 2022. Marine Protection Atlas. Available at: https://mpatlas.org/countries/MDG 138. TL Mayol, 2013. Madagascar’s Nascent Locally Managed Marine Area Network. Madagascar Conservation & Development 8 (2): 91–95. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4314/mcd.v8i2.8 139. MIHARI, 2015. The First Wave of Community-Managed Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar. Available at: https://mihari-network.org/en/news/the- first-wave-of-community-managed-marine-protected-areas-in-madagascar/ 140. MIHARI, 2022. LMMA IN MADAGASCAR. Available at: https://mihari-network.org/base-de-donnees/lmma-a-madagascar/ 141. Gardner, C.J., Nicoll, M.E., Birkinshaw, C., Harris, A., Lewis, R.E., Rakotomalala, D., Ratsifandrihamanana, A.N, 2018. “The rapid expansion of Madagascar’s protected area system.” Biological Conservation, 220:29-36. 142. Jones, J.P.G., Rakotonarivo, O.S., Razafimanahaka, J.H, 2021. Forest Conservation in Madagascar: Past, Present, and Future. In S. M. Goodman (Ed.), The New Natural History of Madagascar. Princeton University Press. World Bank, 2021. Madagascar—Third Environment Program Support Project. Independent Evaluation Group, Project Performance Assessment Report. 143.  Washington, DC: World Bank. 144. IUCN, 2005. Benefits beyond boundaries: proceedings of the Vth IUCN World Parks Congress. Available at: https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/8662 UNEP, 2015. Loi n° 2015-005 du 26 février 2015 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires Protégées. Available at: http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/ mad146122.pdf 145. UNEP, 2015. Loi n° 2015-005 du 26 février 2015 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires Protégées. Available at: http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/ mad146122.pdf 61 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Figure 4.1. Terrestrial and Marine Protected Area Percentages Per Country Source: Adapted from Maxwell et al. (2020), using data from UNEP-WCMC and IUCN 2020. Note: The figure is showing the increase in area coverage (%) per year for marine and terrestrial protected-are estates for countries >25,000 km2. 62 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism Table 4.1. Terrestrial Protected Areas and Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar and Peer Countries Terrestrial Protected Areas Marine Protected Areas Country Land area covered / Marine and coastal area covered / % coverage % coverage Total land area Total marine and coastal area Madagascar 62,333.17 km2 / 594,719 km2 10.6% 13,800 km2 / 1.14 million km2 1.1% Bangladesh 6,456 km2 / 140,160 km2 4.61% 4,540 km2 / 84,563 km2 5.36% Cambodia 72,527 km2 / 182,511 km2 39.14% 691 km2 / 47,967 km2 1.44% Rwanda 2,317 km2 / 25,452 km2 9.11% 0 km2 / 0 km2 0% Tanzania 363,541 km2 / 947,253 km2 38.38% 7,330 km2 / 243,130 km2 3.02% Uganda 39,054 km2 / 243.145 km2 16.06% 0 km2 / 0 km2 0% Source: IUCN, UNEP-WCMC, 2021. The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). Cambridge (UK): UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Available at: www.protectedplanet.net Box 4.1. The Protected Area Code (Codes des Aires Protégées, COAP) 2015 The 2003 Durban Vision of tripling the country’s terrestrial protected area network within five years required the creation of new protected areas in addition to expanding the existing ones. This was unlikely to be achieved within the narrow definition of protected areas provided by the first Protected Area Code (COAP) of 2001. In addition, many non-governmental organizations were already involved in the sustainable management of areas of forests to help reduce deforestation, and called for a broadening of the scope of protected areas in Madagascar. After a lengthy process involving extensive consultations and negotiations under the guidance of a dedicated national commission, a new COAP was prepared to provide the tools to achieve this vision. The preparation was delayed by the political turmoil following the 2009 coup, and it was finalized and approved in 2015 (Loi n°2015-005 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires Protégées). The revised COAP is inspired by the principles developed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), including allowing a modern management of protected areas, opening the management of protected areas to new actors and methods, and building natural capital and promoting the sustainable use of natural resources for poverty reduction. The revised COAP allows the creation of three new types of protected areas (Natural Monument (IUCN type III), Protected Harmonious Landscape (IUCN type V), and Natural Resource Reserve (IUCN type VI)), enabling Madagascar protected areas to follow all types defined by the IUCN. In addition, the COAP integrates the four IUCN governance types, giving them all equal legitimacy within the national system: governance by government; shared governance; governance by private individuals and organizations; and governance by local communities. The revised COAP was completed in 2017 by an implementing decree establishing the procedure for the creation, modification, and management of protected areas (Décret N°2017-415 du 30 mai 2017 fixant les modalités et les conditions d’application de la Loi n° 2015-005). 63 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis New protected areas have typically been 112.  MNP manages 43 protected areas (1.5 million established with shared governance hectares), while 67 protected areas (four million arrangements.146 A promoter, usually an hectares), called the New Protected Areas,152 are international or Malagasy NGO,147 promotes and managed by non-state actors. Together with less manages the protected area, generally under protected marine areas, national parks with a a co-management agreement with regional marine component and LMMAs, the total share authorities, local communities, and private sector of Madagascar’s waters under some form of representatives (e.g., tourism operators).148 The protection reaches 1.25 percent. The 178 LMMAs first step involves an application for temporary spanning 18 percent of Madagascar’s coastline protection, and the second the application to gain (MIHARI, 2022), which can have multiple uses definitive protection. This includes documents including extractive activities, have had varying describing the management of land-use conflicts, degrees of success in meeting their management public consultations, the delimitation and objectives that are often fisheries related (Mayol, securing of land, an approved management plan, 2013). Many new marine protected areas rely on and an environmental and social management community-based management, targeting the plan.149 All new protected areas now name the recovery of fast-growing species to help fishing- promoter as delegated manager with obligations dependent communities derive meaningful (“cahier de charge”) defined by the state as part livelihood benefits from resource management of the management delegation. In the long while avoiding resource depletion and habitat term, the Government of Madagascar aims for destruction. promoters to withdraw into more advisory roles, although this will imply that there is a system As noted, Madagascar was one of the first 114. ready to continue management. MNP also seeks countries in Africa to formalize community-based to establish management partnerships with natural resource management, and this also specialist institutions for the expansion and applies to buffer zones adjacent to protected professionalization of key services (e.g., tourism areas.Communities adjacent to protected areas infrastructure provision, applied research, and may integrate into a Protected Area Orientation small scale private sector enterprise development). and Support Committee (Comité d’Orientation et de Soutien à l’Aire Protégée, COSAP) and form 113.  Marine conservation initiatives in Madagascar only a Local Park Committee (Comité Local du Parc, began in earnest after 2003 but shared governance CLP) whose main task is the surveillance of their arrangements are now widely used. Despite some adjacent park sector. CLPs also help prioritize progress and the Government of Madagascar’s development interventions and submit their commitment to triple its marine protected areas proposals to the COSAP for approval and funding. in 2014 (IISD, 2014), there are currently 22 MPAs covering 13800 km2 or 11.8% of continental shelf. GELOSE and GCF have been widely used, 115.  A national association helps to lesson sharing especially to create the buffer zones around and lobbying for legal recognition of LMMAs protected areas. As mentioned, in 1996 while150 specific projects or programs focus on Madagascar adopted the law on Secure Local establishing marine protected areas, LMMAs151 Management (Gestion Locale Sécurisée, GELOSE) and fisheries, and on selected species. As of 2022, and in 2001 adapted this to forest management 146. UNEP, 2015. Article 33 of the 2017 Implementation Decree of the 2015 Protected Area Code (« Décret N°2017-415 du 30 mai 2017 fixant les modalités et les conditions d’application de la Loi n° 2015-005 du 26 février 2015 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires Protégées ») Available at: http:// faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/mad146122.pdf 147. Promoters also include universities, mining companies as part of their biodiversity strategy, and private individuals. Participating NGOs include Conservation International, World Wildlife Fund, World Conservation Society, the McArthur Foundation and Blue Ventures, among others, often in collaboration with local NGOs and community production associations. Two neighboring protected areas are managed by a private mining company, Qit Madagascar Minerals (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto). 148. Franks, P., Booker, F, 2015. Shared Governance of Protected Areas in Africa: Case Studies, Lessons Learnt and Conditions of Success. IIED, London. 149. UNEP, 2017. 2017 Implementation Decree of the 2015 Protected Area Code (« Décret N°2017-415 du 30 mai 2017 fixant les modalités et les conditions d’application de la Loi n° 2015-005 du 26 février 2015 portant refonte du Code de Gestion des Aires Protégées ») Available at: http://faolex.fao.org/ docs/pdf/mad203129.pdf 150. MIHARI, 2018. LMMA A MADAGASCAR. Available at: https://mihari-network.org/base-de-donnees/lmma-a-madagascar/  ogel et al., 2019. LMMAs are marine and/or coastal areas managed by one or more communities to help protect fisheries resources and marine 151. V biodiversity. The first LMMA in Madagascar was created in 2005. 152. In addition, 13 parks covering 0.5 million ha have been created but abandoned by their manager (MNP or promoter) and fall under the authority of the Ministry of the Environment. They are not managed and are considered paper parks. 64 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism through Contractualized Forest Management and co-management should in principle result (Gestion Contractualisée des Forêts, GCF). These in more effective improvement of human well- contracts cover five percent of the Malagasy being, this has not yet substantially materialized territory and 30 percent of the current forests, systematically. VOIs have had limited capacity to including 20 percent within protected areas implement GCF (management contracts) and dina (around core conservation areas). The LMMA is rules further limit their authority: there have been considered part of the GELOSE legal framework issues with migrants moving in from other areas, (community management) but has limited legal distrust between stakeholders, and issues with the standing, with dina rules ,153, 154 often used to effectiveness of power transfer.159 restrict access or catches. Although Madagascar’s National Parks legally recognizes community- In coastal and marine areas, the LMMA model 117.  based management as a form of governance, has also had modest outcomes to date. Lack LMMAs are not part of this system (USAID, 2019; of a strong legal basis for the LMMAs limits Rakotondrazafy, 2014), yet they could be an effectiveness within the GELOSE framework. intermediate step towards establishing formal Community success in enforcing the dina rules, MPAs. managing outside fishers and migrants accessing the resource, ensuring understanding within the community of appropriate management measures, LEARNING FROM PAST EXPERIENCE: and accessing financing are key elements in CHALLENGES IN BIODIVERSITY improving biodiversity outcomes and human well- CONSERVATION being.160,161 Thirty years of expansion of community-based 116.  Improvement to the economic well-being of 118.  natural resource management have not slowed communities dependent on forests and coastal deforestation or biodiversity loss as much as and marine resources has not met expectations anticipated.155,156,157,158 The country has lost close and this failure may have contributed to the limited to 20 percent of its forest cover since 1990. results in halting degradation. The root causes The objective of improving both biodiversity of deforestation relate to low (and declining) soil conservation and human well-being has had productivity in agricultural lands and continued limited success. There is no determinate incentives to practice slash-and-burn agriculture evidence that protected areas managed by NGOs (tavy). Land tenure issues, labor constraints, are more effective in relation to conservation poverty and illiteracy, inadequate access to or tourism objectives than those managed by modern forms of energy, limited transport and MNP. Although the shift to shared governance irrigation infrastructure, constrained markets, weak 153. Vogel et al., 2017. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297962919_Using_the_dina_tool_as_governance_of_natural_resources_ lessons_of_Velondriake_southwestern_Madagascar 154. In order to reduce conflict between national laws and local customs and social norms (known as dina), the Government of Madagascar has progressively decentralized the governance of natural resources to local levels. Rules regarding resource use within contractual management transfers and co-managed protected areas are defined within dina, which can be legally recognized. The ‘dina’, which can be translated as social pact, is a customary institution defined as a traditional local convention used to establish common rules for the purpose of social cohesion, mutual aid or security, and which includes sanctions for non-compliance. 155. Desbureaux, S., Aubert, S., Brimont, L., Karsenty, A., Lohanivo, A.C., Rakotondrabe, M., Razafindraibe, A.H., Razafiarijaona, J, 2016. “The Impact of Protected Areas on Deforestation: An Exploration of the Economic and Political Channels for Madagascar’s Rainforests (2001–12).” Etudes et Documents, n°3, CERDI. 156. Desbureaux, S., Damania, R, 2018. “Rain, forests and farmers: Evidence of drought induced deforestation in Madagascar and its consequences for biodiversity conservation.” Biological Conservation, 221:357-364. 157. Eklund, J., Coad, L., Geldmann, J., and Cabeza, M, 2019. “What Constitutes a Useful Measure of Protected Area Effectiveness? A Case Study of Management Inputs and Protected Area Impacts in Madagascar.” Conservation Science and Practice, 1 (10). 158. These assessments have mostly focused on the historical protected areas, those managed by MNP for which long-term data exists. There is no consensus among stakeholders (including promoters of new protected areas) that new protected areas do or do not perform better. One of the promises of management transfers is that communities will improve their livelihoods by directly receiving the benefits of well managed natural resources on which they rely (e.g., food, firewood, building materials, and traditional medicines). Estimates of the impact of community forest management on household living standards as measured by per capita consumption expenditures, find that impacts are positive, but small and not statistically different from zero. However, when effectiveness is measured by deforestation rates studies show that rates are lower within protected areas than outside (Eklund 2016 Eklund et al., 2016. Contrasting spatial and temporal trends of protected area effectiveness in mitigating deforestation in Madagascar. J. Eklund, … +4 …, M. Cabeza. Biol. Conserv., 203 (2016), pp. 290-297, 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.033.. 159. Jones, J.P.G., Rakotonarivo, O.S., Razafimanahaka, J.H, 2021. Forest Conservation in Madagascar: Past, Present, and Future. In S. M. Goodman (Ed.), The New Natural History of Madagascar. Princeton University Press. 160. Ratsimbazafy, Hajaniaina, Thierry Lavitra, Marc Kochzius, and Jean Hugé, 2019. “Emergence and Diversity of Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar.” Marine Policy 105 (July): 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.03.008. 161. USAID, 2019. “MADAGASCAR FAA 118/119 BIODIVERSITY AND TROPICAL FORESTRY ANALYSIS.” Madagascar: USAID. 65 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis governance and political instability all reduce the However, they require considerable resources ability of conservation projects to transform local from NGOs. Despite the potential for the LMMA farming systems and manage natural resources model to be used for biodiversity conservation sustainably. In marine and coastal areas, the and marine resource management, the current combination of the failure of other sectors, weak legal and regulatory frameworks such as GELOSE governance of coastal and fisheries resources, may need to be reviewed to realize the potential migration, habitat destruction, and climate change of LMMAs. are driving marine resource degradation. Increasing demand for seafood and weak fisheries governance FINANCING OF PROTECTED AREA creates opportunities for corruption and illegal, MANAGEMENT unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing which exacerbates overfishing. Habitat destruction, The protected area network is generally under- 120.  especially of coastal fish nursery areas such as funded. The network currently receives no direct mangroves, coral reefs, and seagrass and the funding from the central government budget. Total increasing impacts of climate change further add to available funding is estimated at US$6 to 8 million165 the challenges.162 The landscape approach recently annually for MNP compared with estimated developed by the Government of Madagascar with requirements of US$25 to 35 million for the entire the support of the World Bank aims to reconcile protected area system of Madagascar’s size. rural development and biodiversity conservation (i)  Madagascar Biodiversity Trust Fund (Fondation and can be applied to the management of coastal pour les Aires Protégées et la Biodiversité zone and marine areas (an approach recognized de Madagascar, FAPBM). In 2005, after the elsewhere as seascapes) as well as to terrestrial Durban Vision, Madagascar created the areas (ridge to reef). FAPBM, an endowment fund aimed eventually at financing the operating costs of the entire Shared management of marine areas and 119.  system of protected areas. FAPBM has an resources is also a challenge. There are four endowment of US$138 million as of January possible forms of shared governance and 2022 and although this is insufficient to meet management within LMMAs: dina, transfer all financing requirements it is considered a management of natural resources, transfer major success of the biodiversity conservation management of aquatic resources and MPAs.163,164 system in Madagascar and a model of Most LMMAs are managed through dina rules, with conservation trust funds for other countries. the rules primarily for managing fish resources. Its governance complies with standards These LMMAs face many challenges, with rule of practice developed by the Conservation enforcement and corruption often cited. There Finance Alliance and it is achieving its are no LMMAs where management of aquatic financial performance objectives. It provided resources has been transferred because it requires significant resources to the management of a fisheries management plan and there are none protected areas,167 even during the 2020 to developed for any LMMA to date. Velondriake, the 2021 COVID-19 crisis, and it catalyzes new and first LMMA established in 2006, was gazetted as additional financing.168 It contributed US$2.31 an MPA in 2015 along with four other LMMAs. million to the protected area network in 2021 162. Wallner-Hahn, Sieglind, Malin Dahlgren, and Maricela de la Torre-Castro, 2022. “Linking Seagrass Ecosystem Services to Food Security: The Example of Southwestern Madagascar’s Small-Scale Fisheries.” Ecosystem Services 53 (February): 101381. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecoser.2021.101381 163. MIHARI, 2015. “The First Wave of Community-Managed Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar.” Available at: https://mihari-network.org/en/news/the- first-wave-of-community-managed-marine-protected-areas-in-madagascar/ 164. MIHARI, 2022. “LMMA IN MADAGASCAR.” Available at: https://mihari-network.org/base-de-donnees/lmma-a-madagascar/ 165. MNP, 2021. Notre Défi pour les Années 2021 et 2022. 166. Estimates of ‘ideal’ protected area management costs for Madagascar’s protected areas vary significantly and an average figure is US$10 per ha per annum (used by FAPBM). The MNP network covers 1.5 million ha, and its ‘ideal’ budget using this figure is in the order of magnitude of US$25 million. 167. The main contributors to the endowment fund are: KfW (39%), French government (17%), AFD (12%), GEF (11%), Conservation International (9%), and World Bank (9%). 168. Republique Francaise, 2021. Assessment of Conservation Trust Funds: for the Benefit of Biodiversity. Available at: https://www.afd.fr/en/actualites/ assessment-conservation-trust-funds-benefit-biodiversity 66 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism and it partially supported 36 PAs169,170 in 2020 (as is the situation in most countries) if their public and 2021 (covering close to 30 percent of their good benefits can be clearly demonstrated. budget), and plans to support 45 in 2022.171 (ii)  Tourism generated US$2 million annually Benefit sharing with local communities may 122.  advance development and conservation goals but before the pandemic in direct revenues, the current scope is limited. Benefit sharing can US$1.5 million from entry fees and U$0.5 include direct sharing of fees and other charges, million from other tourism revenues. One indirect benefits from employment generation, and challenge is that at present 83 percent public-private partnerships connected with tourism of tourists visit only six protected areas. in protected areas. The current legal framework Expansion is constrained by a number of as set out in the 2017 Code sur les aires protégées factors (see next section). Revenues are (COAP) provides for flexible benefit sharing of pooled and shared with other protected areas. up to 50 percent of tourist entry fees with local Donors (development finance institutions, (iii) communities, based on presentation of eligible international NGOs, and foundations) finance development projects. However, in practice tourism the remaining US$2 to four million annually. revenues are distributed throughout the protected There is no aggregated data for new protected area system to help finance management costs, areas, for which financing varies considerably including those of the protected areas that do not but is perhaps even more volatile. VOIs have receive significant numbers of tourists. If half of limited management capacity and technical the US$1.5 million of entry fees collected every and financial resources, and depend highly on year were shared among the many communities the financial and technical resources of external surrounding the protected area system in its partners (NGOs, donors) for the elaboration entirety, the revenue per community would be very and implementation of management plans172 modest. Alternative forms of benefit sharing are and for the financing of 3-year and 10-year taking place, but their impact is not assessed. evaluations that are critical to their renewal. The bulk of the direct benefits shared from This dependency questions the actual protected areas appears to be the provision of autonomy of communities in managing their employment (e.g., local guides, porters, canoe resources in a context where donor funding and drivers, and construction workers for tourist NGO support are time-bound. infrastructure). MNP does finance community development projects in the framework of donor- 121.  While external funding is critical to the financing of funded projects. Detailed information about the protected area network, these funding sources these different benefit sharing mechanisms, their are unreliable in the long-term. Donor priorities can amount, their beneficiaries, and their impact is not change and timescales are often short, periodic readily available. political crises have resulted in international sanctions and donor withdrawals, and events such TOURISM IN PROTECTED AREAS: as the COVID-19 pandemic and cyclones, as well CHALLENGES AND POTENTIAL as political instability can severely impact tourism revenue. The FABM remains a predictable source Promotion of tourism has been a cornerstone of 123.  of revenue and given its governance success there Madagascar’s protected areas and biodiversity is scope for expanding the endowment. In the strategy since the 1990s but visitors are longer run there is also scope for direct funding of concentrated in only a few parks. Between 2017 protected areas by the Madagascar government and 2019, an annual average of 210,000 tourists173 169. 22 MNP protected areas (44 percent of all MNP protected areas) and 14 non-MNP protected areas (19 percent of all non-MNP protected areas) received partial funding. For non-MNP protected areas: FAPBM contributed to 29 percent of the financial needs; most funds were used for conservation activities (40 percent on patrolling, boundary delimitation, and ecological surveys) and recurring costs (42 percent on salaries and operating costs of the NGOs). For MNP protected areas: FAPBM contributed to 28 percent of the financial needs; funds were used to cover payroll expenses and some operating costs; many MNP protected areas did not receive sufficient funding to implement all of the 2019 annual work plan. 170. World Bank, 2021. FAPBM Annual Report 2019. 171. FAPBM, 2022. 45 AIRES PROTÉGÉES BÉNÉFICIERONT DES FINANCEMENTS DE LA FAPBM POUR L’ANNÉE 2022. Available at: https://www.fapbm. org/45-aires-protegees-beneficieront-des-financements-de-la-fapbm-pour-lannee-2022/ 172. VOIs’ financial resources are limited to membership fees, harvest authorizations and fines actually paid by offenders, which rarely represent more than a hundred US dollars per year. 173. Including 35 percent of Malagasy nationals. 67 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis visited protected areas managed by MNP, Constraints to the development of the (a)  generating Ar6.9 billion (US$2 million) of direct tourism sector as a whole include: annual revenues for MNP or 25 percent of total • Governance challenges: the private investment funding.174 Visits and revenues grew steadily after environment is difficult and unpredictable with the 2009 to 2014 political crisis, but had still not an uneven playing field and vested interests. The rebounded to their 2019 peak when the COVID-19 2017 WEF Travel and Tourism Competitiveness pandemic hit, and numbers declined sharply. There Report ranked Madagascar 126th of 136 is no consolidated tourism data for new protected countries in terms of business environment, areas, which for the most part do not attract large with issues in property rights and the cost of numbers of tourists. Tourism is highly concentrated construction permits, and delays in obtaining in a minority of protected areas, with six national financing both from commercial banks and from parks (five percent of the number and coverage of development finance institutions. protected areas) receiving 83 percent of visitors on average between 2017 to 2019: Nosy Tanikely;175 • P  ublic sector capacity constraints: The Isalo; Andasibe and Analamazaotra; Ranomafana; Ministry of Tourism has limited capacity to Bemaraha; and Montagne d’Ambre. These are monitor developments and ensure quality, or mostly in the north and east of the country. to gather and disseminate reliable data on Madagascar’s tourism performance. Sector 124.  The government of Madagascar and the African development does not follow a coordinated Development Bank (AfDB) are currently preparing master plan, hindering the strategic planning an investment in the sector. The Climate Resilience of public investments that support tourism for Biodiversity Preservation Project (Projet de development (e.g., hotels, infrastructure, and Résilience Climatique pour la Préservation de la services, such as waste management). Biodiversité, PRCPB) is expected to have US$15 • P  oor air connectivity: Limited and uncompetitive million in financing to promote ecotourism to air connectivity is a major constraint, despite strengthen the conservation of protected areas some pre-pandemic improvements. Reliability and support the community to cope with the of domestic connectivity improved with the effects of climate change. The project would creation of a domestic subsidiary in 2018, finance infrastructure in selected protected although flights remain infrequent and areas,176 capacity strengthening of MNP, promotion expensive. Inadequate airport infrastructure of ecotourism (including tourism concession), and and standards prevent regional airports from community development. Currently in preparation, reaching international certification and limit their the project should be presented to the board of the ability to cater to multi-destination travel within AfDB in June 2022 and be launched in September the country, a key product type. High jet fuel 2022. There are likely to be useful lessons from prices resulting from a supply monopoly further the approach that this project takes. The World constrain tourism development. Bank, through its Second Integrated Growth Poles Project,177 has also historically supported MNP in • S  kills challenges: A lack of qualified labor and its investment promotion efforts and with capacity of high-quality, accessible hospitality training strengthening. The project is currently supporting opportunities burdens the private sector and development of a merchandising strategy as an detracts from the tourist experience. In-house additional channel of revenue for MNP. training raises costs. Furthermore, related skills, as in market analyses, feasibility studies, or local 125.  The development of nature-based tourism is law firms specializing in contract negotiations, hampered by some significant constraints.178 are scarce. Madagascar ranked 122nd of 136 Some cut across the entire tourism sector while countries for human resources and the labor others are more specific to protected areas. market in the tourism industry in 2017.179 174. Ar5.1 billion (US$1.5 million) in entry fees and an additional Ar1.8 billion (US$0.5 million) in revenues from the sale of camping nights, souvenirs, film licenses, school field trips, etc. 175. Nosy Tanikely is a mostly marine national park close to Nosy Be, the main beach destination in Madagascar. 176. These protected areas will likely be Andasibe-Mantandia / Anamalazoatra; Nosy Hara; Ankarana; Lokobe; Bemaraha; and Tsimanampetsotsa. 177. Part of a Series of Projects (SOP). 178. IFC, 2021. Creating Markets in Madagascar: Country Private Sector Diagnostic. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/publications_ext_ content/ifc_external_publication_site/publications_listing_page/cpsd-madagascar 179. WEF, 2017. The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2017. 68 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism •  easonality: Madagascar has not yet S potential for generating conservation developed tourism packages for visitors financing. Managers of protected areas (MNP outside the traditional European summer and NGOs) still have a stronger orientation holiday period, leading to excess capacity and and skills base for conservation rather low occupancy rates for much of the year. than tourism development, translating into insufficient focus on the quality of the tourism •  rises: Recurring political, security, and health C experience and the enabling environment for related crises have generated crashes in tourism investments. visitation to Madagascar and exacerbated reputational challenges. •  rotected area management planning needs P to adopt a more ambitious tourism approach. Constraints to the development of tourism in (b)  Most protected area management plans protected areas: include a tourism section, in line with the guidance provided by the Protected Area • Road connectivity. Most protected areas Code and MNP’s strategic pillars. These can only be accessed by road, and poor road tourism sections are however very similar connectivity – including a complete lack of from one park to the other, despite significant access to some areas during the rainy season – differences in tourism activity and potential, limits the development potential and quality of and are insufficiently developed: they usually some of the most popular products and circuits. lack market analysis, tourism activities are Poor road connectivity also limits investor limited to the development of circuits and interest in more isolated protected areas. camping, and maps show only existing • Tourism infrastructure. Even the protected tourism infrastructures and attractions. areas that receive the highest numbers of Such plans would benefit from the inputs of visitors generally lack the infrastructure tourism strategies and action plans, based and services (roads, trails, interpretation, on the identification of each protected area’s toilets, camp sites, quality hotels, and competitive advantage, market analyses, and activity offerings) to provide quality feedback from tourism professionals, with a tourism experiences. Somewhat linked, the view to strengthening, growing, and diversifying lack of originality and diversity in tourist tourism offerings (Spenceley, 2019). experiences (including but not limited to accommodation) among protected areas • T  ourism offerings are currently limited to only hinder the development of tourism in new a few protected areas. Six protected areas protected areas. Marine protected areas also receive 83 percent of visits, concentrating lack the necessary infrastructure to both both positive and negative impacts on these access marine sites and to mitigate human regions. With 117 additional protected areas use of fragile sites, such as coral reefs (e.g., in Madagascar, covering many different permanent moorings or allocated mooring ecosystems and landscapes, there is ample areas) or degradation of coastal dunes and room for diversifying the tourism offering. beaches (e.g., boardwalks). Such diversification requires policies, programs and investments that go beyond • Investment climate in protected areas. protected areas and is made more difficult Underdeveloped sector-specific legislation and by the different constraints listed above, regulation hinder investment opportunities especially the difficulties to reach some of and growth in high-potential markets. these protected areas. Past experiences to Despite extensive donor support, the country promote tourism in underserved protected continues to lack a regulatory framework for areas have often been unrealistic because land titling and private concessions in national they were not sufficiently informed by market parks (see below), and marine spatial plans to analyses and the views of the tourism private allocate areas for tourism development and sector. For instance, tourism in protected avoid conflicts with other users. areas is heavily driven by the structuring of •  rotected area managers. In Madagascar, P one-week or two-week tourist circuits by tour protected areas were initially set up with operators. Any investment outside of these biodiversity conservation objectives and circuits is unlikely to meet a demand without tourism was a secondary activity with private sector efforts to develop and market 69 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis new circuits. The tourism potential of new 2014, the EP3 project financed by the World Bank protected areas therefore needs to be assessed, relied on the 2007 selection, selecting a subset and priority sites identified which consider of protected areas, and adding Lokobe (following marketing potential, road access, security, unsolicited investor interest and its potential close biodiversity, landscape attractions, and local to Nosy Be).180 Under the World Bank-funded stakeholder interest in tourism development. Second Integrated Growth Poles project, a new selection of sites for investments inside and 126.  Tourism in protected areas, as well as nature- outside protected areas was made, again in the based tourism more broadly, generates substantial northern region of DIANA and and the souther indirect benefits, which ripple beyond the tourism region of Atsimo-Andrefanana181. More recently sector. Tourism creates markets for products from and in preparation of a proposed AfDB investment, local economies, offering economic stimuli and MNP prioritized six protected areas that are a development benefits which make for favorable subset of the past selections: Andasibe-Mantandia returns on government investments in protected / Anamalazoatra; Nosy Hara; Ankarana; Lokobe; areas and natural assets. Tourists contribute to Bemaraha; Tsimanempetsotse. Fifteen years after the economy through their spending on park fees, the most extensive exercise, the prioritization of hotels, transport, leisure, and recreation, which protected areas for tourism investments deserves creates local employment. In addition, tourists an update. generate economic activity in the local economy by stimulating local demand for goods and services, Tourism concessions in protected areas have 128.  either directly (as when tourists buy goods and the potential to promote tourism, improve services from local businesses and households) local livelihoods, and support the financing of or indirectly (as when lodges pay wages to local biodiversity conservation.A concession is a lease, households, or source goods from local businesses, license, easement or permit for an operation who in turn spend this income on locally supplied undertaken by any party other than the protected goods and services). The protected area tourism area agency. It can include a commercial operation data currently collected in Madagascar do not and/or a piece of land. A tourism concession cover these broad and indirect impacts. The key could provide accommodation, food and beverage, tourism statistic collected by MNP is the number recreation, education, retail, and interpretive of visitors and revenue from entry fees and other services. Madagascar has tried to develop tourism tourism products. This gives only a very limited concessions in protected areas for the past 15 picture of the contribution of protected area tourism years, with limited success. The Government of to the local and national economy. There is also no Madagascar and MNP benefitted from the support systematic tourism data collection from non-MNP of the IFC (Ecotourism Investment Program protected areas. The economic effects of protected 2005-2009), the World Bank (Third Environmental area tourism can be estimated using a variety of Program Support Project, 2004-2015), and KfW methods that must be tailored to the environmental (support to Ankarafantsika in 2007-2008 and 2014- and social contexts in which tourism occurs and to 2015). A 2017 report182 summarizes key lessons: the objective of the evaluation. •  solid, comprehensive concession framework A needs to be in place before looking for investors. The previous prioritization exercise was undertaken 127.  The concession framework should include: in 2007 with the support of the International Finance Corporation. Based on the national strategy, o A strong political support development priorities, site characteristics, market o Adequate laws and regulations attractiveness, and protected area management capacity, it selected 11 sites organized in five o Clearly defined roles and responsibilities clusters (see Figure 4.3 below). All except one of o Standardized procedure manuals and these is in the north and west of the country. In supporting documents 180. Mantadia, Analamazotra, Montagne d’Ambre, Ankarana, Lokobe 181. Nosy Hara, Ankarana, Tsimanampetsotse. It should be noted, however, that although the project has invested in infrastructure and services in the destinations home to these protected areas, no investments inside these protected areas have yet been made. 182. Massyn, P.J., Rajeriarison, P., 2017. “Recherche d’investisseurs pour les aires protégées de Madagascar.” International Finance Corporation. 70 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism • The parks and each investment opportunity a mechanism such as a permit to be assured should correspond to an actual market of access to marine spaces especially where segment. there may be investment (e.g., permanent mooring) in infrastructure or place-based • The selected sites could be subject to an experiences (e.g., dive sites). authorization following a verification, before they are put on the market, to make sure that Ministerial authority. In parallel, the Ministry of 3.  they are bankable and aligned with the national Environment (MEDD) and the Ministry of Land concession strategy. Planning (MATSF) have been disagreeing • The main concession conditions should be on who has the authority over dealing with pre-established and clearly communicated to investors in protected areas.183 Since 2016, the candidates. These conditions should also the relevant ministerial departments have be competitive with opportunities outside the been working together to solve the issue parks, where investors benefit from longer term through an administrative process (the land rights, access rights to marine areas and a signing of a “collaboration protocol”). The less regulated operating environment. turn-over of Ministers, General Secretaries, and Directors has caused the process to • Once launched, the bidding process should be repeatedly start over before finalization. Both candidate-focused and be managed efficiently. Ministers were replaced during the March 2022 government reshuffle, which is expected The concession framework needs to be finalized 129.  to further delay the process. before investors are sought. The regulatory framework for concessions is still in development MNP’s mandate. There is a lack of clarity on 4.  and several key elements would need to be fixed the legal mandate of MNP to manage its before potential sites are put on the market: protected areas. This mandate was previously granted by a decree under the previous Legal framework. The revised COAP was 1.  Protected Area Code, but the 2015 revision of published in 2015 and its implementing the Code was not translated into the signing decree (“décret d’application”) in 2017. The of a new management delegation contract 2017 implementing decree is not assessed as with MNP. MNP is de facto continuing sufficiently detailed for tourism concessions to manage its protected areas under an and a new specific decree is being prepared automatic renewal assumption, seemingly (“concessions decree”). acknowledged by a communication between 2.  Securing land tenure and access to marine MEDD and MNP. This situation is a potential areas. The demarcation of protected areas was threat to investors signing a concession not always recorded in the land registries at contract with MNP, whose own management the time of their creation. This situation poses rights are not guaranteed. a threat to the solidity of investment proposals Standard contract for concessions. Madagascar 5.  and could deter investors. It seems however is now preparing standard concession that recording the protected areas would contracts. The past projects all have prepared require extensive work and financing that their own standard concession contracts. is unlikely to happen soon, and alternatives Ideally, a standard contract should be are being sought. A ministerial order (“arrêté discussed with potential investors and adopted ministériel”) is currently being drafted to before the concessions decree to avoid provide some form of land tenure security contradictions. to investors. An idea would be to demarcate only the piece of land that would support National concession strategy. The only 6.  the concession. Similar efforts need to be document guiding the development of considered for marine space, given the lack of concessions in the protected areas of marine tenure, and private investments need Madagascar is a 2008 Policy Letter. An up- 183. MATSF argues that like for any other piece of land that is the property of the State (Domaine public de l’Etat), it (MATSF) should be the only interlocutor for any investor and that the investor should go through the standard procedure and pay its fee to its Land Services General Directorate (DGSF). MEDD argues that protected areas fall under a special regime, provided for by the different protected areas laws and regulations, that makes them (MEDD) and the protected area managers the sole interlocutors and fee recipients for concession processes within a protected area. 71 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis to-date national concession strategy would allow protected areas generate revenues to the allow agreement on a vision, set objectives for local population, but other alternatives should be concessions in terms of financial contribution developed. The COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed (to the management of the protected area that when the protected areas do not generate network and community development, etc.), revenue to the populations, their sustainability is and present the main aspects of the business highly threatened. plan (what kind of investment in each protected area, marketing timeline, etc.). MOVING FORWARD 130.  The COVID-19 pandemic since 2020 hit the There are a number of measures which could both 131.  tourism sector especially hard. Global travel strengthen management of the country’s protected restrictions and Madagascar’s lengthy border areas and conserve biodiversity while stimulating closures have had particularly dramatic effects local economic development including tourism. on the tourism sector, while confinement These can be categorized in three groups: sound measures led to a sharp drop in service activity management of protected areas, promotion of and disrupted global value chains. Data shared tourism and diversification of its offerings, and fair by the Tourism Confederation of Madagascar sharing of benefits with local communities.187 indicated a 90 percent loss of revenue for the sector in 2020. Many planned tourism investment Manage Protected Areas Well projects are significantly delayed, if not temporarily A strong network of protected areas requires 132.  abandoned, as a result of the pandemic. Tourism sustainable financing. Conservation spending operators benefitted from some limited financial measures implemented by the government can address threats to natural assets and (such as deferring certain payment deadlines) improve management when used to hire and train but the overall level of support was deemed staff, invest in infrastructure for enforcement insufficient by the sector.184 The COVID-19 crisis and tourism, manage wildlife and other natural for the tourism sector is also a major concern resources, and promote outreach. Investing in for protected areas and their populations. MNP protected areas with viable tourism can also lost close to €2 million in revenues from tourism subsidize other parks in which tourism is still to be in 2020 and again in 2021, and faced a critical developed or is not suitable. The FAPBM, one of financial crisis,185 although international donors the key successes of biodiversity conservation in helped cover some management costs with Madagascar, provides an efficient way to transform emergency funds. Many protected areas were intermittent donor funding into sustainable closed for much of 2021 and a few into early 2022 financing of protected areas. Its current and faced degradation for lack of maintenance. endowment fund is capitalized with approximately Overall poverty levels increased and resource US$138 million and is conservatively managed, harvesting in protected areas saw a major uptick, allowing it to contribute about US$2.31 million with increases in bush-meat traps (25 percent), annually to management costs. In order for it illegal hardwood, precious wood, and construction to finance the management costs of the entire wood harvesting (eight percent, 19 percent, and protected area network its endowment would 106 percent respectively), a 250 percent increase need to be increased very substantially to about in primary forest deforestation and a 200 percent US$1.75 billion. While an increase of this amount increase in secondary forest deforestation within is unrealistic, increasing its capitalization would National Parks.186 Protected areas serve as a strengthen its financing power and would be recourse in the case of emergency for vulnerable one of the most efficient means of preserving populations. Tourism is a valuable opportunity to Madagascar’s unique biodiversity, and even more 184. IFC, 2021. Creating Markets in Madagascar: Country Private Sector Diagnostic. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/publications_ext_ content/ifc_external_publication_site/publications_listing_page/cpsd-madagascar 185. The financial crisis was worsened by the fact that the government did not transfer the annual €450,000 envelope provided by the FAPBM sinking fund to MNP. 186. World Bank, 2021. SD Practice Group Note, contribution to the preparation of Madagascar CPF FY23-27. 187. World Bank, 2021. Banking on Protected Areas: Promoting Sustainable Protected Area Tourism to Benefit Local Economies. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35737 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO 72 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism modest fundraising would allow it to ensure basic for environment. The ministry claims that operating costs of protected areas.188 While most managers did not fulfill the obligations recognizing resource constraints, there is also stipulated in their temporary delegation contracts scope for the Government of Madagascar to begin and therefore cannot extend them, but did not public funding of the protected area system. provide the elements to explain this position. The managers are nonetheless de facto managing the 133.  And there is potential to build on the success of protected areas for which they are responsible, recent REDD+ initiatives to expand payment for but without a contract that would clarify their environmental services. Already approved, the role and responsibilities. This situation is a major Atiala-Atsinanana Emission Reductions Program risk to the management of the protected areas, (financed by the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility their legitimacy and that of the managers, as Carbon Fund)189 will provide 58 percent of its well as to community-based forest management US$50 million budget (total of US$29 million) over more broadly. LMMAs, similarly, lack clear legal five years to validated REDD+ Initiatives, based on status including recognition of their role in marine verified reduced deforestation, forest degradation, biodiversity conservation, management of marine and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. These resources, and possibly climate change mitigation REDD+ Initiatives are for the most part protected and adaptation. This should include its legal areas: Masoala National Park and other protected status in relation to existing biodiversity legislation areas managed by MNP, COMATSA Protected Area and regulations, such as DINA and GELOSE, for managed by WWF, Makira National Park managed example. This may require adapting the GELOSE to by WCS, and CAZ managed by CI. LMMAs, the marine context. similarly, have opportunities to take advantage of REDD+ initiatives, for example in “blue carbon” Recommendations sequestration through sea grasses and other coastal and marine species and ecosystems. There (i) Undertake an independent, transparent, and is a growing carbon market, and while mangroves in-depth assessment of the performance of are well established now in this market, seagrass all delegated protected areas (including MNP, meadows are gaining interest. In addition to the NGO, communities, and private sector) including carbon market, there is also the opportunity to use LMMAs; this type of blue carbon storage to meet national (ii) Based on the results of this assessment, adjust NDCs as well as biodiversity commitments. and formalize the legal status and management delegation contracts for all protected areas, Recommendations terrestrial and marine; (i) Increase the capitalization of the FAPBM; Strengthen the ministry’s capacity to monitor and (iii)  evaluate the implementation of these delegation (ii) Argue for some public funding of the protected contracts; area system; and Review and improve consistency between the (iv)  Expand opportunities for payment for (iii)  GELOSE, the forest law, and the land tenure law, environmental services, building on the REDD+ and local dinas for LMMAs. Address gaps in the experience in both terrestrial and coastal/marine legal and regulatory framework for community- protected areas. based natural resource management and correct the inconsistencies between the different forest The current informality surrounding new protected 134.  and environment-related texts; areas is a major threat to their management. Many new protected areas have been created (v) Strengthen the capacity of the State, both central since 2015. However, most new protected area government and regional services, to support managers do not have a management delegation community-based natural resource management contract signed with the ministry responsible policy; 188. See for instance: https://www.afd.fr/en/actualites/assessment-conservation-trust-funds-benefit-biodiversity WB and GEF contributions have so far totaled US$ 17.5 million 189. Forest Carbon Partnership. Madagascar Country Profile. Available at : https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/country/madagascar 73 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis (vi)  Help address the financial constraints that VOIs, awareness and education about protected areas. municipalities, and MPAs face through supporting Managing tourism concession programs requires expansion of performance-based payment skill sets that go beyond knowledge of wildlife schemes, taking for example advantage of REDD+ management, and this capacity must be built. projects and programs; in MPAs use mangrove Experience from many countries has shown forests and sea grasses for carbon storage; that centralizing conservation at the national level allows for better access to specialists and Review current and planned MPAs for climate change (vii)  decision makers, and more policy consistency, impacts and consider needed changes, especially while the day-to-day management of concessions for enabling some species to adapt to climate is best accomplished at the protected area level change, such as turtle nesting beaches or changes in by trained park managers. protecting coral reefs in deeper cooler waters. Other changes include using protected areas to adapt to climate change and erosion control; and Recommendations Strengthen the capacity for law enforcement and (viii)  (i) Review current education and training the traceability of forest products. The role of opportunities and develop priorities for filling the decentralized territorial units, particularly the key skills gaps in Madagascar, including through municipalities, is crucial; they are in charge of the refresher courses and in-service training; implementation of the two essential components for (ii) Adapt the conservation and tourism study paths: regulating access to renewable natural resources revise curricula and create new forms of tourism management: land tenure and spatial planning. training that can be delivered in a short period of time (e.g., courses on demand) and target specific Protected Area Management needs a range of 135.  stakeholder groups; and skills including both conservation and tourism. Successful protected areas have qualified Build the capacity of protected area managers and (iii)  managers who are well versed in protected staff in tourism planning, investment promotion, area laws and policies, and also understand the and the management of tourism concessions. business needs and obligations to conservation of tourism operators and commercial entities. As Promote Tourism in Protected Areas and highlighted by IUCN,190 these include planning Diversify its Offerings and management skills in areas such as policy With adequate enablers, tourism in protected 136.  development, organizational leadership, financial areas can make a greater contribution to the and operations management, administration, economy, jobs and financing of protected areas. communication, and collaboration. A recent Many constraints faced by the tourism sector assessment191 of capacity building needs are beyond the scope of this note, but the post along the tourism value chain concluded that COVID-19 recovery provides an opportunity to protected area managers and staff could benefit assess and support rehabilitation needs both from capacity building in leadership, hospitality, within and outside protected areas. The support to commercialization, marketing, and negotiation Nosy Be provided through the Second Integrated of tourism opportunities, and languages. They Growth Poles Project (before COVID-19), which also include protected area and biodiversity improved infrastructure, services, and connectivity, management, including scientific skills in and which helped trigger interest in renewed ecosystems research, biodiversity conservation, private sector investment, is an example. There is upholding laws and regulations, and knowledge also a need for better understanding of the direct of flora and fauna, understanding the needs and and indirect impacts of protected area tourism, rights of local communities, and ensuring that tracking returns on protected area investments protected area governance meets their priorities, to better make the case for increased public understanding and promoting economically spending, and for private sector engagement in and environmentally sustainable tourism protected areas. Surveys and information on park and recreation opportunities, and promoting visitor numbers and tourist spending behavior can 190. IUCN, 2016. A Global Register of Competences for Protected Area Practitioners. Available at: https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/content/ documents/global_register_of_competences_for_pa_practitioners_e_version_0.pdf 191. Consortium, 2021. « Évaluation des besoins de renforcement des maillons des chaînes de valeur de l’industrie écotouristique à Madagascar. » Étude de faisabilité du projet de Résilience Climatique par la Préservation de la Biodiversité 74 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism be used to inform policies, improve services to when led by private actors, such as marine wildlife tourists, assist local communities, refine tourism watching. The development of such ecotourism business models, understand the impacts of will be beneficial for biodiversity conservation. tourism and how they may change over time, and Within protected areas there are opportunities for demonstrate the economic returns of investing establishing partnerships between the tourism in protected areas. The most recent such Visitor sector and LMMAs, and there are opportunities to Survey at the national level in Madagascar dates draw on international experiences (e.g., Pemba in back to 2012 and deserves an update. East Africa, Komodo in Indonesia for coral reef based ecotourism, the Azores, Seychelles, and others for Recommendations whale watching) as well as from the experience of Blue Ventures in Madagascar. There may also be (i) Assess post-COVID-19 infrastructure rehabilitation opportunities for fish-based tourism which may needs in protected areas, with a view to bringing provide alternative livelihoods for fishers. them back to acceptable tourism standards; (ii) Direct COVID-19 recovery financing toward the Recommendations rehabilitation of protected areas; (i) Update the prioritization of protected areas for (iii)  Strengthen MNP’s overall data collection, tourism investments with the private sector, based management, and dissemination methodologies, on past exercises, new global post-Covid tourism including on tourism; trends and investor appetite, and connectivity; Carry out regular visitor surveys to identify key (iv)  (ii) Prepare a national protected area tourism strategy areas for improvement and inform decision identifying new protected areas for tourism, in making; and partnership with the private sector, based on data and market intelligence, and nested within broader (v) Create a protected area tourism dashboard, tourism development priorities for Madagascar; assessing direct and indirect economic impacts of protected area tourism, linked to broader efforts to In marine and coastal areas develop tourism (iii)  improve tourism data collection in the country. strategies within a broader context of marine and coastal spatial planning; There is room for diversifying the tourism 137.  Build on the experience of the Integrated Growth (iv)  offerings in highly visited parks as well as Poles Series of Projects (SOP) to support diversifying into a greater number of protected infrastructure, services, and connectivity areas and reviewing priority areas for tourist improvements in priority areas; related investments more broadly. As mentioned above, the last exercise identifying priority (v) Prepare tourism strategies and action plans for locations was undertaken in 2008 (see figure protected areas that currently receive the most 4.3) and would benefit from an update. A new visitors, informed by visitor surveys and market effort to re-assess the potential of all protected analyses. These strategies and action plans should areas will allow the other protected areas outside ideally be integrated in the different protected the six most highly visited to be considered and area management plans. They could identify developed while diversifying the ecotourism the required investments to meet and maintain product. An update of the list of the priority areas minimum standards and propose flexible upgrade has to involve the private actors to ensure that plans, to be aligned with future means and needs; the review is market driven and realistic. Involve tourism professionals in the governance (vi)  and management of key protected areas. This Given the more recent development of marine 138.  can be piloted in a one or two landmark protected protected areas and the potential for growth in areas at first; coastal and marine tourism, there is scope for Promote public private partnerships in ecotourism, (vii)  a particular focus on marine and coastal areas. both inside and outside protected areas and Marine and coastal tourism is best managed within a broader MSP process and ecotourism including marine and coastal areas; and strategy. Marine tourism should not be only linked Support the national tourism office (Office (viii)  to marine protected areas. There are other areas of National du Tourisme de Madagascar, ONTM) in conservation importance outside the current MPA strengthening its promotion of Madagascar as a that have high potential in ecotourism, especially biodiversity tourism hotspot. 75 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 139.  Tourism concessions in protected areas have for tourists to interact with local communities; the potential to promote tourism, improve local strengthening the capacity of local communities livelihoods, and support the financing of biodiversity to provide goods and services to tourists; conservation. The section above summarizes assisting households to participate in the tourism Madagascar’s experience with concessions over the economy through entrepreneurship training, skills last 15 years. Despite limited success to date, much development, credit services, and logistics, among of the background work has been undertaken and the others; and supporting business diversification current political context is favorable. Investors have and local procurement. These benefits, once expressed their interest, and the AfDB is preparing an understood, may be distributed more fairly by investment in the sector. including the poor and disadvantaged.193 Share benefits with local communities Recommendations Deciding on increasing direct revenue sharing. 140.  (i) Explore and decide on an entry fee revenue sharing Sharing entry fee revenues, if done well, has strategy, balancing their relative shortage and the the potential to greatly improve the ownership need to increase the support of local communities of the local population and their support to the for protected areas; protected area – which is less true for more indirect development projects. However, spreading (the (ii) Undertake an in-depth assessment of protected currently low level of) revenues among many area income multipliers, to strengthen the protected areas and communities would not achieve economic impact of protected areas; and the level of adherence required to preserve the Improve regulatory framework for community- (iii)  protected areas. There is therefore no simple choice based natural resource management by improving between the two key approaches: (i) the current consistency between the GELCOSE, the forest law, status quo of not sharing entry fee revenues until and land tenure law, for example. they reach an acceptable proportion of management costs; or (ii) engaging in a strategic revenue sharing CONCLUSIONS maximizing the use of scarce resources (for example Madagascar’s landscapes, coastlines, marine 142.  by implementing a direct, fair, and transparent environment, and network of protected areas sharing mechanism that focuses on the parks that are unique. There is great potential for them generate tourism revenues).192 A debate between to contribute to economic development and key stakeholders and informed choice between both poverty reduction if they are well managed, approaches should, however, take place to move and with the right enabling environment. Many from an unofficial situation to an informed and of the challenges faced are linked to broader implemented strategy. development challenges of poor connectivity 141.  Understanding income multipliers in order to and lack of basic services, weak or incomplete maximize them. Neighboring communities benefit legal and regulatory frameworks in areas ranging from the economic activity spurred by tourists from land tenure to tourist concessions, poor visiting protected areas. The economic impact of public sector capacity and weak collaboration this activity through direct and indirect linkages, between institutions, and limited education and including but not limited to jobs, may be expressed human resource development opportunities. as an income multiplier. It is likely to be among But Madagascar also has a long experience in the most important protected area benefits that protected area management to draw on, and there are shared with the communities. An in-depth are valuable lessons from other countries. With understanding of these income multipliers, value- the return to political stability, the opportunity is chains, opportunities, and constraints for the there for the country to develop and manage its local population and businesses would allow the natural assets both to conserve its unique natural government to design and implement policies assets and to increase prosperity for the country’s and programs to strengthen their economic citizens. Recommendations are summarized in impact. Examples include providing opportunities the Table 4.2 below. 192. The benefit-sharing mechanism put in place by the government of Madagascar in the framework of its REDD+ program could be a good source of inspiration, even though the expected amounts to be shared are much greater (US$50 million). 193. World Bank, 2021. Banking on Protected Areas: Promoting Sustainable Protected Area Tourism to Benefit Local Economies. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35737 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO 76 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism Table 4.2. Summary Table of Recommendations Policy Objective Study/Assessment Legal/ Institutional/ Investment Implementation Regulatory Capacity Building Responsibilities Change Strengthen Assess performance Adjust & Strengthen MEDD, MNP ministry capacity of delegated formalize Ministry capacity and delegated to monitor protected areas; management to monitor park managers & evaluate delegation & evaluate with technical implementation Review and ensure contracts for implementation assistance of delegated consistency of these areas of delegated contracts regulations for contracts community based natural resource management contracts (see also section on sharing benefits below) Increase Communicate Increase FABM with financing of management capitalization MEDD, MNP and protected areas record of FABM of FABM international to relevant & expand development stakeholders: support to adequate LMMAs; funding to meet Explore operational costs additional can free space mechanisms to invest in to raise communities funding Improve capacity Review present Support Ensure MEDD, MNP, to manage education & training strengthening government relevant training protected areas opportunities for of local training funding of institutions with protected area institutions in protected development management relevant areas; areas assistance Support in- service training to manage including tourism management Support post- Assess post- Direct MNP with relevant COVID-19 COVID-19 COVID-19 ministries and recovery of infrastructure recovery deconcentrated protected areas rehabilitation financing institutions, needs in protected toward the with support of areas, with a view rehabilitation tourism partners to bringing them of protected and international back to acceptable areas and development tourism standards their tourism partners, including infrastructure through GIP 2 77 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Policy Objective Study/Assessment Legal/ Institutional/ Investment Implementation Regulatory Capacity Building Responsibilities Change Diversify and Update the Prepare a Build on the Tourism industry, improve the prioritization of protected experience of MNP, Ministry quality of protected areas area tourism the Growth of Tourism, tourism offerings and coastal/ strategy for (a) Poles Series public works, marine for tourism protected areas of Projects decentralized investments, based that currently to support territorial local on past exercises, receive most infrastructure, authorities, market surveys, visitors; (b) new services, and MEDD/MNP with travel preferences, protected areas connectivity the support of new conditions and for tourism; and improvements development investor appetite, (c) coastal and in priority partners. together with private marine areas, in areas sector partnership with Tourism industry the private sector with MNP and & identify new delegated investments; managers including LMMAs and municipalities Pilot secondment Growth Poles of tourism project professionals in the management Ministry of of key protected Tourism, national areas and tourism office improve the (ONTM) integration of tourism and Protected Area Management more broadly; Support the national tourism office (ONTM) in its marketing strategy to refine messages on nature-based tourism Finalize Discuss options Approve Finalize Investment MNP, MEDD regulatory in support of amendment documents in support of Ministry of framework concession reform of regulations required finalization Tourism, donors for tourist (among other (concessions concession concessions in measures) decree, framework, protected areas ministerial building order; national on reforms concession linked to strategy; special status standard lands (as contract). part of larger package) Update MNP’s mandate to manage protected areas 78 Protected Areas and Nature-based Tourism Policy Objective Study/Assessment Legal/ Institutional/ Investment Implementation Regulatory Capacity Building Responsibilities Change Promote public private partnerships in ecotourism, both inside and outside protected areas and including marine and coastal areas Share benefits Undertake an in- Reform Improve Design & with local depth assessment regulations if transparency of implement communities of protected area appropriate mechanisms for investment income multipliers, benefit sharing strategies to strengthen the with local to maximize economic impact of communities multipliers protected areas; Explore and decide on an entry fee levels and revenue sharing strategy, balancing modest resources available with shortage and the need to increase the support of local communities to protected areas Improve Improve consistency Address gaps Strengthen the Help address MNP, MEDD, regulatory between the GELOSE, in the legal capacity of the financial Forest framework for the forest law, and and regulatory the State, both constraints Department, community- the land tenure law framework for central that VOIs and deconcentrated based natural community- government and municipalities and resource based natural regional services, face through decentralized management resource to support supporting agencies natural resource management community- expansion of including management and correct the based natural performance- communes and inconsistencies resource based municipalities between management payment with assistance the different schemes, from forest and taking for development environment- example partners related texts advantage of REDD+ projects and programs Note: Blue refers to major policy recommendation; green refers to short term (1-3 years) policy recommendation; red refers to medium term (3-5 years) recommendation 79 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 5 MANAGING PERSISTENT AND EMERGING Photo credit : Dennis van de Water/Shutterstock.com ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES 143. Apart from challenges around integrated replacing charczoal-burning stoves with clean landscape management, Blue Economy, and fuels and technology; (ii) to reduce outdoor air nature-based tourism, which are reflected pollution by monitoring and reducing emissions in the low productivity of Madagascar’s from vehicles, industry, and forest fires; and natural capital, the quality of Madagascar’s (iii) to address soil and water contamination environment is also under threat, with by identifying the sources causing harm and corresponding impacts on human health and cleaning up contaminated soil and water. other development indicators. These health Chapter 2 discusses programs to reduce indoor impacts of environmental degradation are also air pollution. This chapter analyzes three other receiving increasing attention. Since 2018, the key environmental challenges: ambient air Government of Madagascar has been working pollution, solid waste management, which is to address some impacts through the Health a source of air, water, and soil contamination, and Pollution Action Plan,194 an initiative led and sustainable tourism. Effectiveness of by MEDD and with the participation of the current Environmental Impact Assessment Ministry of Public Health, under the umbrella arrangements to manage threats to the of the Global Alliance. It has identified three environment, particularly from infrastructure priorities: (i) to reduce indoor air pollution by development, are also discussed. 194. Indiana University, 2018. Madagascar’s Health and Pollution Action Plan. Available at: https://solvepollution.iu.edu/hpap/index.html 80 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND 146. The mission of OLEP is to combat marine SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT pollution from hydrocarbons. OLEP is a public institution endowed with legal authority and 144. The mission of the Ministry of Environment with administrative and financial autonomy; and Sustainable Development (Ministère de its sources of finance include royalties paid by l’Environnement et de Développement Durable, oil companies and fines collected for marine MEDD) is to “Safeguard and value our environment pollution caused by oil tankers. OLEP in practice and unique natural resources for the well-being only addresses the prevention of marine of the Malagasy population and the sustainable pollution by tankers and does not consider development of the country.195 There are 15 overall pollution, particularly down the value regional directorates (some serve more than one chain. region) providing “deconcentrated services.” At the central level there are two general directorates. One ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT is in charge of environmental governance including departments for natural resource management, for ASSESSMENT combating threats to the forest (including illegal 147. ONE has oversight over the environmental logging), and for reforestation and landscape impact assessment of new investments. It is management. The second general directorate guided by legislation adopted in 2015 — the is for sustainable development, including for Environment Charter and the MECIE Decree — the green and blue economies, for payment for which updates earlier laws.196 New investments environmental services, for strategy and policy, and are subject first to an environmental screening for integration, evaluation, and information. process, which determines whether or not an EIA needs to be undertaken; they are categorized by 145. The Ministry includes additional key services and the nature, size and sensitivity of the area of the organizations. Reporting directly to the Secretary investment. Once prepared, the EIA is reviewed General (under the Minister), is a Bureau by ONE and subject to public consultations. ONE for Climate Change, Carbon and Emissions may review draft terms of reference for the EIA, Reduction from Deforestation and Forest but this is not mandatory. If the investment is Degradation, whose responsibilities includes found acceptable, ONE issues an environmental climate change strategy, REDD+ strategy, carbon, permit with stipulations regarding mitigating and other external financing and evaluation. measures and specifications to ensure Other departments provide specialized services compatibility with environmental standards as such as quarry management and health, well as reporting requirements related to their medical waste and environment, and external implementation effectiveness. ONE’s structure relations. Furthermore, there are key semi- and recent work, including environmental autonomous organizations which are under permits issued per sector, are summarized in the umbrella of the Ministry — the National its May 2020 Activity Report.197 The majority Office of the Environment (Office National pour of these are for mining and industry; there are l’Environnement, ONE) with oversight over relatively few for infrastructure investments. environmental impact assessment, research and training institutes, the organization responsible 148. Effectiveness of these institutions to manage for controlling marine environmental pollution environmental risks is constrained by limited (l’Organe de Lutte contre les Évènements de human and financial capacity. Environmental Pollution, OLEP) and Madagascar National Parks Units within key sectoral ministries198 have (discussed in Chapter 4). responsibility for ensuring that sectoral 195. Development Bank of Southern Africa, 2021. Madagascar. Available at: https://www.dbsa.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/2021-05/ Chapter%2014%20Madagascar.pdf This website provides more details on the responsibilities of MEDD, including oversight of environmental standards, environmental impact assessment and climate change. 196. Law n°2015-003 of January 20th, 2015, and the MECIE Decree (Compatibility of Investments with the Environment), decree N° 99-954 of December 15th, 1999, amended by decree N° 2004-167, MECIE ‘Mise en Compatibilité des Investissements avec l’Environnement’, concerning the environmental impact assessment of all activities that could harm the environment. 197. Office National pour l’Environnement, 2020. Rapport d’Activities. Available at: https://www.pnae.mg/AttributionsPrincipalesONE-mai2020.pdf 198. Republic of Madagascar, 2003. Decree No. 2003-439 of March 27, 2003. 81 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis investments are compatible with environmental 149. A further limitation is that country-specific guidelines. These units are centralized in environmental quality and emission norms and Antananarivo with limited staff. Through standards have been adopted only for a few prefectural order, MEDD has also mobilized the sectors.In most cases, regulations are based on establishment of regional environmental units in international standards and are not necessarily STDs; however, human and financial resources to based on experience in Madagascar. staff these have not been allocated. Furthermore, capacity is lacking within ONE to ensure that 150. ONE to date has focused on preventing the project promoters are respecting the guidelines negative impacts of investments but efforts laid down in environmental permitting documents. are under way for the revision of 2015 MECIE This is the case also for the Hydrocarbons Marine decree, which is intended to address incentives Pollution Incident Response Body and OLEP , for investments in greener initiatives, including which reports to both the MEDD and the Ministry recycling. In the revision process, the intention of Finance. There is no certification system is that EIA will also address social impacts; for environmental assessment practitioners in investment would thus be subject to broader Madagascar.199 The guidelines merely encourage ESIA (environmental and social impact the proponent to use recognized scientific experts assessment). The aim is also that, as part of the in conducting the EIA and the names, professions, decentralization process, CTDs will play a greater and functions of each EIA team member must role in environmental management. be provided in an annex to the EIA report. Also, guidelines for sectoral EIAs are often not provided, AMBIENT AIR POLLUTION such as for the road and water infrastructure. Except for forestry, furthermore, MEDD lacks 151. Air pollution remains the third largest risk factor judicial capacity to assess and investigate for deaths and disability in Madagascar, after environmental offenses. An ongoing reform malnutrition and poor water and sanitation process in the environmental code is intended to services (Figure 5.1), with no change between address this but has not been completed. 2009 and 2019. Top 10 Risks Contributing to Total Number of DALYs in 2019 and Percent Change (2009 – 2019, all ages Figure 5.1.  combined) 2009 2019 Malnutrition 1 1 Malnutrition WaSH 2 2 WaSH Air pollution 3 3 Air pollution High blood pressure 4 4 High blood pressure Dietary risks 5 5 Dietary risks Tobacco 6 6 High body-mass index Metabolic risks Occupational risks 7 7 Occupational risks Environmental/ High fasting plasma glucose 8 8 Tobacco occupational risks High body-mass index 9 9 High fasting plasma glucose Behavioral risks Alcohol use 10 10 Alcohol use Source: GBD (2020) http://www.healthdata.org/madagascar 199. DBSA, 2021. Madagascar. Section 14.3.10. Available at: https://www.dbsa.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/2021-05/Chapter%2014%20 Madagascar.pdf 82 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges 152. However, indoor air pollution drives the health of 1.5 percent per year. Antananarivo is by far impacts of air pollution, and ambient air pollution the largest city in Madagascar, with a current is not currently a challenge. Madagascar shows population estimated at 3.5 million, and a an increase in ambient PM2.5 concentration growth rate of nearly five percent per year.201 Air between 1990 and 2019. While average pollution is for example an emerging challenge annual population-weighted ambient PM2.5 in Antananarivo, in some seasons (see Box 5.1). concentrations increased slightly from 16.4 μg/ The government’s Health and Pollution Action Plan (HPAP) estimates deaths from ambient air m3 in 1990 to 17.9 μg/m3 in 2019, Madagascar’s pollution at 8,500 annually.202 The MEDD through ambient PM2.5 concentrations are well below the Department of Pollution, Waste Management the interim Target 1 established by WHO, and and Integration is in charge of data hosting and significantly lower than the global average and data analysis on air pollution in Antananarivo. those of Madagascar’s peer group countries. The data have been collected daily in five hotspots of the capital since November 2020. 153. Addressing ambient air pollution will be of Air monitoring stations are available to measure increasing concern as Madagascar urbanizes. Particulate Matters (PM), carbon monoxide, Urban population growth rates are currently hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur about 4.5 percent per year,200 with 39 percent dioxide. Ambient air quality levels are monitored of the population living in towns and cities, only in Antananarivo, and the results are not compared with rural population growth rates made public on a routine basis. Figure 5.2. Average Annual Populated-Weighted Concentration of Ambient PM2.5 Average Annual Population – Weighted PM 2.5 (ug/m3) 80 70 Average Annual Population – Weighted PM 2.5 (ug/m3) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Bangladesh Cambodia Madagascar Rwanda Uganda Source:  Health Effects Institute. 2020. State of Global Air 2020. Data source: Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. IHME, 2020. 200. WDI, 2022. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/country/MG 201. Macrotrends, 2022. Antananarivo, Madagascar Metro Area Population 1950-2022. Available at: https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/21792/ antananarivo/population#:~:text=The%20metro%20area%20population%20of,a%204.97%25%20increase%20from%202018 202. Global Alliance on Health and Pollution, 2018. Madagascar Health and Pollution Action Plan. Available at: http://gahp.net/wp-content/ uploads/2019/07/Madagascar-HPAP_EN.pdf 83 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Box 5.1. Air Pollution Trends in Antananarivo Though not an issue nationally, ambient air pollution is a recurrent problem in the concentrated urban area of Antananarivo. In 2021, air quality monitors in Ambohidahy recorded an average annual concentration of 45 g/ m3 PM2.5, higher than the WHO recommended interim Target 1 of concentration of 35 µg/m³. The highest peak of 72 g/m3 was recorded in November. Poor ambient air quality in the urban area of Antananarivo is noted to be caused by various emission sources including road traffic, open burning of waste, bush fires from the perimeter of the urban area, industrial emissions, and smoke emissions from brick kilns. Source: MEDD, 2022. Statistics on air pollution in Antananarivo, DPDIDE, MEDD. 154. Ambient air pollution has multiple causes. In some countries it has resulted in widespread Antananarivo these include vehicle emissions, smuggling. Madagascar has also been slow to emissions from industry, brickyards, fumes introduce modern quality standards for gasoline from solid waste burning in landfills and wild and diesel. Leaded gasoline was banned in dumps, and a reliance on solid biomass (e.g., 2006,205 but imports of low-quality fuel with high wood, crops) for cooking. Analysis has not yet sulfur levels are permitted; maximum sulfur been undertaken on the relative importance of standards for gasoline at 2,000 ppm. these different sources, but poor-quality fuel emission standards for vehicles, including both 156. There is scope for taking a proactive approach cars and lorries, are a major cause. The HPAP to mitigating urban air pollution, which is notes that the two primary drivers of increasing likely to become more acute, especially levels of particulate matter are the high sulfur in Antananarivo. The first step would be fuel imported to Madagascar that is referred to to establish ambient air quality standards as “African quality” diesel; and the used vehicles accompanied by improved air quality and imported to Madagascar which are less efficient emissions monitoring so that there is clearer and lack basic environmental controls. understanding of the extent of the problem and its principal sources. Air quality information 155. Vehicle ownership is still low, though growing, should also be shared regularly with the public. and Madagascar does not have modern vehicle This will help build ownership for future reforms. or fuel quality emission standards. Vehicle As stricter emission standards for vehicles are ownership was estimated at 27 per 1000 introduced, these must be accompanied by population in 2015,203 but it is growing steadily, capacity building to provide for regular vehicles with car ownership concentrated in the capital. emissions testing. Traffic management can also Demand is significant in particular for used cars, help mitigate pollution. Other countries, such as on which Madagascar has not yet implemented Bangladesh, have supported cleaner production restrictions. Other countries in the region have methods for bricks; if this is identified as implemented restrictions based on the age, a major pollution source, similar support mileage, or emission standard of the vehicle.204 measures could be considered. Over time more However, introduction of import restrictions incentives for switching to cleaner cooking increases costs, including for small businesses, sources (ethanol, LPG, and solar energy) will be and requires careful public relations campaigns. necessary, mitigating the impact of uncontrolled It requires capacity to enforce regulations; in burning of waste. 202. Wikipedia, 2022. List of countries by vehicles per capital. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita 204. Jane Akumu, 2019. Africa’s Progress to Cleaner Fuels and Vehicles. UNEP. Available at: http://airqualityandmobility.org/PDFs/sadc2019/ OverviewAfricaprogress.pdf 205. Republic of Madagascar, 2006. Order No. 155/2006 of January 4, 2006 setting the specifications for unleaded gasoline. 84 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT waste generation, including of plastics, is not high by the standards of comparator African 157. Though data on the extent and nature of countries; the challenge is collection and the solid waste management challenge are safe management.207 A recent World Bank scarce in the country, this is noted to be a Publication208 illustrates that for low-income growing challenge. In 2016, it was reported countries like Madagascar the majority of waste that Madagascar produced 3,769,000 tons of generated is either not collected (61 percent), or municipal solid waste per year with a population disposed of inadequately (93 percent), in open of 24,895,000,206 0.41 kg/per capita/year and dumps on land or along waterways. Waste is about half the global average (see Table 5.1). also not sorted to facilitate management. Open Tourism hotspots such as Nosy Be and Ile Sainte dumping contributes to health risks from pests Marie are said to produce a higher amount of and fumes from uncontrolled burning, while waste than the national average. Furthermore, it when solid waste accumulates in waterways this is reported that 96.7 percent of waste ends up in not only pollutes the water but can exacerbate open dumps. If open dumps are near the coast or the severity of flooding as the waste can block if rivers are used as dump sites, then much of it drainage channels. Stagnant water from blocked will likely end up in the ocean, adding pollutants, drains can also contribute to the spread of insect including plastics. borne diseases. 158. Generation of waste is increasing, and 159. Marine plastics are found throughout the coast Madagascar faces increasing challenges in of Madagascar, from remote beaches to urban waste management. Up to date information is areas. While there are no historical studies to lacking, but a 2014 study estimated generation establish a baseline, a 2007 report that assessed of 18,003 metric tons of hazardous waste, marine litter and related waste management 173,129 metric tons of recoverable waste activities provides a comprehensive description and 689,850 metric tons of household waste of the situation at that time (Lane, 2007). The (Table 5.2). Household waste constitutes by assessment found significant quantities of far the largest proportion of waste. As noted, marine litter around urban areas, noting that Table 5.1. Waste generation rates for Madagascar and peer countries adjusted to 2016 Waste Generation Population Waste generation Rates (2016 adjusted tons) (2016 adjusted) (kg/capita/day) Global Average 0.74 Madagascar 3,768,759 24,894,551 0.41 Bangladesh 16,380,103 162,952,000 0.28 Cambodia 1,159,859 15,762,000 0.2 Rwanda 4,384,969 11,917,508 1.01 Tanzania 10,860,140 55,572,000 0.54 Uganda 8,375,073 41,488,000 0.55 Note: Data adjusted to 2016. Source: “Kaza, Silpa; Yao, Lisa C.; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz; Van Woerden, Frank. 2018. What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Urban Development; Washington, DC: World Bank. © World Bank. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.” 206. World Bank. 2016. “Integrated Urban Development and Resilience Project for Greater Antananarivo (P159756): Project Information Document/ Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (PID/ISDS).” Concept Stage. Report No. PIDISDSC17608. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. 207. WWF, 2022. Plastic Pollution in Africa: Identifying Policy Gaps and Opportunities. Available at: https://wwfafrica.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/ wwf_plastic_pollution.pdf?38342/plastic-pollution-in-africa 208. Kaza, Silpa; Yao, Lisa C.; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz; Van Woerden, Frank, 2018. What a Waste 2.0 : A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. 85 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table 5.2. Waste Estimation in Madagascar (in metric tons) Type/Category Hazardous waste Recoverable waste Household waste Batteries and accumulators 4,940 - - Lamps, neon lights 1,000 - - Mineral oils 6,906 - - Car batteries 3,039 - - Refrigerants 524 - - Healthcare waste 1,594 - - Paper and paper boxes - 89,681 - Metals - 13,797 - Plastics - 68,985 - Tires - 66 - Household waste - - 689,850 TOTAL 18,003 173,129 689,850 Source: Initiative on Cities, 2014. one coastal city collected 100m3 of plastic per 160. Responsibility for waste regulation is shared day. At that time, illegal dumping accounted for between MEDD and the responsible sectoral 50-70 percent of solid waste, with the coast seen ministry. Healthcare waste is under the direct as a cost-free disposal place. The study found supervision of the MEDD and the Ministry for management to prevent solid waste entering the Public Health (Law N° 2011-002 of July 15, ocean was inadequate in terms of institutional 2011 on the Health Code). Industrial waste arrangement, technical compliance, and waste and traded goods are under the supervision management services. More recent studies of of the MEDD and the Ministry of Trade marine litter in Madagascar at specific sites show Industry and Consumer Goods (Law N° 99- that much of the litter is plastic and includes 021 of August 30, 1999 on management and bottles, films, packaging, and fishing gear. The control of industrial pollution policy). However, relative quantities depend on the site (Gjerdseth, although regulations specify that the costs 2017). Ongoing surveys at four locations around should be met by firms, there are no further Madagascar found the origin of the plastics is specifications on management of industrial primarily domestic for surveys close to urban solid waste. Waste discharged into water areas, while more remote locations have plastics is under the supervision of MEDD and the from international locations (Saloma et al., 2021). Ministry of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene. (Law Southeast and South Asia are major sources of N° 98-029 of January 20, 1999 on the Water plastic debris. Some plastics also originate in Somalia (van der Mheen et al., 2021; Pattiaratchi Code). Waste affecting the territorial planning et al., 2022). There is a need for a footprint is under the direct supervision of the Ministry analysis to better understand the extent of in charge of Territorial Planning and Land marine plastics in Madagascar including imports, Administration (Ordinance N° 92-033 of July 17, production, and disposal. This work can inform 1992 amending certain provisions of Ordinance the transition to a circular economy for plastics. N° 60-167 of October 3, 1960 relating to town In addition, the prevalence of marine plastics planning). While there are regulatory gaps, the originating outside of Madagascar justifies the bigger challenge is human resource capacity to country extending their participation in regional communicate and enforce regulations, and to and global efforts to reduce marine litter. adapt existing standards to local conditions. 86 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges 161. Responsibility for waste collection is the quantify either the number of workers the sector responsibility of the municipalities (CTDs).209 sustains or the economic impact. Despite the Waste collection and disposal can be undertaken emergence of some local recovery channels either directly by municipalities, or it can be (for example in paper recycling), and strategies contracted to specialized bodies. Fees can be for plastics recycling, most recoverable waste levied on citizens to cover costs. In practice there is exported to Asia (mainly metals) and most are financial and organizational constraints, even waste, including hazardous waste, is not treated. in Antananarivo, which has the highest waste management budget, and where the quantity of 163. MEDD is aware of the potential for creation waste generated is sufficient to enable economies of energy from waste. Examples include the of scale in sorting, disposal, and recycling. generation of energy from communal biogas power Antananarivo is, however, benefitting from plants paid for by electricity fees. The intention assistance from the French Development Agency is to work with private sectors and decentralized (Agence Française de Développement, AFD) in territorial collectivities (municipalities) in support waste management, linked to the WBG supported of “green” bankable local projects. One option Integrated Urban Resilience and Recovery Project would be creation of a “local investment fund for for Greater Antananarivo.210 AFD is providing sustainable development” (Fond d’Investissement an EU€2 million grant to the Autonomous pour le Développement Durable, FILDD) which could Maintenance Service of the City of Antananarivo be anchored with existing funds like the Local (SMA) in order to secure and reorganize the Development Fund. operations of the landfill, Andralanitra, 10 km from the city center, filled to above capacity and SUSTAINABLE TOURISM a source of pests, water, land and air pollution. DEVELOPMENT The city’s longer-term goal is to build a new landfill further from the city but in the meantime 164. While tourism is a driver of economic returns remedial measures for Andralanitra are required. that can support environmental conservation,212 The WBG supported First Growth Poles project if not carefully planned and managed, it can (PIC1) has also supported improved municipal also generate negative environmental impacts. services in some towns. For example, support Such impacts can include human pressures on was provided to Andoany (formerly Hell-Ville), the natural assets through visitation, generation principal town in the tourist island of Nosy Be, for of greenhouse gasses through transportation creation of a solid waste management enterprise services, excessive water use by hotels and (EGEDEN), which was able to increase the number large-scale solid waste generation. of people provided with solid waste collection services from 25,000 in 2005 to 75,000 in 2013. 165. Globally, a number of efforts and commitments The Second Growth Poles project is also financing have been made to limit tourism’s negative small civil works for improved service delivery in environmental impact and to ensure a water supply, solid waste management and rural more sustainable approach to tourism electricity in targeted communes. development. For instance, the UN World Tourism Organization’s Global Code of Ethics 162. Informal waste recovery is significant but for Tourism (GCET), established in 1999, aims difficult to quantify. Waste recovery is to help maximize the sector’s benefits while undertaken mostly by waste pickers, whose minimizing its potentially negative impact on work is difficult and dangerous. It is difficult to the environment, as well as on cultural heritage 207. WWF, 2022. Plastic Pollution in Africa: Identifying Policy Gaps and Opportunities. Available at: https://wwfafrica.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/ wwf_plastic_pollution.pdf?38342/plastic-pollution-in-africa 208. Kaza, Silpa; Yao, Lisa C.; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz; Van Woerden, Frank, 2018. What a Waste 2.0 : A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. 209. Republic of Madagascar, 2015. Law 2014-020 of September 27, 2014 on the resources of Decentralized Territorial Collectivities, election procedures, and the organization, operation and powers of their bodies, as amended by Law No. 2015-008 of March 20, 2015. 210. Agence Francaise de Developpement, 2017. Improving Waste Management in Antananarivo. Available at: https://www.afd.fr/en/carte-des-projets/ improving-waste-management-antananarivo 211. World Bank, 2018. Madagascar – Integrated Growth Poles and Corridor SOP2 Project (English). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/348081537500634040/Madagascar-Integrated-Growth-Poles-and-Corridor-SOP-2-Project 212. Chapter 4 provides more details on the potential for tourism. 87 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis and societies. A plethora of international green yet public, the revised policy’s vision for the certification and standards programs provide sector is directly centered on sustainability, tourism operators with recognition for applying through a strengthened collaboration between sustainable practices in their operations. In 2019 the public sector as the sector’s regulator, the UNESCO and Expedia Group partnered to create private sector as the engine of growth, and the the UNESCO Sustainable Travel Pledge, whereby population as the custodians of the country’s tourism businesses commit to sustainable assets. An ongoing review of the country’s practices for protecting local cultures and the Tourism Code, also supported by the Second natural environment. The Pledge is considered Integrated Growth Poles project, has also an alternative to more complex green prioritized integration of sustainability principles. certifications, making it accessible to smaller One revised article specifies four principles and independent businesses. The sector’s for ensuring the sustainability of tourism global commitment to environmental goals investments, the first of which is to favor the was recently reasserted through the Glasgow respect of the environment and biodiversity. Declaration for Climate Action in Tourism, launched at the UN Climate Change Conference 169. The sustainability of tourism depends not only COP26 in November 2021, which aims to on how the sector’s development is planned and accelerate climate action in tourism towards Net managed at the macro level, but also on how Zero emissions as soon as possible before 2050. individual travel and tourism firms operate – and how tourists behave – at the ground level.214 166. Global travel and tourism trends in the post- While the policy environment in Madagascar is COVID context show a growing interest in favorable to a sustainable approach to tourism sustainable and “responsible” travel. For development, challenges remain in implementing instance, UNWTO foresees “conscious travel” these policies. Key challenges at the policy and and “green travel” as two key trends for travel planning level include: and tourism in 2022.213 As such, a commitment • Scarce public funds: The public budget to sustainable tourism is not only positive for allocated to tourism in Madagascar is low in a destination’s natural assets but also for the comparison to other high-potential, emerging destination’s attractivity and competitiveness. destinations. As such, overall public sector capacity for planning, implementing, and 167. Madagascar is committed to sustainable monitoring sustainability programs is limited tourism development and sustainable practices and actions have to be prioritized. within the sector. The country’s 2018 Tourism Policy Letter aimed to develop Madagascar • Fragmented planning: Tourism sector as a destination recognized worldwide for its development in Madagascar does not sustainable management and the exceptional follow a master plan at the national level, richness of its natural, cultural, and human hindering adequate investments in related heritage. It confirmed its desire to promote infrastructure and services (e.g., energy, competitive and responsible tourism that water, sanitation and waste management) maximizes economic and social benefits, that would contribute to effective contributing in particular to poverty reduction destination management and limit negative and limiting negative effects. It also stated an environmental impacts. Tourism planning objective to increase the number of foreign is also not coordinated with environmental visitors to National Parks and Protected Areas authorities. Planning and management in order to generate sustainable funding for at the local destination level is also often biodiversity conservation. fragmented. • Limited data collection: An overall lack 168. The Ministry of Tourism is currently leading of data collection across the tourism a review of the country’s tourism public sector prevents systematic monitoring of policy, supported by the World Bank’s Second sustainability efforts and performance of Integrated Growth Poles project. Although not firms and of destinations. 213. UNWTO, 2022. Tourism Trends 2022. Available at: https://www.unwto-tourismacademy.ie.edu/2021/08/tourism-trends-2022 214. Note: this section does not explore the behavior of tourists, focusing rather on the actions of the public and private sectors to ensure sustainability. 88 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges • Challenging concessions framework: The THE INTEGRATED GROWTH POLES legal framework for concessions inside SERIES OF PROJECTS Protected Areas is incomplete and lacks transparency (see Chapter 4). As such, 171. The World Bank-financed Integrated Growth tourism operations and activities inside Poles Series of Projects takes a multisectoral, Protected Areas that could potentially spatially focused approach to sustainable contribute directly to conservation tourism development. The development objectives are limited in number across the objective of the project currently under country. implementation, the Second Integrated Growth Poles project, is to contribute to the sustainable • Poor enforcement of rules at site level: Even growth of the tourism and agribusiness sectors where tourism sites, including natural sites by enhancing access to enabling infrastructure and Protected Areas, have guidelines in and services in certain regions of Madagascar. place for visitation and management plans, enforcement on the ground is often weak due to limited capacities, potentially leading 172. The project focuses on a number of regional to inappropriate contact of tourists with destinations that have been identified as having natural resources (e.g., mooring of boats in particular potential for private sector tourism inappropriate marine zones, picking of plants). growth. In its lifetime, the Series of Projects has intervened in the tourist hub island of Nosy Be in • Key challenges at the operator level include: the north, in Diego in the north, in Fort Dauphin • Lack of financing: Particularly in the in the far south, in Tulear in the west, and in Ile COVID-19 context, tourism firms lack the Sainte Marie off the east coast of the mainland, necessary funds to adopt sustainability while also supporting authorities and private practices, which often involve upfront sector entities at the national level. Each of these capital investments (e.g., in solar panels, “growth poles” is identified as having unique recycling stations). In addition, access to tourism development potential largely due to their external financing from commercial banks terrestrial and marine natural assets and existing for tourism operators, especially MSMEs, is clusters of tourism enterprises with the potential extremely limited and/or complex. for growth. The project works to improve their planning, management, and competitiveness • Limited technical capacities: Many operators through, for instance, institutional capacity lack technical knowledge of sustainable building, financing, and technical assistance to practices and/or of the multitude of entrepreneurs and startups, investment in local international standards and certifications infrastructure and service delivery, promotion initiatives to which they could apply. of private investment, and direct investment in • Poor local infrastructure/service provision: specific tourism attractions, including Protected In many cases, operators are prevented from Areas and natural sites. applying sustainable practices due to a lack of local infrastructure and services such as 173. The project has demonstrated that monetization solid waste management services, water of natural resources can help protect them, treatment centers, etc. with which their firm- improve their governance and create jobs,215 but level actions would integrate. also recognizes the potential negative impact of increased tourism. Activities in Nosy Be have 170. Multiple programs and initiatives have been particularly impactful, by combining local- been undertaken over the years to support level efforts to (i) crowd in large investments the application of sustainability principles and strengthen local SMEs; (ii) upgrade in tourism development and operations in infrastructure and basic services; (iii) strengthen Madagascar. While reviewing all such programs governance; and (iv) upgrade and improve is far beyond the scope of this chapter, some management of natural and cultural sites, with key initiatives identified through consultations support for improving the overall investment are summarized below. climate at the national and regional levels. By 215. For instance, in Nosy Tanikeley, a marine Protected Area near Nosy Be, Tsingy Rouge in Diego, Montagne des Français in Diego. 89 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 2014, Nosy Be was on Lonely Planet’s top 10 list focus is aligned with the revised public policy of islands in the world and visitation quadrupled for tourism and the World Bank’s corporate from 25,000 visitors in 2005 to 100,000 in 2019. environmental commitments. However, recognizing the potential for negative cumulative impacts of this development, and GREEN LABELS AND CERTIFICATIONS in the context of the design of a new planned US$150 million investment project following 176. In 2006 the World Bank, under the first the Integrated Growth Poles model that will Integrated Growth Poles project (PIC1), continue to intervene on the island,216 the World supported the establishment of a Green Charter Bank undertook a Strategic Environment and (“Charte Verte”).This was a declaration of Social Impact Assessment (SESA) of tourism commitment to tourism development based on development in Nosy Be. At the time of writing, planning and on a sense of partnership between the SESA had not been publicly disseminated, the public authorities, the private sector, and but its purpose is to identify and prioritize risks civil society. Firms adhering to the Charter of negative social, environmental, and economic declared their commitment to implementing a set of guidelines and codes of conduct, tailored impacts of continued tourism development, and to the type of firm or operator (e.g., hotels, tour develop mitigation strategies based on growth operators, transportation service providers). projections. Firms also agreed to establish indicators that allowed environmental, social, and economic 174. The project has recently implemented a new evaluation of their operations and investments mechanism to support operators in their (e.g., related to infrastructure provision, solid sustainability efforts. In 2021, under the current waste disposal and a code of ethics). However, project phase, a COVID-19 crisis-response no specific criteria had to be fulfilled or verified capacity building and co-financing program for by any third parties, limiting enforcement tourism enterprises was rolled out in the project’s of those codes. In addition, an Evaluation target regions.217 The objective of the program Committee intended to review firms’ self- was to support tourism operators’ survival evaluations was not a success. through the crisis and their subsequent resilience and competitiveness for the recovery. The five 177. In 2011, GIZ, in collaboration with a grouping subject areas covered by the program included of private tourism operators in Nosy Be and “Sustainable Management of Tourism Operations,” supported by the Nosy Be Regional Tourism which attracted 35 percent of all co-financing Office, financed the development and rollout of applicants (99 individual operators), indicating a a “Sustainable Tourism Charter for Nosy Be.”218 strong interest in sustainable practices among Alignment with the charter required fulfillment of operators across the country. The vast majority of approximately 200 criteria and participation in an project proposals under this subject area were for audit. Operators participated in environmental the purchase and installation of renewable energy projects such as reforestation and waste sources (e.g., solar panels). collection activities, as well as social projects. Very limited public data suggests that around 70 175. In its recently launched third phase, the operators in Nosy Be had signed the charter by Economic Transformation for Inclusive Growth 2015. The charter appears to have been adapted project, the Series of Projects will further to some other destinations within Madagascar strengthen its environmental sustainability (Diego, Mahajanga), but with limited engagement. focus. It will do so through (i) greater integration of environmental sustainability principles and 178. ONE created a “Green Label” for hotels in collaboration with environmental stakeholders Nosy Be. However, the political crisis in 2009 in public sector planning at the national level; and the resulting crash in tourism effectively and (ii) facilitating the adoption of sustainability ended the labeling program, which has not practices at the firm level. This enhanced been revived to date. 216. World Bank, 2022. Economic Transformation for Inclusive Growth Project. Project Details. Available at: https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects- operations/project-detail/P174684 217. The “Mandrisika” program, available in Diana, Anosy, Atsimo-Andrefana, the island of Sainte Marie. Operators in Analamanga were also eligible for the program due to an exception opened for the COVID-19 context. Available at: https://mandrisika.mg/ 218. In French, entitled “Nosy Be s’engage pour un tourisme durable”. 90 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges 179. Few tourism operators in Madagascar are Recommendations for ensuring this certified or accredited under international sustainable management could include: programs for sustainability or environmental • National-level planning: Strengthen tourism management. For instance, three hotels in development planning at the national level, Madagascar are currently certified by the particularly through enhanced public-private international Green Globe system, a Global dialogue and coordination with environmental Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC) recognized authorities and Madagascar National Parks. standard.219 The Green Globe system assesses and certifies the sustainability performance • Local destination management: Draw on of travel and tourism businesses and their international best practices in destination suppliers according to 44 environmental, management to pilot a model for Madagascar sustainable management, social economic, and that brings together municipalities, local cultural heritage criteria. It offers three levels tourism authorities, and business associations of certification. There are 33 certified hotels in as integrated destination management Africa. One hotel in Madagascar has earned entities for regional destinations and their key the Green Key label, an eco-label established attractions. in 1994, representing a commitment to 130 • Standards and certifications: Support tourism criteria set by the Foundation for Environmental operators both technically and financially, Education (FEE) and is also GSTC-recognized. potentially in a group format, in selecting and Twelve tour operators and travel agents are implementing environmental management partners of or are certified by Travelife, a GSTC- standards such as ISO 14001 and applying for recognized standard for incorporating social and international “green” certifications or labels. environmental criteria into operations.220 • Local infrastructure and services: Scale up investments in local infrastructure and 180. Some clusters of tourism operators in services in key tourism destinations, allowing Madagascar have shown a particular tourism operators to “plug in” to more effective commitment to sustainable practices. In Sainte basic services and upgrade their in-house Marie, an island beach destination that relies sustainability efforts (e.g., water treatment, heavily on tourism income, many operators solid waste collection). have come together to push for, for instance, the eradication of the use of plastic straws in hotels • Access to finance: Replicate and/or scale up and restaurants. One hotel has successfully programs such as Mandrisika that support eliminated plastic water bottles. Local tourism tourism operators in understanding and firms also collaborate with environmental applying sustainability practices through both organizations to raise awareness of the negative (i) technical capacity building, and (ii) access to impacts of plastic waste, organize beach clean finance for implementation. ups, etc. CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY OF 181. Madagascar’s tourism sector will take time RECOMMENDATIONS to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, and growth in the short- and medium-term will 182. This chapter has discussed both long-standing continue to be hindered by binding constraints and emerging environmental challenges. There as outlined in Chapter 4. In addition, long term are three main lessons moving forward. These all apply to the growing challenges of ambient development of the sector depends, critically, on air pollution and solid waste management and to sustainable management of the country’s unique sustainable tourism: natural assets, including its marine and coastal ecosystems, its biodiversity and landscapes, as 1. Cross-sectoral coordination at both central well as its cultural heritage. and local level is essential. 219 Green Globe. Available at: https://www.greenglobe.com/ 220. Travelife. Awarded Companies. This list is non-exhaustive. Available at: https://www.travelife.info/index_new.php?menu=certifiedcompanies&lang=en 91 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 2. Involving and supporting the CTDs, Ambient Air Pollution especially at communal and municipal 184. Ambient air pollution is an emerging problem and level, will help build local ownership, already of concern in Antananarivo. Addressing solutions adapted to local circumstances, the issue is likely to require regulatory and and sustainability. behavioral change, as well as financial incentives. 3. While the broad policy and strategy At present there is an insufficient understanding framework may be favorable, the main of the key sources, though vehicle emissions challenge is implementation. This are likely to be a principal cause, together with involves capacity building especially poor traffic management, uncontrolled burning at local level, targeted investments, from solid waste dumps, dust from construction, financial incentives to encourage cook-stoves, and brick kilns. Addressing the issue cleaner, greener transitions, and longer will require close cooperation with the municipal term educational and vocational training authorities, as well as community outreach, so that programs. local businesses and the population understand reasons for tighter regulation. Before changes are Each of the four areas covered in this chapter will be introduced, furthermore, a thorough study of the addressed through the lenses of these three cross- costs, including on which groups these costs are cutting recommendations. likely to fall the most heavily, is necessary. Environmental Impact Assessment Solid Waste Management 183. Environmental impact assessment and 185. Improved solid waste management is a function of management plans need to support resilient, municipal, financial, and organizational capacity, of green, and inclusive development. While public awareness, and of the availability of viable environmental impact procedures exist, they options for recycling. Generation of solid waste is are currently focused on avoiding negative likely to grow as Madagascar’s economy grows, impacts rather than supporting broader and there are opportunities to avoid the mistakes sustainable development. Procedures for that other countries have made, including as strategic social and environmental impact regards single use plastics. assessment and plans are not routinely used, unless required for projects financed Sustainable Tourism by international donors. Capacity is lacking in sector ministries, especially at the 186. Ensuring minimal environmental impacts deconcentrated level, to ensure that social and of tourism recovery and growth will require environmental impact plans are implemented sustainable use of natural assets and protected during project implementation. areas, and the mainstreaming of sustainability practices by the tourism private sector. Recommendations include: Table 5.3. Recommendations for Environmental Impact Assessment Policy Instrument Implementation Objective responsibilities Assessment Legal/Regulatory Reform Capacity Building Investment Use social and Study existing Introduce strategic social Support training ONE with sector environmental legislation/ and environmental impact and capacity ministries and impact regulation assessment/ planning building for local training/ assessment and propose where appropriate sector-specific educational to contribute locally adapted and ONE staff institutions Incorporate costs of to sustainable revisions as environmental and social development appropriate mitigation into bidding documents Note: Where recommendations are in green they are for implementation in the short term (1-3 years); where they are in blue they are in the medium term (3-5 years). 92 Managing Persistent and Emerging Environmental Challenges Table 5.4. Recommendations for Ambient Air Pollution Policy Instrument Implementation Objective responsibilities Assessment Legal/Regulatory Capacity Building Investment Reform Develop Further assessment Adopt WHO Create vehicle Support to MEDD, Ministry air quality of principal interim guidelines emissions testing establishment of Transport, standards sources of ambient for air quality units in Antananarivo; of emissions Ministry of air pollution in standards Phase in similar testing Industry, Reduce Antananarivo and programs for other centers in Trade and emissions Revise fuel quality other cities major cities Antananarivo Consumption from motor standards for vehicles Study behavioral sulfur content and Make information Support Municipality of constraints and other pollutants as on ambient air establishment Antananarivo, costs, including necessary quality available of air quality work through administrative on a weekly basis, monitoring in ongoing/ costs of introducing Revise vehicle using cost effective major cities successor tighter vehicle emission technologies for to Urban emission standards, standards for monitoring (satellite, Support traffic Resilience including on imported vehicles low-cost sensors management Project imported vehicles in combination schemes with regulatory to reduce Study traffic grade ground level pollution patterns and traffic monitors) management Note: Where recommendations are in green they are for implementation in the short term (1-3 years); where they are in blue they are in the medium term (3-5 years). Table 5.5. Recommendations for Solid Waste Management Policy Instrument Implementation Objective responsibilities Assessment Legal/Regulatory Capacity Building Investment Reform Support Study SWM in Support capacity Support CTDs, Waste improved secondary cities, building of municipal construction of companies SWM, including waste waste utilities new landfill for including generation, and Antananarivo Work through safe consider options Build local support existing disposal for waste separation Support support and investments programs (e.g., recycling Build on AFD work to in recycling, PIC2) develop alternative including livelihoods for composting waste pickers in and biogas Antananarivo facilities Note:  Note: Where recommendations are in green they are for implementation in the short term (1-3 years); where they are in blue they are in the medium term (3-5 years). 93 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table 5.6. Recommendations for Sustainable Tourism Policy Instrument Implementation Objective responsibilities Assessment Legal/ Capacity Building Investment Regulatory Reform Enhance Enhance tourism Ministry of tourism sector planning, and Tourism, MEDD, development improve coordination MNP, MATSF planning at between tourism the national authorities and level environmental authorities and MNP for planning Improve Assess Pilot innovative, Invest in the Municipalities, regional international collaborative models implementation of regional destination best for integrated regional destination tourism offices, management practices in destination management entities decentralized destination management representations management entities for regional of the Ministry for similar destinations of Tourism destinations Increase Build capacities of Provide financing to Donors, prevalence (groups of) tourism tourism operators tourism private of “green” operators to apply to apply sustainable sector, Ministry certifications, environmental practices to comply of Tourism, standards and standards and apply with standards/ Tourism labels for green certifications certifications Confederation or labels Improve local Scale-up investments Municipalities, infrastructure in local infrastructure MATSF, and and services and services in key donor projects for tourism tourism destinations, working on operators allowing tourism tourism, operators to facilitate infrastructure, sustainability efforts urban by operators (e.g., development, water treatment, solid rural waste collection) development, etc. Facilitate Build capacity of Provide access to Donors, access to tourism operators finance for operators Ministry of finance for in sustainability to implement Tourism, MEDD tourism practices sustainable practices operators that require capital to apply investment (e.g., sustainable Mandrisika model) practices 94 6 CONCLUSIONS AND Photo credit : Artush/Shutterstock.com RECOMMENDATIONS 187. The CEA has tried to make the case that the Blue Economy still have potential to better improved management of Madagascar’s natural contribute to the economy and to the livelihood capital is essential to the country’s transition of coastal communities of the fifth largest island to a green, inclusive, and resilient growth path. in the world. This development should be done It has argued for an integrated and participatory through an integrated approach, optimizing the integrated landscape management approach development of each sector, without mutually to land, water, and forest management which compromising each other. It has made the balances interventions to protect and restore case for the potential of nature-based tourism, ecosystem integrity, assuring delivery of which can help maintain protected areas and natural capital services in the long term, with natural assets through sound management, interventions which will improve access to sufficient funding and sharing the benefits with local services and increase productivity in communities, while creating jobs by growing the the short run. It has, similarly, made the case tourism sector. It has argued that protected area that policies to support the transition to more managers need to work with the tourist industry energy efficient and cleaner cooking need at the to understand the market and incentivize same time to support expansion of woodfuel private investment in tourist facilities. It has production through plantations, agro-forestry also emphasized the importance of developing and community woodlots in order to address infrastructure and services to support the one of the key drivers of deforestation, reduce tourist industry, including investments in indoor air pollution, and improve women’s roads and local capacity to deliver municipal and children’s health. It has made the case services. It has highlighted the emerging for an integrated Blue Economy approach to challenges of ambient air pollution and solid better leverage its diverse marine resources waste management as cities grow, and argued for economic development, while keeping for proactive measures, while also arguing for its coastal and marine ecosystems healthy. improved environmental management of new Fisheries, aquaculture, coastal habitats, marine investments and practices to promote more renewable energy, as well as other sectors of environmentally sustainable tourism. 95 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 188. Many of the solutions to improved management the Health and Pollution Action Plan, the New of natural capital and the environment are Energy Policy, and the Handbook Articulating crossing-cutting and address broader capacity the Constitutional Requirements for the and governance issues. Protection of the Environment, as well as in sector-specific legislation. The next subsections • The private sector investment environment provide recommendations on suggested policy, needs to be strengthened, in particular regulations, capacity building, and investment as regards to property rights, the cost of measures to restore and increase productivity construction permits, and delays in obtaining of natural capital on land and along coasts and financing both from commercial banks and beyond, promote sustainable growth of tourism, from development finance institutions. This mitigate emerging urban pollution challenges, will create a more favorable environment for and improve environmental management as investments not only in the tourism sector the Government of Madagascar advances with but in green industries more broadly. the PEM. The full suite of recommendations for each major theme – landscape management, • Improved management of natural capital Blue Economy, nature-based tourism, and and environmental pollution need well- environmental management are included at the functioning organizations, particularly at sub- end of each respective chapter. This chapter national level. This includes capacity to plan highlights the priority interventions. and manage investment projects, to manage and monitor expenditures and outputs, to work at various scales, including through ADOPT INTEGRATED AND inter-communal cooperation and to include PARTICIPATORY LANDSCAPE the interests of different groups. Technical MANAGEMENT APPROACHES capacity in deconcentrated sectoral organizations should be strengthened to 190. Using landscape approaches helps conserve and deliver better services to decentralized restore the natural capital on which Madagascar organizations. In cities, municipalities need depends and provides lasting benefits and long- to have the capacity to deliver services in term resilience for investments affecting land areas, such as solid waste management, and water management and for Madagascar’s sanitation, and drainage and address the citizens. growing challenge of air pollution through • Promote tenure security for forest and non- traffic management. In rural areas they play forest lands. an enabling role in integrated landscape approaches as well as to broader rural • Improve regulatory framework for community- development. At the central level there is based natural resource management. The room for greater inter-ministerial cooperation regulatory and institutional mechanisms and a willingness to move forward with for landscape approaches mostly already needed policy changes, not only in exist through the CTD planning mechanisms regulations but also in staffing and career at communal and inter-communal level policies, including in deconcentration of but there is a need for greater coordination technical staff at the sub-national level. between sectors. There needs to be greater consistency between the legislation • It is also important that donor agencies for community-based natural resource cooperate to maximize development outcomes, management, the GELOSE, the forest law, and that government agencies facilitate this and the land tenure law. This requires cooperation and ensure coordination. collaboration between MEDD and MATSF (Ministre de l’Aménagement du Territoire et 189. Government is committed to improving natural des Services Fonciers), as well as with the capital and environmental management through Ministries of Agriculture and Livestock and of the PEM. Its policies are articulated in the the Ministry of Interior and Decentralization. policy documents referred to in the preceding chapters, including the former Tourism Policy • Mainstream landscape approaches into larger Letter and upcoming Tourism Policy, the scale investments. These include investments Strategy for Forest Landscape Restoration, in water resource development for hydropower 96 Conclusions and Recommendations and irrigation. Maintenance of upstream TRANSITION TO A BLUE ECONOMY watershed ecosystem functions is key to their APPROACH sustainability. There is room for exploring further Payment for Ecosystem Schemes in 191. Madagascar’s marine resources provide this regard. The Strategic Environmental and important economic and social benefits to the Social Impact Assessment (SESA) tool, if used country and its coastal population, however, effectively, can also help build in maintenance the potential for the Blue Economy to better of these ecosystem functions into permitting, contribute to the development of the island procurement, and longer-term operations. nation needs to be enhanced. MEDD needs to work with the relevant sector • Finalize, adopt, and implement a Blue Economy agencies and ministries to advance policies strategy. Through a consultative and and actions in this regard (e.g., JIRAMA, collaborative process, Madagascar should the Ministry of Energy and Hydro-carbons finalize, adopt and start the implementation and of Water Supply and Sanitation and of of its Blue Economy strategy. This will Agriculture and Livestock for water resource provide the country’s vision for the integrated development, and Ministries of Transport and development of the maritime and coastal Meteorology and Public Works). At the same sectors, while ensuring the preservation of time, adapt landscape approaches to specific the ecosystems that support them. It will contexts and expand existing programs, in particular provide ways to strengthen such as PADAP and Mionjo, while exploring implementation of this integrated approach the scope for greater use of environmental across sectors. An institutional functional finance instruments, such as REDD+ and review should be carried out as part of the PES to support investments. Existing finalization of the strategy to ensure an implementing agencies would work with adequate institutional framework for the MEDD and development partners to explore implementation, as well as monitoring and these options, with the participation of CTDs evaluation of the strategy. The strategy should include climate change considerations and STDs. throughout its development, as well as gender • Invest in productive forestry. Both to reduce to ensure equitable opportunities for women deforestation and to facilitate the transition in the country’s Blue Economy. to more energy efficient and cleaner cooking and improve women’s health, investments • Formulate and implement Marine Spatial Plans (MSP) to guide the development of the Blue in productive forestry (for woodfuel and Economy as well as private sector investments. charcoal for construction) need greater An overarching framework should be prepared support. This includes community woodlots, for the development of subnational MSPs trees on agricultural, land and private sector at the regional level. MSP will provide a wood plantations. mechanism to make early policy decisions • Upscale support for the transition to more on the use of the marine space for activities energy efficient and cleaner cooking. There of the blue sectors, avoiding conflicts by needs to be continued support for expanded looking at the necessary trade-offs ahead of use of improved fuelwood and charcoal time. MSP will also provide recommendations burning cookstoves, with financial incentives for revisions to key marine sector policies to reach populations and with the private for better alignment and implementation of sector to expand production. Expansion Madagascar’s Blue Economy strategy. in production of ethanol for use in clean • Improve investment climates, in particular, for cookstoves, for solar powered stoves, and emerging industries, and incentivize increase for biogas also needs continued support. in compliance and mitigation of impacts Implementation could be through grant on marine ecosystems. The regulatory mechanisms to CTDs through the next phase framework for investment in the sectors of an ongoing program such as Mionjo, but of the Blue Economy, including emerging cooperation is also needed with private sector sectors, should be reviewed to identified how initiatives and the Ministry of Energy and best to lift barriers and support improved Hydrocarbons. There is potential for exploring compliance within key sectors with measures carbon finance to support investments. mitigating impacts on the environment. 97 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis DEVELOP THE POTENTIAL OF flexible upgrade plans, to be aligned with NATURE-BASED TOURISM AND future means and needs. There should be closer collaboration between tourism TOURISM IN PROTECTED AREAS professionals and protected area managers. 192. Madagascar’s unique natural assets can play an For instance, secondment of tourism increasing role in supporting jobs and economic specialists or private operators to contribute development, provided they are managed and to tourism development as part of protected preserved for lasting local and global benefits. area management is one option that could be piloted, facilitated by MNP and the Ministry • The level of financing for protected area of Tourism. management and operations needs to be increased. Current funding levels, at US$6 • The legal framework for tourist concessions million to US$8 million annually for MNP, are in protected areas should be finalized. After about a third of those generally considered years of efforts, finalization of the framework necessary for a protected area system of is expected to contribute to unlocking Madagascar’s size. There is a strong case private investment in protected areas. for increasing the endowment of the trust The finalization could be undertaken in fund FAPBM, given its solid reputation collaboration with MNP/MEED, the Ministry for sound management and the fact that of Tourism, representatives of the tourist it is the most stable source of funding (it private sector and MATSF with the support contributes about US$2.2 million annually). of technical assistance and/or as part of a FABM is exploring options but direct larger package investment program. funding from development partners and • The present allocation system of tourist entry NGOs is one option. NGOs and development fees could be re-assessed with a view to (i) partners’ levels of funding, currently about improving transparency of the system, and US$2 million, could also be increased, both (ii) exploring pathways for systematically through development projects and through sharing (more) revenues with local support to operations. At present most communities. The assessment would need to tourists visit only six protected areas out balance the modest resources available for of 123 in the system, and entry revenues operations and management with the need (US$1.5-2 million before COVID-19) are to increase the support of local communities shared with other protected areas to help to protected areas. It could be undertaken meet their management costs. There is a by MNP with the participation of CTDs and case for MNP to review this strategy (see donor support. following section). Finally, there is a strong case for direct government funding, given the public good benefits TACKLE EMERGING POLLUTION of PAs. CHALLENGES AND STRENGTHEN • Park management training should include ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT training for a broader range of skills. It 193. As Madagascar urbanizes there are opportunities has traditionally focused on protection to tackle emerging issues of ambient air and conservation. Education and training pollution and solid waste management, including programs could be reassessed, with a view those linked to tourism, while environmental to increasing opportunities in areas such impact assessment tools can be used more as tourism management, interpretation, proactively to ensure the sustainability and investment promotion, marketing, and resilience of investments across sectors. administration. Planning would be undertaken with MNP together with the • Madagascar should adopt overall air quality tourism private sector and educational standards, based on the interim WHO establishments. Management plans for guidelines. Air quality monitoring data should protected areas should integrate tourism be made public. Understanding the level and planning and actions. They could identify the impact of pollution will help build ownership required investments to meet and maintain for policy changes. Other major cities should minimum tourism standards and propose begin to collect air quality monitoring data. 98 Conclusions and Recommendations • Strengthen the capacity of municipalities and CONCLUSIONS solid waste utilities in improved solid waste management. This should be undertaken 194. Madagascar is a country rich in natural through broader municipal development capital – it is a defining feature of the programs or projects such as the Integrated country. This report considers the status of Growth Poles Series of Projects where natural capital as the country is poised to possible, and include support for financial grow and urbanize in the coming decades. sustainability as well collection, separation Through this review, it has emerged that an and disposal of solid waste, and public integrated, landscape-level and Blue Economy awareness campaigns to change behavior. approach is essential for mapping out a • Review current legislation and regulations pathway to growth that is green, inclusive, and propose amendments, including and resilient. An integrated approach brings introduction of the Strategic Social and together consideration of the land, air, and Environmental Impact Assessment tool; water resources that are fundamental to this assessment would be undertaken by the health, well-being, development, and MEDD with ONE and concerned ministries. resilience of Madagascar and its people. It Strengthen capacity for EIA and EMP in includes well-managed forests, marine, and the main sectoral ministries, especially at freshwater resources, cities with clean air and sub-national level, including capacity to water that are vibrant and livable, a robust monitor both private and public investment tourism industry, a productive agricultural implementation. sector, and increasingly diverse industrial • Support tourism operators both technically value chains. It includes institutions and and financially in selecting and implementing policies which can provide the services and environmental management standards such policy environment to enable the transition as ISO 14001 and applying for international towards this growth trajectory. By adopting this “green” certifications or labels. Replicate and/ approach, Madagascar has the opportunity, or scale up programs such as Mandrisika that as the economy recovers from the COVID-19 support tourism operators in understanding pandemic, to move towards a growth path that and applying sustainability practices through provides improved lives for its citizens in a both (i) technical capacity building, and (ii) lasting way while preserving the natural capital access to finance for implementation. on which this growth depends. 99 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Photo credit : Javarman/Shutterstock.com REFERENCES Chapter 2 Cooke A, Ranaivoarison R, Andriamahefazafy F and Fenn M, 2022. The Economic Contribution of Madagascar’s Protected Areas – A review of the evidence. 136 pages. Antananarivo: AHT Group. Estrada-Carmona N., A.K. Hart, F.A.J. DeClerck, C.A. Harvey, J.C. Milder. 2014. “Integrated landscape management for agriculture, rural livelihoods, and ecosystem conservation: An assessment of experience from Latin America and the Caribbean.” Landscape and Urban Planning, 129:1–11. Eklund et al., 2016. Contrasting spatial and temporal trends of protected area effectiveness in mitigating deforestation in Madagascar. J. Eklund, … +4 …, M. Cabeza. Biol. Conserv., 203 (2016), pp. 290-297, 10.1016/j. biocon.2016.09.033. Milder J., A.K. Hart, P. Dobie, J. Minai, C. Zaleski. 2014. “Integrated landscape initiatives for African agriculture, development, and conservation: A region-wide assessment.” World Development, 54:68–80. Ravelomanantsoa H., R. Andrianarivelo. 2021. Politique ouverte : structures locales de concertation dans les municipalités de Sahanivotry et Masindray, Madagascar. UNESCO. Reed J., J. Van Vianen, E.L. Deakin, J. Barlow, T.C.H. Sunderland. 2016. “Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future.” Global Change Biology, 22(7): 2540-2554. Sayer J.A., T.C.H. Sunderland, J. Ghazoul, J.L. Pfund, D. Sheil, E. Meijard, M. Venter, A.K. Boedhihartono, M. Day, C. García, C. Van Oosten, L.E. Buck. 2013. “Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 110(21): 8349-8356. Scherr S.J., S. Shames and R. Friedman. 2013. “Defining integrated landscape management for policy makers.” Ecoagriculture Policy Focus, 10. 100 References UNCCD. 2018. Country Profile of Madagascar. Investing in Land Degradation Neutrality: Making the Case. An Overview of Indicators and Assessments. Bonn, Germany: UNCCD. Vieilledent, G., C. Grinand, F.A. Rakotomalala, R. Ranaivosoa, J.-R. Rakotoarijaona, T.F. Allnutt, F. Achard. 2018. “Combining global tree cover loss data with historical national forest cover maps to look at six decades of deforestation and forest fragmentation in Madagascar.” Biological Conservation, 222:189-197. World Bank. 2017. Madagascar—Sustainable Landscape Management Project. Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2018. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2018: Building a Sustainable Future. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2020a. Madagascar—Digital Governance and Identification Management System Project. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2020b. Madagascar— Support for Resilient Livelihoods in the South of Madagascar Project (Mionjo). Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2021a. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021: Managing Assets for the Future. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2021b. Sustainable Landscape Management Project Restructuring Paper. Report No.: RES41721. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2022. 2022 Systematic Country Diagnostic Update for Madagascar: Reducing Poverty by Strengthening Governance and Accelerating Structural Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank. Chapter 3. Giri, C., & Muhlhausen, J. 2008 Mangrove forest distributions and dynamics in Madagascar (1975–2005). Sensors, 8(4), 2104-2117. GCRMN. 2020. Status of Coral Reefs of the World: Chapter 5. Status and trends of coral reefs of the Western Indian Ocean region https://gcrmn.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Chapter-5.-Status-and-trends-of-coral-reefs-of-the- Western-Indian-Ocean-region.pdf. Arjen Luijendijk 1,2, Gerben Hagenaars2, Roshanka Ranasinghe3,4,2, Fedor Baart2, Gennadii Donchyts1,2 & Stefan Aarninkhof1. 2018.The State of the World’s Beaches. SCIENTIFIC REPOrTS | (2018) 8:6641 | DOI:10.1038/s41598- 018-24630-6. Lorenzo Mentaschi 1, Michalis I. Vousdoukas 1,2, Jean-Francois Pekel3, Evangelos Voukouvalas 4 & Luc Feyen. 2017. Global long-term observations of coastal erosion and accretion. SCiEntiFiC REPOrTS | (2018) 8:12876 | DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-30904-w. Chapter 4 Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Lassen, B., Pathak Broome, N., Phillips, A., Sandwith, T. 2013. “Governance of Protected Areas: From understanding to action.” Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 20. Gland, Switzerland. Desbureaux, S., Aubert, S., Brimont, L., Karsenty, A., Lohanivo, A.C., Rakotondrabe, M., Razafindraibe, A.H., Razafiarijaona, J. 2016. “The Impact of Protected Areas on Deforestation: An Exploration of the Economic and Political Channels for Madagascar’s Rainforests (2001–12).” Etudes et Documents, n°3, CERDI. Desbureaux, S., Damania, R. 2018. “Rain, forests and farmers: Evidence of drought induced deforestation in Madagascar and its consequences for biodiversity conservation.” Biological Conservation, 221:357-364. Dudley, Nigel, and Sue Stolton. 2003. Running Pure : The Importance of Forest Protected Areas to Drinking Water. World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use. 101 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Eklund, J., Coad, L., Geldmann, J., and Cabeza, M. 2019. “What Constitutes a Useful Measure of Protected Area Effectiveness? A Case Study of Management Inputs and Protected Area Impacts in Madagascar.” Conservation Science and Practice, 1 (10). Franks, P., Booker, F. 2015. Shared Governance of Protected Areas in Africa: Case Studies, Lessons Learnt and Conditions of Success. IIED, London. Ganzhorn, J.U., Wilmé, L., Mercier, J.-L. 2014. “Explaining Madagascar’s biodiversity.” In: Scales, I.R. (Ed.), Conservation and Environmental Management in Madagascar. Routledge, Abingdon. Gardner, C.J., Nicoll, M.E., Birkinshaw, C., Harris, A., Lewis, R.E., Rakotomalala, D., Ratsifandrihamanana, A.N. 2018. “The rapid expansion of Madagascar’s protected area system.” Biological Conservation, 220:29-36. Jones, J.P.G., Rakotonarivo, O.S., Razafimanahaka, J.H. 2021. Forest Conservation in Madagascar: Past, Present, and Future. In S. M. Goodman (Ed.), The New Natural History of Madagascar. Princeton University Press. Massyn, P.J., Rajeriarison, P. 2017. “Recherche d’investisseurs pour les aires protégées de Madagascar.” International Finance Corporation. Philippe MÉRAL, Géraldine FROGER, Fano ANDRIAMAHEFAZAFY, Ando RABEARISOA. 2009. Chapitre 5. Le financement des aires protégées à Madagascar : de nouvelles modalités. Miller, D.C., Agrawal, A., Roberts, J.T. 2013. “Biodiversity, Governance, and the Allocation of International Aid for Conservation.” Conservation Letters, 6(1):12-20. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R., Mittermeier, C., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Kent, J. 2000. “Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities.” Nature, 403:853-858. Pollini, J., Hockley, N., Muttenzer, F.D., Ramamonjisoa, B.S., 2014. “The transfer of natural resource management rights to local communities.” In: Scales, I.R. (Ed.), Conservation and Environmental Management in Madagascar. Routledge, London. Rabemananjara, Z.H., Raharijaona, A.S., Aubert, S., Ramamonjisoa, B.S., et Rakotoarisetra, F.N. 2016. “Vu d’ailleurs. Les limites juridiques et institutionnelles de 25 ans de gestion communautaire des ressources forestières (GCRF) à Madagascar.” In Buttoud G. et J.C. Nguinguiri (éds). 2016. La gestion inclusive des forêts d’Afrique centrale : passer de la participation au partage des pouvoirs. FAO-CIFOR : Libreville-Bogor. Rasolofoson, R. A., Ferraro, P. J., Jenkins, C. N., and Jones, J. P. G. 2015. “Effectiveness of Community Forest Management at reducing deforestation in Madagascar.” Biological Conservation, 184:271-277. Rasolofoson, R.A., Ferraro, P.J., Ruta, G., Rasamoelina, M.S., Randriankolona, P.L., Larsen, H.O., and Jones, J.P.G. 2017. “Impacts of Community Forest Management on Human Economic Well-Being across Madagascar.” Conservation Letters, 10(3):346-353. Spenceley, A., Snyman, S., Eagles, P. 2017. “Guidelines for tourism partnerships and concessions for protected areas: Generating sustainable revenues for conservation and development.” Report to the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and IUCN. Spenceley, A. 2019. « Modèles de concession et de gestion des parcs nationaux & Rapport d’analyse des projets de texte et les cadres réglementaires et institutionnels pour l’industrie de l’écotourisme. » Études de faisabilité pour le projet Résilience climatique par la préservation de la biodiversité. Thompson, A., Massyn, P.J., Pendry, J., Pastorelli, J. 2014. Tourism Concessions in Protected Natural Areas: Guidelines for Managers. United Nations Development Programme. Urech, Z.L., Zaehringer, J.G., Rickenbach, O., Sorg, J.P., Felber, H.R. 2015. “Understanding deforestation and forest fragmentation from a livelihood perspective.” Madagascar Conservation & Development, 10:67-76. Vieilledent, G., Grinand, C., Rakotomalala, F.A., Ranaivosoa, R., Rakotoarijaona, J.-R., Allnutt, T.F., Achard, F. 2018. “Combining global tree cover loss data with historical national forest cover maps to look at six decades of deforestation and forest fragmentation in Madagascar.” Biological Conservation, 222:189-197. Virah-Sawmy, M., Gardner, C.J., Ratsifandrihamanana, A.N. 2014. “The Durban Vision in practice: experiences in the participatory governance of Madagascar’s new protected areas.” In: Scales, I.R. (Ed.), Conservation and Environmental Management in Madagascar. Routledge, Abingdon. 102 References Vogel, A., Fétiveau, J., Groeber, S., Desbureaux, S. 2017. “Gouvernance partagée des aires protégées à Madagascar. Quel contenu donner à la cogestion ?” Comprendre, Agir et Partager, n°1. Editions du GRET. Waeber, P.O., Wilmé, L., Mercier, J.-R., Camara, C., and Lowry, P.P. 2016. “How Effective Have Thirty Years of Internationally Driven Conservation and Development Efforts Been in Madagascar?” PloS One 11 (8). World Bank Group. 2013. “MADAGASCAR Tourism Sector Review: Unlocking the Tourism Potential of an Unpolished Gem.” Washington DC: World Bank Group. World Bank. 2015. Analysis of Community Forest Management (CFM) in Madagascar. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2021. Madagascar—Third Environment Program Support Project. Independent Evaluation Group, Project Performance Assessment Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2021. Banking on Protected Areas. World Bank. 2021. Madagascar Country Private Sector Diagnostic. WTTC 2019b, quoted in World Bank, 2021[a][b]. WTTC (World Travel and Tourism Council), “Madagascar: 2019 Annual Research, Key Highlights” (WTTC, London, 2019). Botosoamananto, Radonirina Lebely, Gildas Todinanahary, Andriamanjato Razakandrainy, Mahery Randrianarivo, Lucie Penin, and Mehdi Adjeroud. 2021. “Spatial Patterns of Coral Community Structure in the Toliara Region of Southwest Madagascar and Implications for Conservation and Management.” Diversity 13 (10): 486. https://doi. org/10.3390/d13100486. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2022. “Madagascar Country Profile.” 2022. https://www.cbd.int/countries/ profile/?country=mg. Cripps, Garth. 2009. “Understanding Migration amongst the Traditional Fishers of West Madagascar.” Blue Ventures Conservation Report for ReCoMaP, 176. Cripps, Garth, and Charlie J. Gardner. 2016. “Human Migration and Marine Protected Areas: Insights from Vezo Fishers in Madagascar.” Geoforum 74 (August): 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.05.010. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. 2014a. “ECOSYSTEM PROFILE MADAGASCAR AND INDIAN OCEAN ISLANDS.” Arlington, VA.: Conservation International. https://www.cepf.net/sites/default/files/ecosystemprofile_madagascar_ en.pdf. ———. 2014b. “The Madagascar and Indian Ocean Islands Hotspot Ecosystem Profile Summary.” Arlington, VA.: Conservation International. https://www.cepf.net/sites/default/files/cepf_madagascar_profile_summary_eng.pdf. Gerety, R.M. 2017. “Fish vs. Forests? Madagascar’s Marine Conservation Boom.” 2017. https://news.mongabay. com/2017/11/fish-vs-forests-madagascars-marine-conservation-boom/. Gough, Charlotte L. A., Katrina M. Dewar, Brendan J. Godley, Erude Zafindranosy, and Annette C. Broderick. 2020. “Evidence of Overfishing in Small-Scale Fisheries in Madagascar.” Frontiers in Marine Science 7 (June): 317. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00317. iisd. 2014. “SUMMARY OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE (IUCN) WORLD PARKS CONGRESS (WPC) 2014: 12-19 NOVEMBER 2014.” IUCN World Parks Congress 2014 Bulletin. Sydney: iisd. https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/enb.iisd.org/archive/download/pdf/sd/crsvol89num16e.pdf?X-Amz- Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA6QW3Y WTJ6YORWEEL%2F20220221%2Fus-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20220221T111852Z&X-Amz- SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Signature=3a9fefc7e14b81660a48d95e4360aa4f980554161641ee 92b983309eadc34a66. Jones, Trevor, Leah Glass, Samir Gandhi, Lalao Ravaoarinorotsihoarana, Aude Carro, Lisa Benson, Harifidy Ratsimba, Chandra Giri, Dannick Randriamanatena, and Garth Cripps. 2016. “Madagascar’s Mangroves: Quantifying Nation- Wide and Ecosystem Specific Dynamics, and Detailed Contemporary Mapping of Distinct Ecosystems.” Remote Sensing 8 (2): 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8020106. Marine Conservation Institute. 2022. “Marine Protection Atlas.” 2022. https://mpatlas.org/countries/MDG. 103 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Mayol, Tl. 2013. “Madagascar’s Nascent Locally Managed Marine Area Network.” Madagascar Conservation & Development 8 (2): 91–95. https://doi.org/10.4314/mcd.v8i2.8. MIHARI. 2015. “The First Wave of Community-Managed Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar.” 2015. https:// mihari-network.org/en/news/the-first-wave-of-community-managed-marine-protected-areas-in-madagascar/. ———. 2022. “LMMA IN MADAGASCAR.” 2022. https://mihari-network.org/base-de-donnees/lmma-a-madagascar/. Nairobi Convention. 2000. “Status and Management of the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Eastern African Region.” Nairobi: UNEP. Obura, David, Mishal Gudka, Melita Samoilys, Kennedy Osuka, James Mbugua, David A. Keith, Sean Porter, et al. 2021. “Vulnerability to Collapse of Coral Reef Ecosystems in the Western Indian Ocean.” Nature Sustainability, December. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00817-0. Obura, David, Mishal Gudka, Fouad Abdou Rabi, Suraj Bacha Gian, Jude Bijoux, Sarah Freed, Jean Maharavo, et al. 2017. “Coral Reef Status Report for the Western Indian Ocean (2017). Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN)/International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI).” https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20642.07366. Rakotondrazafy, Riambatosoa. 2014. “Towards Developing Governance Strategies for a Sustainable Management of the Fisheries Sector in Madagascar, through the Implementation of a Marine GELOSE.” New York: DOALOS. Ratsimbazafy, Hajaniaina, Thierry Lavitra, Marc Kochzius, and Jean Hugé. 2019. “Emergence and Diversity of Marine Protected Areas in Madagascar.” Marine Policy 105 (July): 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.03.008. USAID. 2019. “MADAGASCAR FAA 118/119 BIODIVERSITY AND TROPICAL FORESTRY ANALYSIS.” Madagascar: USAID. Vyawahare, Malavika. 2020. “An Export Boom Threatens to Put Madagascar’s Mud Crabs in Hot Water.” Mongabay Series. 2020. https://news.mongabay.com/2020/07/an-export-boom-threatens-to-put-madagascars-mud-crabs-in- hot-water/. Wallner-Hahn, Sieglind, Malin Dahlgren, and Maricela de la Torre-Castro. 2022. “Linking Seagrass Ecosystem Services to Food Security: The Example of Southwestern Madagascar’s Small-Scale Fisheries.” Ecosystem Services 53 (February): 101381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101381. Yan, Helen F., Peter M. Kyne, Rima W. Jabado, Ruth H. Leeney, Lindsay N.K. Davidson, Danielle H. Derrick, Brittany Finucci, Robert P. Freckleton, Sonja V. Fordham, and Nicholas K. Dulvy. 2021. “Overfishing and Habitat Loss Drive Range Contraction of Iconic Marine Fishes to near Extinction.” Science Advances 7 (7): eabb6026. https://doi. org/10.1126/sciadv.abb6026. Chapter 5. Gjerdseth, E. 2017. Quantitative Analysis of Debris and Plastic Pollution on Beaches in Northern Madagascar. Oregon Undergraduate Research Journal 10:32-46. Lane, S. 2007. A Regional Overview and Assessment of Marine Litter Related Activities in the Western Indian Ocean Region. WIOMSA, Nairobi, Kenya. Pattiaratchi, C., M. van der Mheen, C. Schlundt, B. Narayanaswamy, A. Sura, S. Hajbane, R. White, N. Kumar, M. Fernandes, S. Wijeratne. 2022. Plastics in the Indian Ocean - sources, transportation, distribution, and impacts. Ocean Science 18:1-28. Saloma, A., A. Ramananpamonjy, K. Andriamirado, M. Rakotovao, M. Thibault. 2021. Les Déchets Marine Sur les Côtes de Madagascar. Progress Report. Cétamada. van der Mheen, M., E. van Sebille, C. Pattiarachi. 2021. Beaching patterns of plastic debris along the Indian Ocean rim. Ocean Science 16:137-133. 104 Annex 1.Integrated Landscape Management Projects Photo credit : Natia Tsiky ANNEX 1. INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS PADAP aims “to increase access to improved irrigation • Preparation of Sustainable Landscape services and agricultural inputs and strengthen the Management Plans (SLMPs) using spatial analysis integrated management of natural resources in the approaches, with the assistance of consultants, selected landscapes by the local actors”. together with policy notes on good practice, and institutional capacity building;121 Landscapes were defined based on geography, using a watershed approach. • Investments and capacity building in the selected landscapes, including capacity building of Five watersheds were selected, all in the northern decentralized and deconcentrated authorities, part of Madagascar (see figure 3.3), comprising parts productive investments, including in irrigation, of four regions, 45 municipalities and targeted to hillside stabilization, forest stabilization, support benefit about 50,000 families. It is made up of land to farmers in new techniques, partnerships with used for different purposes, such as agricultural the private sector in value chain creation, and land, pastoral land, forests, and protected areas. investments in management of critical ecosystems All included irrigated areas important for food and protected areas; production and were highly threatened watersheds, all had potential for economic development and • Project management, coordination and monitoring for promoting biodiversity conservation in critical and evaluation. ecosystems. Project activities include: 221  AUREL, the 2016 to 2020 Land Use Planning for Resilience Project, was a US$1.9 million technical assistance project supporting the SLMP which L aimed “to support integrated decision making for landscape management across sectors and levels of government in Madagascar and Mozambique” https://www.profor.info/knowledge/land-use-planning-enhanced-resilience-landscapes-madagascar-and-mozambique. It helped facilitate access to high level experts on spatial modeling and planning, and supported the development of methodological notes and development of the prototype platforms for simulating land use and land use change processes in order to support decision making. The aim was to develop the information base for planning in the different landscapes, including development of a land degradation baseline using spatial data, and a prototype land use planning decision support tool. 105 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis The Support for Resilient Livelihoods in the South additional financing a new sub-component was of Madagascar Project (Mionjo)222 is a 2020 to 2025 added focusing on support to environment and project initially financed by a US$100 million grant from green infrastructure including fixing dunes and the World Bank. Its objective is to improve access to wind breaks to protect fields, adaptive vegetation, basic infrastructure and livelihood opportunities and and restoration of natural forests (for wood energy, strengthen local governance in southern Madagascar, livelihoods, upstream protection of water sources, with a primary focus on youth and women. It became and agroforestry and mangrove restoration) in the effective in December 2020. The three administrative southern part of Madagascar. Forest and mangrove regions Anosy, Androy, and Atsimo-Andrefana of restoration maintains and expands ecological southern Madagascar are drought prone and have the functions, protects the upstream ecosystems highest concentration of poverty in the country, with (a key target area under the pipeline project), an estimated 90 percent of the population living below and secures the breeding ground for fisheries the poverty line. In 2021, the government articulated a resources; and reforestation satisfies local strategy focused on the south, ‘The Southern Regions fuelwood and wood energy needs; Development Plan’ (‘Plan Emergence Sud Regions’). • Implementation support and learning, including In late 2021, the project received additional financing project implementation and development of a of US$100 million223 to strengthen the government’s geospatial knowledge platform, preparatory studies response to the drought, address vulnerabilities, for SOP 2m and support for crisis response to and enhance the resilience of communities and equip the National Office of Risk and Disaster sustainability of food production and livelihood Management with resources and capacity, and systems to multiple risks. The additional financing institutional support to the regions, communes, document highlighted that degradation of the natural and local consultation structure. environment is one of the key driving factors as to why the drought has been so damaging in the south; ecosystem fragility has increased vulnerability to Location of the Five PADAP Landscapes Figure A1.1.  drought shocks and diminished the population’s adaptive capacity. The project has four main components: • Strengthening local governments, including support to the Decentralized Territorial Collectivities on community-based planning, participatory planning and service delivery, and strengthening social resilience, citizen engagement, conflict prevention, and early warnings and disaster response systems; • Support to resiliency infrastructure, including commune resiliency grants to improve access to basic services, regional water resiliency (rehabilitation and extension of water pipelines and drinking water infrastructure), and improving access to sustainable and multi-use water sources; • Support to resilient livelihoods, including support for community-based organizations and local value chains, rehabilitation of irrigation schemes for resilient livelihoods, restoring food production capacity and strengthening resilience of food and livelihoods systems, including through locust control and climate smart agriculture; and FP026: Sustainable Landscapes in Eastern Madagascar224 Start: capacity building for local government. Under the 01/01/2017 End: 12/31/2026 222. https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/project-detail/P171056 223. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/937121641925820458/pdf/Madagascar-Support-for-Resilient-Livelihoods-in-the-South-of- Madagascar-Project 222. Projet de Résilience Climatique pour la Préservation de la Biodiversité 106 ANNEX 2. MAP AND LIST OF MADAGASCAR’S PROTECTED AREAS Figure A2.1. Map of Madagascar’s Protected Areas Evolution du Système des Aires Protégées de Magadascar AP avan 2003 AP entre 2003 et 2014 AP en 2015 AP Orphelin NAP dossier en cours (Iles Barren) Site Prioritaire pour AP Site Potentiel pour AP marine et côtière Site Potentiel pour AP Limite Région Source: SAPM; BD 500 FTM Réalisation: WCS ReBioMa Edition: Février 2022 Source: SAPM, 2022. 107 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table A2.1. Number and Area of Protected Areas in Madagascar All SAPM MNP Network Non-MNP Network No. Sites Area (ha) No. Sites Area (ha) No. Sites Area (ha) Cat I 1 2228 1 2228 Cat II 28 2,617,847 27 2,245,377 1 372,470 Cat III 2 4807 2 4807 408,231.9 407,461.9 Cat IV 23 (3) 22 (3) 1 770 (53,470) (53,470) Cat V 39 2,617,638.4 39 2,617,638.4 Cat VI 17 865,549.5 17 865,549.5 566,224 566,224 No category 12 (10) 12 (10) (484,517) (484,517) 7,082,525.8 2,655,066.9 4,427,458.9 Total 112 (13) 50 (3) 72 (10) (537,987) (53,470) (484,517) Source: Gardner et al., 2018.225 Table A2.2. Madagascar and IUCN Protected Area Categories, Objectives and Resource Use Madagascar IUCN category Primary goal Use of resources and tourism category Strict Nature I – Strict Nature Strict biodiversity or Access and use of natural resources are forbidden, Reserve Reserve geo-heritage protection except for scientific research and very specific ritual uses National II – National Park Protection of an Harvesting of trees, animals, or plants is forbidden. Park or ecosystem and its Ecotourism is one of the objectives and is regulated Natural Park large-scale ecological by each management plan (no general limitation) processes Natural III – Natural Conservation of specific Are forbidden any intervention susceptible to Monument Monument natural features transform the ecosystems or landscapes, and any commercial harvesting of natural resources. Tourism development is an objective (no general limitation) Special IV – Habitat/ Conservation through Commercial use of hunting, fishing, corals, animal, and Reserve Species management timber products is regulated. Ecotourism is authorized Management Area intervention (no general limitation) Protected V – Protected Landscape/seascape The harvesting of renewable and non-renewable Harmonious Landscape/ conservation natural resources is regulated. Tourism activities are Landscape Seascape encouraged (no general limitation) Natural VI – Managed Sustainable use of Fire and deforestation are forbidden. Harvesting of Resource Resource natural ecosystems natural resources is regulated. Tourism activities are Reserve Protected Area encouraged (no general limitation) Source: IUCN Protected Area Categories 225 Numbers as of 2017. Numbers in brackets refer to protected areas that currently lack active management and are considered ‘paper parks’. 108 Annex 2.Map and List of Madagascar’s Protected Areas Table A2.3. Revenues from Tourist Fees to Protected Areas Protected area Category Terrestrial /Marine No. visitors Entry fees collected (2017-2019 average) (US$, 2017-2019 average) Nosy Tanikely II Mixed 44,567 $ 200,735 Isalo II Terrestrial 34,696 $ 431,397 Andasibe - Analamazaotra II-II Terrestrial 33,689 $ 177,111 Ranomafana II Terrestrial 25,579 $ 226,831 Bemaraha II Terrestrial 19,667 $ 123,215 Montagne d`Ambre II Terrestrial 14,081 $ 69,769 Ankarana IV Terrestrial 8,518 $ 64,047 Lokobe II Mixed 6,283 $ 11,850 Zom bitse II Terrestrial 4,692 $ 36,036 Ankarafantsika II Terrestrial 4,488 $ 41,531 Masoala II Mixed 3,823 $ 44,658 Andringitra II Terrestrial 2,313 $ 25,062 Tsimanampesotse II Terrestrial 1,441 $ 14,251 Marojejy II Terrestrial 1,193 $ 4,973 Nosy Hara II Marine 1,044 $ 18,999 Kirindy Mitea - Andranomena II - IV Mixed 550 $ 4,854 Cap Ste Marie IV Terrestrial 485 $ 1,464 Andohahela II Terrestrial 280 $ 4,195 Baie de Baly II Mixed 122 $ 1,133 Ambohitantely IV Terrestrial 115 $ 511 Andranomena IV Terrestrial 96 $ 4,854 Zahamena II Terrestrial 63 $ 491 Sahamalaza II Mixed 61 $ 820 Manombo IV Terrestrial 52 $ 381 Mananara-Nord II Mixed 40 $ 399 Beza Mahafaly IV Terrestrial 31 $ 199 Mikea II Terrestrial 22 $ 41 Manongarivo IV Terrestrial 13 $ 139 Analamerana IV Terrestrial 2 $ 25 Marolambo II Terrestrial - $ 25 Total 208,004 $ 1,509,998 Source: Numbers provided by MNP. Amounts in Ariary were changed to US$ using the yearly World Bank data rate. 109 Photo credit : Michail_Vorobyev/Shutterstock.com ANNEX 3. LAWS, DECREES, AND ORDERS ON POLLUTION AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 1. Law No. 98-029 of January 20, 1999 on the Water Code. 2. Law No. 99-021 of August 30, 1999 on management and control of industrial pollution policy. 3. Law No. 2001-013 of September 11, 2001 authorizing the ratification of the 1992 International Convention establishing an International Fund for Compensation for Damage Due to Oil Pollution (IOPC Funds). Law No. 2001-012 of September 11, 2001 authorizing the ratification of the 1992 International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC). Law No. 2001-011 of September 11, 2001 authorizing the ratification of the 1990 International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC 90 Convention). 4. Law No. 2004-019 of August 19, 2004 implementing international conventions relating to the protection of the marine and coastal environment against pollution by oil spills. 5. Law No. 2005-004 of August 3, 2005 authorizing the ratification of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 6. Law No. 2011-002 of July 15, 2011 on the Health Code. 7. Law No. 2014-023 of December 10, 2014 authorizing the ratification of the 2001 International Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Due to Pollution by Bunker Hydrocarbons (“Bunker Hydrocarbons” Convention), adopted in London on March 23 2001. 8. Law No. 2014-027 of December 10, 2014 authorizing the ratification of the 2000 Protocol on the preparation, response and cooperation against pollution incidents by Harmful and Potentially Dangerous Substances (OPRC-HNS 2000), adopted in London on 15 March 2000. 9. Law 2014-020 of September 27, 2014 on the resources of Decentralized Territorial Collectivities, election procedures, and the organization, operation and powers of their bodies, as amended by Law No. 2015-008 of March 20, 2015. 10. Law No. 2015-003 of February 19, 2015 on the updated Malagasy Environmental Charter. 110 Annex 3.Laws, Decrees, and Orders on Pollution and Solid Waste Management 11. Law No. 2016-048 of December 16, 2016 authorizing Madagascar’s accession to the 1996 Protocol to the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution Resulting from the Dumping of Waste (London Protocol 1996). 12. Law No. 2017-037 of January 15, 2018 authorizing Madagascar’s accession to the 1997 Protocol to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973, as amended by the 1978 Protocol relating thereto (1997 MARPOL Protocol). 13. Decree No. 2001-898 of October 11, 2001 ratifying the 1992 international convention establishing an International Fund for Compensation for Damage Due to Hydrocarbon Pollution (IOPC Funds); Decree No. 2001-897 of October 11, 2001 ratifying the 1992 international convention on civil liability for damage due to pollution by hydrocarbons; Decree No. 2001-896 of October 11, 2001 ratifying the 1990 International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC 90 Convention). 14. Decree No. 2002-1274 of October 16, 2002 establishing the general principles of radioactive waste management; Decree No. 2002-1199 of October 7, 2002 establishing the general principles of protection against ionizing radiation; Decree No. 2002-1161 of October 2, 2002 laying down the general principles governing the possession and use of ionizing radiation sources intended for medical or odonto-stomatological purposes. 15. Decree No. 2003-439 of March 27, 2003 establishing an environmental unit within each ministry. 16. Decree No. 2002-569 of July 4, 2003 setting the powers and operation of the various bodies responsible for protection against the dangers of ionizing radiation and the management of radioactive waste in Madagascar. 17. Decree No. 2004-1018 of November 9, 2004 ratifying the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol 73/78 and its annexes). 18. Decree No. 2004-994 of October 26, 2004 on the creation, organization, and operation of the Hydrocarbons Marine Pollution Incident Response Body (OLEP, Organe de Lutte contre l’Evènement de Pollution marine) by hydrocarbons. 19. Decree No. 2004-167 of February 3, 2004 relating to the compatibility of investments with the environment (MECIE). 20. Decree No. 2005-512 of October 24, 2005 ratifying the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 21. Decree No. 2006-680 of September 12, 2006 adopting the National Policy for the Management of Healthcare Waste and Injection Safety. 22. Decree No. 2007-327 of April 27, 2007 repealing Decree No. 2003-170 of March 4, 2003 on the regulation of the import and use of substances that deplete the Ozone layer; and regulating the import, sale, resale and use of refrigerants, refrigeration appliances or equipment and halons. 23. Decree No. 2008-600 of June 23rd, 2008 and amended by Decree No. 2019-1393 of July 17, 2019 creating the National Office for the Environment (ONE, Office National pour l’Environnement). 24. Decree No. 2011-627 of October 11, 2011 defining a national policy for the use of dispersants in the maritime waters of Madagascar. 25. Decree No. 2011-449 of August 9, 2011 creating a public establishment of an industrial and commercial nature responsible for the management of solid waste in the urban municipality of Nosy Be and called the Waste Management Establishment in Nosy Be “EDEN”. 26. Decree No. 2012-1113 of December 4, 2012 suspending the export of scrap metal, aluminum waste, copper waste and, exceptionally authorizing certain companies to send their goods; Decree No. 2012-900 of October 9, 2012 prohibiting the import, distribution, sale, use and production of certain active ingredients pesticides in agriculture and chemicals in the industrial sector under the application of the Rotterdam Convention and the Stockholm Convention. 27. Decree No. 2012-754 of August 7, 2012 setting the procedures for the management of end-of-life products, sources of waste and hazardous waste harmful to the environment within the framework of the implementation of the Basel Convention; Decree No. 2012-753 of August 7, 2012 prohibiting the import of waste under the Basel Convention in Madagascar until the installation of adequate treatment centers. 111 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 28. Decree No. 2013-428 of June 13, 2013 suspending the purchase and sale of scrap metal, aluminum and copper waste. 29. Decree No. 2014-052 of January 21, 2014 amending and supplementing the appendix to Decree No. 2012-1113 of December 4, 2012 suspending the export of scrap metal, aluminum waste, copper waste and, authorizing exceptionally certain companies to send their goods. 30. Decree No. 2015-930 of June 9, 2015 on the classification and environmentally sound management of waste from electronic and electrical equipment (WEEE) in Madagascar. 31. Decree No. 2015-857 of May 12, 2015 ratifying the 2000 Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Cooperation against Pollution Incidents by Harmful and Potentially Hazardous Substances (OPRC-hns 2000), adopted in London on March 15, 2000. 32. Decree No. 2015-856 of May 12, 2015 ratifying the 2001 International Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Due to Pollution by Bunker Hydrocarbons, adopted in London on March 23, 2001. 33. Decree No. 2017-920 of October 10, 2017 publishing resolution A.741(18) relating to the adoption of the “international management code for the safe operation of ships and pollution prevention” as amended or “ISM code”, adopted on November 4, 1993 by the International Maritime Organization. 34. Decree No. 2017-233 of April 5, 2017 on Madagascar’s accession to the 1996 protocol to the 1972 Convention on the prevention of pollution of the seas resulting from the dumping of waste (London Protocol 1996). 35. Decree No. 2017-622 of July 25, 2017 authorizing the marketing on the national market of biofuel from the treatment and recovery of household waste. 36. Decree No. 2018-393 of May 2, 2018 on the accession of Madagascar to the 1997 Protocol to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships of 1973, as amended by the 1978 Protocol relating thereto (1997 MARPOL Protocol) 37. Decree No. 2018-1145 of September 5, 2018 prohibiting the import and regulating the export of waste, hazardous waste, hazardous substances and materials containing them in Madagascar. 38. Interministerial Order No. 6941/2000 of July 5, 2000 fixing the smoke emissions relating to the exhaust gases of motor vehicles. 39. Order No. 12032/2000 of November 6, 2000 on the regulation of the mining sector in terms of environmental protection. 40. Order No. 6830/2001 of June 28, 2001 setting the terms and procedures for public participation in environmental assessment. 41. Order No. 12890/2007 of August 3, 2007 establishing a National Committee for the Implementation of the Basel Convention (on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal) and the ecological and rational management of heavy metals. 42. Order No. 723/2012 of February 27, 2012 establishing a National Office and a National Synergy Committee between the Basel Convention, the Stockholm Convention and the Rotterdam Convention on waste and chemicals. 43. Order No. 36802/2013/MEEMF of December 30, 2013 establishing the National Committee for the Implementation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury in Madagascar. 44. Order No. 28831/2013 of September 24, 2013 setting the list of products prohibited by Decree No. 2012-900 of October 9, 2012 prohibiting the import, distribution, sale, use and production of certain active ingredients pesticides in agriculture and chemicals in the industrial sector under the application of the Rotterdam Convention and the Stockholm Convention. 45. Order No. 9007/2018 of April 13, 2018 relating to the “National Policy for the Management of Medical Waste and the Safety of Injections in Madagascar. 112 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Photo credit : Mamy Razafindrakoto ANNEX 4. MADAGASCAR INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY SUPPLEMENT 1. STUDY OBJECTIVES The overall methodology comprised the following steps, which are detailed in the The objectives of the current study are to: sections below: • Create a spatially explicit, data driven assessment 1. Using data on physical conditions (topography, of land degradation in Madagascar over the last soils) along with historical data on land-use, land 30 years; cover, rainfall, deforestation, and remote sensing- based ecosystem indicators, perform a trends • Evaluate the impacts of land degradation on ecosystem services to key sectors, including analysis to identify areas of where erosion and erosion control for agricultural productivity, ecosystem health indicators are in decline, and water, and sediment regulation for hydropower where they show recovery. production, and carbon storage; 2. Combine information on land degradation and • Evaluate the potential for investments in land-use change with publicly available economic landscape management that improve vegetation information to estimate the economic impact of cover to effectively offset landscape degradation land degradation, focusing on the agriculture, and improve ecosystem services values to key hydropower generation, and carbon emissions sectors; and sectors. • Identify priority areas for investment in NBS 3. Apply spatially explicit ecosystem services models based on their potential contribution to improving to evaluate the potential impact of investments ecosystem services and landscape productivity. in improved land management (ILM) on baseflow, storm runoff, and erosion. 113 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 4. Apply the models developed in Step 2 to estimate • Water availability via baseflow: Baseflow refers the potential savings to key sectors that could to water slowly released as surface water from result from these investments. local recharge of soil moisture and aquifers.9 Baseflow was modeled using the InVEST Seasonal Water Yield Model v3.9.30 Baseflow is mainly TREND ANALYSIS OF LAND 2.  driven by precipitation and evapotranspiration DEGRADATION and vegetation cover management present in the A composite land degradation index was landscape.10 developed based on pixel-level analysis of historical trends in four sub-indicators: vegetation The final Land Degradation composite index was health condition, carbon storage, soil retention, calculated by combining the four sub-indicators as and baseflow contribution. These sub-indicators described in Figure 1. The land degradation index was were selected based on FAO’s Global Land supplemented with an analysis of deforestation and Degradation Information System (GLADIS) method, changes in precipitation over the same time period, which emphasizes an assessment of the status to explore their linkages to land degradation. We also and trends of ecosystem goods and services, report on human population change, livestock density, including the impacts that changes have on local populations.1,2 The selected indicators rely on and deforestation and land degradation within a remote sensing data and are known to provide 500-meter buffer zone of riverbanks. meaningful proxies of land degradation in terms of severity, temporal dynamics, and areal extent.3 1.1. Data processing The vegetation health indicator utilized the Normalized Selected sub-indicators for the composite land Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) derived from degradation index:4 Landsat imagery at 30-meter resolution, available from 1992 to 2020. Net Primary Productivity (NPP) at 500m • Vegetation health condition: The Normalized resolution was obtained from MOD17A3HGF V6,11 for Difference Vegetation Index derived from the years 2000 to 2018. Five-year moving averages Landsat data (NDVI; 30m resolution) was used of NDVI were calculated to account for the fact that as a proxy for vegetation health. NDVI provides inter- and intra-annual variability of external factors valuable information about temporal and spatial can affect the values of these parameters year-to-year changes in vegetation distribution, productivity, (for example, fallow periods that range from three to and dynamics, allowing monitoring of habitat five years in Madagascar,12 slash-and-burn agriculture degradation and fragmentation, or assessment of (tavy), seasonality and plant phenology, etc.).13,14 For the ecological effects of climatic disasters such example, the NDVI values estimated for 1992 were as drought or fire.5 the average NDVI based on all imagery recorded from • Carbon storage: MODIS-derived Net primary 1990 to 1994, then NDVI for 1993 were the averages productivity (NPP; 500m resolution) was used as from imagery recorded from 1991 to 1995. The same a proxy for carbon storage. NPP data indicates moving window averaging was applied to NPP data. inter-annual variations in net biomass (carbon) Historical series of NDVI were corrected to account for gain by vegetation over year-by-year. Changes in differences in sensor specifications between Landsat this indicator also point to how the landscape has 5, Landsat 7, Landsat 8. The NDVI transformation changed in terms of the availability of food, biofuel, equation for intercalibration of vegetation indices from and fodder over time,6 and has been used as a different sensor systems was applied, based on studies measure of agricultural sustainability.7 of Steven et al.15 for Landsat 5 to 7, then Roy et al.16 for Landsat 7 to 8. • Soil retention services: The InVEST Sediment Delivery Ratio model v3.98 was used to model The analysis of soil retention and baseflow utilized soil retention for this indicator (90m resolution). the InVEST Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR) model and The model output represents the capacity of a Seasonal Water Yield (SWY) models, v3.9. InVEST is landscape to retain sediment by using information a widely used tool for ecosystem services modeling, on geomorphology, climate, vegetative cover, and has been tested in high or poor data environments and management practices such as anti-erosive with promising results.17,18 The spatially explicit SDR techniques available in the landscape. model estimates for each pixel the average amount 114 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Madagascar Land Degradation Index based on Historical Trends from 1992 to 2020 Figure A4.1.  Land Degradation Index Computation Process: Yearly NDVI, NPP, Soil Retention and Baseflow (Google Earth Engin and InVEST model outputs) Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Trendline correlation Trendline slope: Intensity of Trendline intercept: degradation/improvement Magnitude Ecosystem services  ixel significantly 1. P 1. Highly degrading (-4) T-Value: Significance of the trend degrading 2. Moderately degrading (-3) 3. Slightly degrading (-2) 1. Very potential (1st quartile) (+4) 2. Moderate potential (2nd quartile) (+3) 3. Less potential (3rd quartile) (+2) 4. Highly improving (+4) 4. Least potential (4th quartile) (+1)  ixel significantly 3. P 5. Moderately improving (+3) improving 6. Slightly improving (+2) NDVI + NPP + Soil Retention + Baseflow NDVI + NPP + Soil Retention + Baseflow  xcluding areas 2. E 1. Highly degrading (-16) 1. Very potential (16) where all sub indicators showed a x nonsignificant trend 2. Highly improving (+16) 2. Least potential (4) Land degradation categories 1. Very degraded (-256) 1. Very degraded 2. Moderately degraded 3. Lightly degraded 4. Lightly improved (): attributed 5. Moderately improved 6. Highly improved 2. Very improved (+256) score value of erosion per year, then integrates information on the The required input data for the SDR and SWY models landscape context (land cover and land-use upslope include topography (digital elevation model, or DEM), and downslope of the pixel) to estimate the amount soil characteristics (erodibility and hydrologic soil of sediment thereafter retained on the landscape group), monthly mean rainfall, monthly mean reference washed away in streams. The model is based on an evapotranspiration, and various physically-based implementation of the Revised Universal Soil Loss parameters that reflect how vegetation cover and Equation (RUSLE1)46 for the calculation of annual condition affect the impact of rainfall on erosion and soil loss, and a sediment delivery function driven by the partitioning of rainfall inputs into runoff, infiltration, the hydrological connectivity of each pixel within and baseflow. See Section 5 for a full listing of data the landscape. Once sediment reaches the stream, requirements and sources. the model assumes that it ends up at the catchment outlet, thus no in-stream sediment deposition or A key input is the land use land cover (LULC) map. remobilization processes are modeled.19 Because an official national land cover map does not exist that satisfies the historical criteria for the study, The seasonal water yield (SWY) model allows users to the European Spatial Agency (ESA) Climate Change rank specific parcels (or pixels) of land for conservation Initiative (CCI) land cover map at 300m resolution was or development based on their relative contributions used. This map is available on a yearly basis since to specific components of the hydrological cycle. The 1992.21,22 The Copernicus Global Land Service: Land model partitions precipitation into either quick flow Cover (CGLOPS; 100m resolution) and the recently or base flow (runoff versus groundwater recharge) by released 10m resolution land cover map by ESA23 calculating a water balance for each individual pixel were considered but rejected because they were not of the watershed of interest. The information required available over the historical time period, despite their by the SWY model is easily obtained globally from high spatial resolution. The 38 native classes in the publicly available data sources and includes monthly ESA CCI LULC maps were reclassified to align with the precipitation, topography, evapotranspiration, land-use, 11 classes of ESA23 to allow compatibility of future soil type, and land cover data.20 LULC developed by Madagascar Land Use Planning for 115 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Enhanced Resilience of Landscapes (LAUREL) project classified as forest between 2000 and 2017 to obtain completed in July 202024 and 10-m resolution global the total area deforested. map class. Trend analysis: Slope, magnitude, and 1.2.  Precipitation and reference evapotranspiration were change significance taken from the Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS).25,26 Rainfall For each of the four indicators plus precipitation, a erosivity was taken from Panagos et al. (2017), who trend analysis using pixel-based linear regression was estimated global erosivity based on extensive field- performed using the processed time series (data and/ based data from 3,625 stations observed for 16.8 or model results). The resulting slope of the regression years.27 Soil erodibility (K) values were based on Africa indicates the annual increment of the indicator (either soil typology from Hengl et al. (2021) at 30m resolution, positive or negative), while the regression intercept which provides fractions of silt, fine sand, clay, organic value indicates the magnitude of the specified indicator. content, and bulk density parameters.28 K values were calculated according to the EPIC model methodology The slope, which represents the time variation (Equation 2)29,30 and converted into international units characteristics of variables, was determined by using by multiplying by 0.1317.31 ordinary least squares regression pixel-by-pixel using Equation 3.32,33 The slope is expressed as follows: [ ( Kepic = 0.2+03 exp -0.02556 x San 1-Sil 100 )] x ( ClySil + Sil ) 0.3 n∑ i=1 i x fc1 – (∑ i=1 i ) (∑ i=1 n n n fc1 ) x 1-( 0.25C ) (x 1- 0.7SNi ) θslope = n x ∑ i=1 i2 – (∑ i=1 i ) C + exp (3.72 - 2.95C) SNi + exp (-5.51 + 22.9SNi) n n 2 (Equation 2) (Equation 3) where where San : sand content (%) n : number of years studied Sil : silt content (%) i : year Cly : clay content (%) θ : regression slope C : soil organic carbon content (%) Other parameter inputs to the models were guided by The indicator’s magnitude was calculated as the local studies and regional studies whenever available trendline intercept as shown in Equation 4: (see model parameter values in Section 6). The SDR A=ȳ – θ x̄ (Equation 4) and SWY models were run yearly from 1992 until 2020, where and the resulting output rasters for soil retention (sed_ A is the intercept retention, tons/ha/yr) and baseflow (B, mm/yr) were used in the subsequent trend analysis. ȳ represents the mean value of NDVI ,NPP, precipitation, soil retention or baseflow volume Deforestation between 2000 and 2020 was analyzed θ is the trendline slope based on yearly forest cover from 2000 to 2018 developed by The United States Forest Service Estimated trends that were significant at the 95 (USFS) in partnership with Madagascar Bureau percent confidence level (based on T-values) were National des Changements Climatiques, et de la used to classify the pixels into degrading or improving, REDD+(BNCCREDD+).226 The original data classified and those that were not significant were classified forest into four major classes: humid forest, dry forest, as no change or no trend. The correlation coefficient mangrove, and thorny forest, and those classes were was used to calculate the T value (T-test),34,35 and the combined to estimate forest coverage. To explore T-distribution table was used to reclassify the T-value deforestation, and to control for inter-annual forest at 95 percent confidence interval in relation to the dynamics and potential discrepancies in forest degree of freedom of each indicator. The correlation classification year-to-year, we subtracted the forest was calculated by pixel-by-pixel correlation analysis, cover of 2018 from the area that has ever been using equation 5.32,33 226 Data were acquired from World Bank Madagascar team. Data are not published and not officially validated by the Government of Madagascar. 116 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement ∑ i=1 [(xi – X ) (yi – Y )] n - - a high impact relative to a low magnitude pixel, even r xy = though the proportional change might be the same. The ∑ i=1 [( x – X ) 2 (∑ i=1 i (y – Y) ] 2 n n √ i i magnitude value was represented by the intercept of the regression trendline. The magnitude was similarly (Equation 5) classified into four scores based on quartiles, and then where all four sub-indicator magnitude scores were combined in an additive approach. n : number of years studied x: mean value of the independent variable x The final land degradation composite index is the Ȳ : mean value of NDVI, NPP, precipitation, soil retention product of the final increment (slope) and magnitude or baseflow volume scores, and was reclassified into six classes (three r_xy : correlation coefficient between the variables x degrading and three improving; refer to Figure 3). and y ESTIMATING ECONOMIC IMPACTS 3.  The T-value was calculated using equation 6. OF LAND DEGRADATION √ T=R n-2 Information on net primary productivity (carbon 1 - R2 storage) and erosion generated by the above analysis (Equation 6) was processed to estimate the economic impact of land degradation for Madagascar. Key sectors were where analyzed with multiple economic valuation methods, T : t-value including agriculture, hydropower generation, and R : correlation carbon emissions, at the National level and for the 29- n : number of years studied year period between 1992 and 2020. 1.3. Land degradation composite index 3.1. Carbon i. Carbon stock losses The land degradation composite index was calculated as a weighted index developed through three stages. Land use change and land degradation result in The first stage excluded any pixels where all four sub- the release of carbon stock due to deforestation indicators showed no trend over the study period. The and a decrease in the capacity of all ecosystems second stage considered the annual increment (e.g., to absorb carbon from the atmosphere through slope of the regression) for each sub-indicator. The photosynthesis. increment was classified into one of six classes and pixels in each class were assigned the corresponding The release of carbon stocks from diminishing score: highly degrading (-4), moderately degrading forest covers has an opportunity cost for society, (-3), slightly degrading (-2), slightly improving (+2), as it can no longer access funds from carbon moderately improving (+3), and highly improving credits in the cleared areas. Carbon credits are (+4). Pixel-level scores for the four sub-indicators traded in different markets around the world, were summed. For example, if a pixel showed with US$45 billion raised in carbon pricing moderate degradation in NPP (-3) but showed a high revenues globally in 2019 (World Bank, 2020).227 improvement in baseflow (+4), this led to a positive score (+1), implying an overall positive trend between Madagascar is not a stranger to this revenue the two sub-indicators. The third stage accounted for source, for example with the Atiala Atsinanana the magnitude (or the potentiality) of the services, Emission Reduction Program, Madagascar, that indicating the area where a small change could have sets a price of US$5 per ton of CO2e as reference a high impact. For example, the soil retention service (FCPP,2018).228 This potential market price and has a high magnitude in steeply sloping regions where the carbon content of Madagascar’s forests can there is also high precipitation. Thus, any proportional be used to estimate the potential income loss by change on that high magnitude pixel would lead to Madagascar due to land use change. 227 World Bank Group. 2020. State and trends of carbon pricing 2020. 228. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. 2018. ER Program Name and Country: Atiala Atsinanana Emission Reduction Program, Madagascar 117 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis We used Vieilledent et al. (2018) data on forest global growth rates as well as a three percent loss from 1992 to 2010, and data reported increase in value from year to year. Applying by Forestwatch (2021) for 2011 to 2020. The the social cost of carbon to the amount of CO2 humid forest category was selected because not absorbed due to land degradation allows its most REDD+ projects are located in this type of valuation with the following formula: ecosystem. Carbon stock release was estimated C=∑ Nt x St from two different sources229 that were used as (Equation 8) two different scenarios for the valuation. The where final value reported was the average of the two C: Global cost of carbon not absorbed scenarios. Both national level estimates as well as N: N   PP decrease in period t, measured in tons of specific losses in Protected Areas were calculated, CO2 at the National level due to the importance of these critical zones. The value of potential carbon credits lost was Social cost of carbon price for period t, S:  calculated based on the following formula: measured in 2020 US$ per ton of CO2 C = P * (A * S) (Equation 7) 3.2. Hydropower where i. Hydropower generation C: Opportunity cost of lost carbon credits The impact of sedimentation and reducing water yields P:   Market price of CO2, measured in $ per ton of CO2 in the three main hydropower plants of Madagascar A: Total area of deforestation, measured in ha (Andakaleka, Antelomita and Mandraka, that provide S:  CO2 content of forest, measured in tons of CO2 nearly 90 percent of the generation in the Antananarivo per ha Interconnected Network) was calculated based on the work by Adeogun et al.(2016)232. These authors explain the difference between the installed generation ii. Carbon absorption losses capacity and the actual generation based on multiple The decreasing capacity of ecosystems to absorb factors and determine that suboptimal hydrological carbon implies that significant amounts of this provision accounts for 19 percent of generation losses. greenhouse gas are left in the atmosphere instead of being incorporated and transformed to biomass. Based on this coefficient, the historical generation The year to year changes in NPP were calculated of electricity and the tariffs for electricity233 , it was in Section 1. The average amount of carbon not possible to estimate how much less reliable water is absorbed during the analysis period was 1.56 M costing the hydropower sector. The following formulas tons of CO2 per year. Besides the potential carbon detail the estimation process: credits, an alternative approach to measure this impact is through the social cost of carbon. This HPL = ICG-HPGt (Equation 9) cost of carbon incorporates the indirect negative C = ∑t=1 n effects of carbon emissions at a global level HPLt .WMD . Pt (Equation 10) and into the future (Hockley & Razafindralambo, 2006).230 Nordhaus (2017) 231 estimates that the where social cost of carbon was US$38.1 per ton of CO2 in 2015. This reference value was updated to 2020 HPL:   hydropower production loss, measured in kWh USD of the specific years of the study period based  nstalled capacity hydropower generation, ICG: I on Nordhaus’ (2007) recommendations, considering measured in kWh 229. Razafindralambo, R. Quoted on Hockey & Razafindralambo. 2006. A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of Conserving the Ranomafana-Andringitra-Pic d’Ivohibe Corridor; and van Kooten, G.C., Eagle, A.J., Manley, J., & Smolak, T. 2004. How costly are carbon offsets? A meta-analysis of carbon forest sinks. Environmental Science & Policy, 7, 239-251. 230. Hockley, N. & Razafindralambo, R. 2006. A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of Conserving the Ranomafana-Andringitra-Pic d’Ivohibe Corridor 231. Nordhaus, W. D. 2017. Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(7), 1518-1523. 232. Adeogun, Niyi & Sule, B. & Salami, Adebayo. 2016. Cost effectiveness of sediment management strategies for mitigation of sedimentation at Jebba Hydropower reservoir, Nigeria. Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences. 30. 10.1016/j.jksues.2016.01.003 233. The data source was the Office de Régulation de L’électricité Madagascar: 1) Inventaire du parc hydroélectrique existant Juin 2013, RI Antananarivo (RIA) ; 2) Données Techniques, Statistiques de Ventes, Abonnés et Productions JIRAMA 118 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Table A4.1. Weighted Matrix for Factors Related to Loss in Hydropower Production Task Mechanical Hydrological Electrical Civil Maintenance Sediments Others Ranking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Weighting 60 35 30 15 20 10 10 Normalizing (%) 33 19 17 8 11 6 6 Source: Adeogun, et al., 2016 HPG: Hydropower generated in period t The estimation method is described in the following C:  Cost of hydrological hydropower production formula: loss, measured in 2020 USD C = S * D (Equation 11) WMD : Hydrological factor in hydropower loss  where p:   Selling price of electricity for t period, measured Cost of dredging reservoir, measured in 2020 USD C:  in 2020 USD per kWh Total sediment trapped in reservoirs, measured S:  in tons Two scenarios were calculated to estimate the D:   Cost of dredging, measured in 2020 USD per ton generation losses for each hydropower plant. For Andekaleka, the first one used the difference For the sediment trapped, we used the sediment export between the installed capacity at a 95 percent result from the SDR model, summed for each dam’s efficiency rate and the actual generation, and the contributing watershed area. Total sediment arriving second scenario used the difference between the at each dam was adjusted to account for trapping maximum historic generation and actual generation. efficiency of the reservoirs, following the approach of For the other two dams, Scenario 1 used the difference Brune (1953)236 which relates trapping efficiency as a between capacity at a 90 percent efficiency rate and function of reservoir storage capacity and contributing actual generation, and a second scenario used the watershed area. Incoming sediment values were difference with the maximum historical generation. adjusted according to the estimated trapping efficiency The final reported values are the average of the two for each dam as given in the table below, to calculate the scenarios. Historical electricity tariffs for the period actual amount of sediments trapped in each reservoir. between 2001 and 2020 were used, considering the distribution of clients between the different zones and To determine the price of dredging in Madagascar, an the low, medium and high tension differences,234 each extensive literature review was performed. The review with their respective price tiers. showed that prices of dredging range from US$3 per ton to US$9.4 per ton. Annandale et al. (2016)237 ii. Potential dredging costs of reservoirs suggests US$3 per ton as a price reference, and in the The impact of land degradation on hydropower plants WEDA report (2021)238 the range for dredging price can also be calculated based on the cost of dredging over the last decade has been US$3.5 to US$5.8 per the accumulated sediments. This methodology is often m3. Adeogun et al. (2015) uses a price of US$9.4 per used for the estimation of land management costs m3 as the official price according to the National Inland of land degradation, specifically the cost of loss in Waterways Authority (NIWA). Grimaldi et al. (2013)239 hydropower production (see for example Udayakumara uses a price of US$4.5 per ton for Burkina Faso, a & Gunawardena, 2017).235 country with a similar economy to Madagascar.240 234 Office de Régulation de L’électricité Madagascar : Donnés Techniques, Tarifs. (http://www.ore.mg/jargon.html). 235. Udayakumara, E.P., & Gunawardena, U. (2017). Reducing Siltation and Increasing Hydropower Generation from the Rantambe Reservoir, Sri Lanka 236. Brune, Gunnar M. 1953. Trap efficiency of reservoirs. Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 34(3), 407. 237  nnandale, G. W., Morris, G. L.Karki, P. 2016. Extending the life of reservoirs : sustainable sediment management for dams and run-of-river hydropower. A Washington, DC: World Bank Group. 238. WEDA. 2021. WEDA’s Technical Report: “Reservoir Dredging: A Practical Overview”. Available at: Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. 239. Grimaldi, S., Angeluccetti, I., Coviello, V., & Vezza, P. 2013. Cost-Effectiveness of Soil and Water Conservation Measures on the Catchment Sediment Budget-The Laaba Watershed Case Study, Burkina Faso. Land Degradation & Development, 26(7), 737–747. doi:10.1002/ldr.2212 240. Both countries classified by the World Bank as low-income economies and with GDP (international dollars) of 46.08 billion $ in 2019 and 47.53 billion $ in 2020 in Burkina Faso and 42.76 billion $ in 2019 and 45.5 billion $ in 2020 Madagascar. 119 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table A4.2. Sediment Trapping Efficiency for Dams in Madagascar Dam Sediment trapping efficiency % Ambilivily 0.8725 Amboromalandy 0.5717 Andekaleka 0.8805 Antanifotsy 0.8426 Antelomita * 0.8161 Mandraka 0.8161 Mantasao 0.8977 Sahamoloto 0.7528 Tsiazompaniry 0.8947 *Two dams located upstream of Antelomita (Tsiazompaniry and Mantasao) also act to trap some sediments arriving from the upper watersheds. Therefore, sediment inflows to Antelomita were further adjusted to account for trapping efficiencies of upstream dams, as follows: Antelomita = Sediment trapping efficiency Antelomita x [sediment export Antelomita - (sediment to export to Tsiazompaniry x sediment trapping efficiency Tsiazompaniry) - (sediment export to Mantsoa x sediment trapping efficiency Mantasao)] Two scenarios were calculated to account for uncertainty scenarios were used to classify regions afflicted by in estimating the dredging cost, since specific information erosion. The first scenario used the average value of 70 for Madagascar was not available: Scenario 1 assumes tons per ha as the threshold for eroded regions, while the a unit cost of dredging of US $4.5 per ton, which is the second scenario considered regions with erosion of over average cost from the literature review; and Scenario 50 tons per ha as impacted. Final reported values were 2 assumes a unit cost of dredging of US$9.4 per ton the average of the two scenarios. In the case of regions (maximum price from literature review). Final reported afflicted by erosion, the estimation of productivity losses values are the average of these two scenarios. was calculated based on the following formula. C= ∑ n Rit . L . Pit (Equation 12) 3.3. Agriculture where i. Productivity losses C: cost of agricultural losses for erosion afflicted One of the sectors most affected by land degradation region, measured in 2020 USD is agriculture, due to the close relationship between R:   Total production of crop i in period t, measured soil health and productivity. A number of studies in tons in Madagascar and other countries have proven L: Production loss coefficient  that erosion, lower water availability and other land Price of crop i in period t, measured in 2020 USD P:  degradation indicators have a negative effect on per ton of produce yields. Some relevant papers that shed light on this issue are presented in the table below. ii. Potential dredging costs of irrigation dams Pimentel et al. (1995), Sartori et al. (2019), and Lal, R. An additional impact of land degradation in the (1995) estimate that high erosion decreases agricultural agricultural sector is the siltation in irrigation dams. productivity approximately eight percent in comparison Similarly, as in the case of hydropower, removing the to areas with no erosion. Based on this coefficient, an sediments accumulated in the reservoirs implies an estimate of the lost value in agricultural production due investment proportional to the severity of the problem. to land erosion was obtained by incorporating mean The potential cost of dredging these reservoirs was erosion at the regional level from the SDR model, prices of calculated using the same method described above main crops, and regional data on agricultural production. for hydropower dams. Similarly, two scenarios were The definition of what constitutes high erosion varies calculated, using the average cost of dredging and by country, with values ranging over a broad spectrum, maximum values obtained from literature review, as depending on sources. For the Madagascar case, two described in Section 2.2.2. 120 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Table A4.3. Relevant Citations and Methodology Geographic Citation Main Results Methods Focus Carret, J; Loyer, D. (2003). Madagascar protected Madagascar 10% loss of productivity Field data area network sustainable financing. in rice plots, due to silted analysis in Economic analysis Perspective. irrigation channels and Maroantsetra and suboptimal water availability Alaotra. Randrianarisoa, J. & Minten, B. 2001. Agricultural Madagascar Cyclones on previous National Survey, Production, Agricultural Land and Rural Poverty year reduce Agricultural statistical in Madagascar production value on 7% analysis, and (National Level estimate). market prices Portela, R., Nunes, P. A. L. D., Onofri, L., Madagascar 1% increase in the use of Production Villa, F., Shepard, A., & Lange, G. M. (2012). water (rainfall or irrigation) function Assessing and valuing ecosystem services leads to a 0.91% increase in the ankeniheny-zahamena corridor (caz), in the production of rice madagascar. A Demonstration Case Study for and a 0.83% increase in the the Wealth Accounting and the Valuation o f production of manioc Ecosystem Services (Waves) Global Partnership. Sartori, M., Philippidis, G., Ferrari, E., Borrelli, P., Global Mean crop yields loss in Literature review Lugato, E., Montanarella, L., & Panagos, P. (2019). areas of severe erosion of A linkage between the biophysical and the 8% in comparison to non- economic: Assessing the global market impacts affected areas of soil erosion. Land use policy, 86, 299-312. Pimentel, D., Harvey, C., Resosudarmo, P., Global Severe soil erosion by water Review article Sinclair, K., Kurz, D., McNair, M., ... & Blair, R. (rates of higher than 17 (1995). Environmental and economic costs of tha−1 year−1) can cause a soil erosion and conservation benefits. Science, crop productivity loss of 8% 267(5201), 1117-1123. annually. Lal, R. (1995). Erosion-crop productivity Africa Yield reductions due to severe A review of relationships for soils of Africa. Soil Science erosion may range from 2% to available data in Society of America Journal, 59(3), 661-667. 40%, with a mean of 8.2% for African plots the continent. ESTIMATING BENEFITS OF 4.  (2020) condition, and then again applying a scenario INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE that reflects the potential implementation of ILM. The ILM scenario assumed broad investments in activities MANAGEMENT (ILM) that improve the condition of vegetation and soil cover, Spatially explicit ecosystem services models (as such as agroforestry, silvopasture, revegetation, etc., described in Section 1) were applied to estimate and assumed that such activities would be focused in the potential improvement that could be achieved areas classified as croplands (cultivated and managed through implementing ILM in productive landscapes vegetation), grazing areas (grasslands vegetation), or in Madagascar. The objective of the analysis was to in degraded areas classed as bare ground or shrubland. identify the areas where the implementation of ILM These land management practices are assumed practices can have the greatest effect in reducing soil to be implemented in all available locations in the loss, thereby preventing further losses in the productivity country, reflecting what the landscape could look like of croplands and grasslands, and in improving rainfall- if there was a strong commitment to implementing runoff dynamics, thereby reducing peak flows (which land management across the board. This approach exacerbate flood risk) and increasing base flows. allowed for highlighting the watersheds where full implementation brings the greatest potential benefits. ILM potential was estimated using the same InVEST SDR and SWY models developed for the degradation Model parameters reflecting the implementation of soil trends analysis. The models were run for the baseline conservation activities and surface runoff management 121 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis practices were used as input to the SDR and SWY Note that for this high-level screening analysis, we do models. ILM implementation was reflected in the SDR not make any assumptions about the specific land model by assuming a 15 percent improvement in the management practices employed; rather, we assume management factor for shrublands and bare areas, and that the most locally appropriate ILM practice will be a 40 percent improvement in croplands and grasslands. selected and implemented, and the end result will be In the SWY model, changes were reflected as a 15 an enhancement of vegetation cover, water infiltration, percent increase in water use by vegetation (reflecting and soil health. Details on the specific ILM practices more vegetation density and/or vigor), a five percent that are most appropriate and effective for a given reduction in runoff curve number for shrublands and location are left for subsequent analyses, when we bare areas, and a 10 percent reduction in runoff curve expect that locally specific data are available, coupled number for croplands and grasslands (reflecting with stakeholder engagement on feasible and locally vegetation’s ability to capture and infiltrate rainfall). acceptable practices. See Section 6 for model parameters. We assumed 2040 as the time frame for the ILM scenario, reflecting full implementation of improved practices. 5. VALUING ILM BENEFITS Restoring environmental integrity can also lead to The benefits of ILM are estimated as the change in economic gains. Based on the modeling described in the average annual erosion rate, sedimentation rate Section 3, it was possible to estimate the potential to major reservoirs, annual average baseflow, and value of integrated landscape management for annual storm surface runoff for each pixel between Madagascar. We focused on projecting potential gains the baseline (2020) land cover and the scenario where for the agriculture and hydropower sectors over a 20 ILM practices are implemented. The catchment areas year future period. for major dams were taken from the Global Reservoir and Dam Database (GRanD) v1.3 dataset (Lehner et al., 2011).241 Changes in erosion were summarized at 5.1 Hydropower and irrigation dams the regional level to allow for valuation of benefits to The reduction of sediment exports in the watersheds of crop productivity. Changes in annual sedimentation dams, achieved by the implementation of ILM practices were summarized for each catchment area of the three would result in lower potential dredging costs. The major hydropower reservoirs (Andekaleka, Antelomita, valuation of the amount of total savings was calculated and Mandraka) and the six major irrigation reservoirs by first estimating the potential dredging costs without (Ambilivily, Amboromalandy, Antanifotsy, Mantasao, the implementation of ILM. For this we used the values Sahamoloto, and Tsiazompaniry). calculated for dredging of sediments accumulated during 2020, multiplied it by two dredging costs The pixel level results for change in erosion, baseflow, (US$4.5 and US$9.4 per ton) and used the average of and storm surface runoff from ILM implementation the two costs as the final value. We then assumed that were combined into an index of ILM potential by first this cost would remain constant until 2040. calculating the difference between the baseline and the ILM scenarios. For erosion and storm runoff, a greater reduction in the indicator value indicated a greater Cost of dredging under ILM practices used the new benefit of ILM. For baseflow, the sign of the change was estimates of sediment exports obtained from the ILM reversed, to indicate that a greater increase in baseflow scenario, adjusted for the trapping efficiencies of is an improvement. The mean of each indicator’s reservoirs, and multiplied by the two possible dredging difference was calculated at the district level. District costs over the 20 year analysis period. The savings level means were then classified based on quartiles from implementing ILM practices for each hydropower (25th percentile, 50th percentile, 75 percentile, and 100 and irrigation dam is the difference between the costs percentile) and assigned a value of one to four. The final in the Business as Usual (BAU) projection and the index of ILM potential is the sum of the component average of the two ILM projections, as described in the quantile scores. formula below. 241  ehner, B., C. Reidy Liermann, C. Revenga, C. Vörösmarty, B. Fekete, P. Crouzet, P. Döll, M. Endejan, K. Frenken, J. Magome, C. Nilsson, J.C. Robertson, L R. Rodel, N. Sindorf, and D. Wisser. 2011. High-resolution mapping of the world’s reservoirs and dams for sustainable river-flow management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9 (9): 494-502. 122 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement S= ∑ CBAUt - CILMt (Equation 13) the decrease in erosion would be linear at a constant rate, reflecting a linear establishment and growth of where vegetation over the 20 year period. This assumption S: Savings from the implementation of ILM  allowed us to project specific erosion values for each practices, measured in 2020 USD region and for each year between 2020 and 2040. The CBAU: Cost of dredging a dam in period t, in the level of erosion in turn determines if a region would Business as Usual projection suffer losses from erosion degradation, just as in the CILM: Cost of dredging a dam in period t, in the ILM  case of the BAU projections. Similarly, two different projection levels of erosion define the threshold for losses, 70 tons per ha and 50 tons per ha, and the final value is the 5.2 Agriculture average of the two scenarios. The reduction in erosion from the implementation The gain in agricultural productivity from implementing of ILM practices will also result in gains for the agricultural sector. The potential benefits that could ILM practices for a specific region in Madagascar is be achieved were calculated by first estimating the difference between the productivity in the Business the potential productivity losses without the as Usual projection and the average of the two ILM implementation of ILM. For this, we used the values projections, as described in the formula below, while calculated for agricultural losses in the different total savings are the sum of all regions. G= ∑ regions of Madagascar during 2020, from the results of AILMt - ABAUt Section 2.3.1. We then assumed that these costs would (Equation 14) remain constant until 2040. where Agricultural gains value, measured in 2020 USD G:  To calculate potential agricultural losses under ILM practices, we used the new estimates of erosion  gricultural losses due to erosion in ILM AILM: A obtained from the ILM implementation scenario. These projection in period t estimates showed the final erosion to be expected by  gricultural losses due to erosion in BAU ABAU: A 2040 in the intervened regions. We then assumed that projection in period t 6. DATA SOURCES USED IN THE LAND DEGRADATION ANALYSIS Data type Description Date Resolution File Source Source Link Used For covering Format data General DEM Digital Elevation 2000 90m Raster WWF Hydrosheds, https://www. SDR and Model Hydrological hydrosheds.org/ SWY Cond. DEM modelling Land Cover & Land LULC from ESA 1992-2020 300m Raster European Space https://cds.climate. SDR, AWY Use Climate Change Agency Climate copernicus.eu/ and SWY Initiative (CCI) Change Initiative cdsapp#!/dataset/ modelling global land cover (ESA CCI) satellite-land- (CCI) cover?tab=form Precipitation Daily precipitation 1992-2020 5Km Raster Global https://data.chc. SWY Precipitation ucsb.edu/products/ modelling Climatology CHIRPS-2.0/africa_ Project (GPCP) monthly/tifs/ Climate Data Record (CDR) Daily analysis Administrative Regions and 2018 Admin shapefile The Humanitarian https://data. SDR, Units District boundaries level Data Exchange humdata.org/ AWY and 1,2,3,4 dataset/madagascar- SWY and administrative-level- modelling 0-4-boundaries 123 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Data type Description Date Resolution File Source Source Link Used For covering Format data Erosion (SDR) Soil erodibility Soil USLE_K 1950-2020 30m Raster Africa Soil Grids https://www.nature. SDR erodibility com/articles/s41598- modelling coefficient derived 021-85639-y from physical properties Rainfall erosivity Annual average 2000-2010 1km Raster Rainfall Erosivity https://esdac. SDR rainfall erosivity of the World jrc.ec.europa.eu/ modelling content/global- rainfall-erosivity USLE_C Crop cover factor, 1990-2020 300m Table USLE_C crop/ https://doi. SDR by land use/land cover factor, org/10.1007/ modelling cover type obtained from BF00889179 regional studies and InVEST 3.9 model user guide recommendations USLE_P Management 1990-2020 300m Table Average USLE_P https://biblio.univ- SDR practice factor, from two recent antananarivo.mg/ modelling by land use/land field based pdfs/rakotomamonjy cover type studied in TolojanaharyE_ESPA_ Madagascar MAST2_16.pdf https://onlinelibrary. wiley.com/ doi/10.1002/ldr.3016 Seasonal Water Yield (SWY) Precipitation Annual and Monthly 5km Monthly Climate Hazards https://data.chc. AWY monthly precipitation and Group InfraRed ucsb.edu/products/ and SWY precipitation since 1992 annually Precipitation CHIRPS-2.0/ modelling to 2020 with Station data (CHIRPS) Evapotranspiration Reference Estimated Climate Hazards https://data.chc. AWY evapotranspiration from Group InfraRed ucsb.edu/products/ and SWY (et0) dekadal Precipitation Hobbins_RefET/ modelling (10-day) et0 with Station data since 1992 (CHIRPS) to 2020 Depth to Bedrock 2021 30m Raster Africa Soil Grids https://www.nature. AWY com/articles/s41598- 021-85639-y Hydrologic Soil Derived from 2020 250m Raster The Oak Ridge https://daac.ornl. AWY Group soil physical National gov/cgi-bin/dsviewer. modelling properties, Laboratory pl?ds_id=1566 following USDA recommendations Kc Water use 1992-2020 .csv table InVEST 9.1 https:// AWY coefficient by land user guide Kc naturalcapitalproject. modelling cover/land use calculator and stanford.edu/sites/g/ type FAO data files/sbiybj9321/f/ kc_calculator.xlsx 124 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Data type Description Date Resolution File Source Source Link Used For covering Format data Climate Zones Rainfall statistics 2001 Raster https://www. SWY calculated at worldwildlife.org/ modelling District level publications/ terrestrial- ecoregions-of-the- world Net Primary MOD17A3HGF 500 m Raster The United States https://lpdaac. NPP productivity (NPP) v006 MODIS/ Geological Survey usgs.gov/products/ Terra Net Primary (USGS) mod17a3hgfv006/ Production Gap- Filled Yearly L4 Global 500 m SIN Grid Vegetation health Landsat 5,7 1992-2020 30 m Raster The United States NDVI Condition and 8 used for Geological Survey calculation of (USGS) the Normalized vegetation Index (NDVI) Socio-economic factors Livestock (cattle, Livestock 2010 1 km m Raster FAO https://www.fao. sheep, and goat) distribution in org/livestock- 2010 expressed systems/global- in total number distributions/cattle/ of specified en/ animals per pixel. Gridded Livestock of the World database (GLW 3). The dasymetric method (DA) was selected Human Population The Gridded 2000, 2005, 1km Raster Center for https://sedac.ciesin. grid Population of the 2015, 2020 International columbia.edu/ World, Version Earth Science data/set/gpw-v4- 4 (GPWv4): Information population-density- Population Density Network - CIESIN adjusted-to-2015- Adjusted to Match - Columbia unwpp-country- 2015 Revision of University. 2018 totals-rev11/data- UN WPP Country download Totals Protected areas From IUCN The https://www. boundary World Database on iucn.org/theme/ Protected Areas protected-areas/ (WDPA)  our-work/world- database-protected- areas 125 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis 7. INVEST MODEL PARAMETERS (2016)38 from the Avaratrambolo watershed. A study We derived sediment delivery ratio (SDR) model by the Institut National des Sciences et Techniques parameters of C and P factors primarily from.36,37 Nucleaires (INSTN - Madagascar) team found that The cover factor C in cropland, we used values based traditional terrace systems have an effect of reducing on crop cover effectiveness in reducing soil erosion soil erosion by up 40 percent in eastern central from Clay and Lewis (1990). We used P factors of 1 highlands.39,40 We applied default values for Borselli for all land cover types except for cropland which is IC0 and maximum SDR parameters and set threshold 0.531. The P factor was an average based on field flow accumulation to 1,100 based on evaluation of measurements reported in Rakotomamonjy et al. the model-derived stream networks using various accumulation parameters.37 Table A4.4. Biophysical Table for Sediment Delivery Ratio LULC_desc lucode usle_c usle_p Tree Cover 10 0.001 1 Shrubland 20 0.08 1 Grassland 30 0.08 1 Cropland 40 0.17 0.55 Built-up 50 0.1 1 Bare Sparse vegetation 60 0.45 1 Water body 80 0 1 Wetland 90 0.077 1 Mangrove 95 0.001 1 Table A4.5. Biophysical Table for Sediment Delivery Ratio, with ILM Implemented LULC_desc lucode usle_c usle_p Tree Cover 10 0.001 1 Shrubland + ILM 20 0.08 0.85 Grassland + ILM 30 0.08 0.6 Cropland + ILM 40 0.17 0.4 Built-up 50 0.1 1 Bare Sparse veg + ILM 60 0.45 0.85 Water body 80 0 1 Wetland 90 0.077 1 Mangrove 95 0.001 1 126 Table A4.6. Biophysical Table for Seasonal Water Yield Model Description lu code Kc_1 Kc_2 Kc_3 Kc_4 Kc_5 Kc_6 Kc_7 Kc_8 Kc_9 Kc_ 10 Kc_ 11 Kc_ 12 CN_A CN_B CN_C CN_D Tree Cover 10 0.837 0.891 0.833 0.887 0.881 0.856 0.846 0.813 0.805 0.783 0.798 0.899 30 30 41 48 Shrubland 20 0.664 0.658 0.682 0.844 0.788 0.561 0.402 0.34 0.379 0.411 0.611 0.59 30 30 41 48 Grassland 30 0.688 0.676 0.711 0.835 0.845 0.704 0.585 0.488 0.503 0.545 0.617 0.67 30 30 41 48 Cropland 40 0.683 0.95 1.21 0.95 0.71 0.55 0.55 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.583 67 78 85 89 Built-up 50 0.2 0.475 0.475 0.45 0.45 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2 91 91 91 91 Bare/Sparse 60 0.2 0.475 0.475 0.45 0.45 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2 91 91 91 91 Water body 80 1.03 1.028 1.031 1.099 1.09 1.035 0.972 0.924 0.935 0.954 1.012 1.016 99 99 99 99 Wetland 90 0.73 0.722 0.733 0.886 0.858 0.733 0.579 0.469 0.509 0.549 0.701 0.697 49 69 79 84 Mangrove 95 1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 49 69 79 84 Table A4.7. Biophysical Table for Seasonal Water Yield Model, with LMP Implemented Kc_ Kc_ Kc_ Description lu code Kc_1 Kc_2 Kc_3 Kc_4 Kc_5 Kc_6 Kc_7 Kc_8 Kc_9 CN_A CN_B CN_C CN_D 10 11 12 Tree Cover 10 0.837 0.891 0.833 0.887 0.881 0.856 0.846 0.813 0.805 0.783 0.798 0.899 30 30 41 48 Shrubland + ILM 20 0.764 0.757 0.784 0.971 0.906 0.645 0.462 0.391 0.436 0.473 0.703 0.679 28.5 28.5 38.9 45.6 Grassland + ILM 30 0.826 0.811 0.853 1.002 1.014 0.845 0.702 0.586 0.604 0.654 0.740 0.804 27 27 36.9 43.2 Cropland + ILM 40 0.820 1.140 1.452 1.140 0.852 0.660 0.660 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.700 60.3 70.2 76.5 80.1 Built-up 50 0.2 0.475 0.475 0.45 0.45 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2 91 91 91 91 Bare/Sparse + ILM 60 0.230 0.546 0.546 0.518 0.518 0.230 0.230 0.288 0.288 0.288 0.288 0.230 86.5 86.5 86.5 86.5 Water body 80 1.03 1.028 1.031 1.099 1.09 1.035 0.972 0.924 0.935 0.954 1.012 1.016 99 99 99 99 Wetland 90 0.73 0.722 0.733 0.886 0.858 0.733 0.579 0.469 0.509 0.549 0.701 0.697 49 69 79 84 Mangrove 95 1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 49 69 79 84 127 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Table A4.8. Climatic Table for Seasonal Water Yield Model ECO_NAME cz_id jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec Madagascar 2 26 24 21 6 3 4 3 1 1 10 14 22 dry deciduous forests Madagascar 17 23 18 22 16 11 7 6 1 0 9 7 16 lowland forests Madagascar 11 12 12 10 6 4 5 2 0 6 6 4 12 spiny thickets Madagascar 18 26 20 21 12 8 8 4 1 2 9 12 20 subhumid forests Madagascar 12 18 16 8 5 5 4 1 0 4 3 7 14 succulent woodlands 8. REFERENCES TO ANNEX 4 1. Biancalani, R., Nachtergaele, F., Petri, M. & Bunning, S. Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands: Methodology and Results. (2013). 2. Kosmas, C. et al. Evaluation and Selection of Indicators for Land Degradation and Desertification Monitoring: Methodological Approach. Environ. Manage. 54, 951–970 (2014). 3. Olsson, L. et al. Climate Change and Land. in IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems (2019). 4. Allen, D. E., Singh, B. P. & Dalal, R. C. Soil Health Indicators Under Climate Change: A Review of Current Knowledge. 25–45 (2011) doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20256-8_2. 5. Pettorelli, N. The normalized vegetation index. (Oxford University Press, 2013). 6. Abdi, A. M., Seaquist, J., Tenenbaum, D. E., Eklundh, L. & Ardö, J. The supply and demand of net primary production in the Sahel. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, (2014). 7. Robinson P. Nathaniel, Cindy M. Cox & Jawoo Koo. Harnessing net primary productivity data for monitoring sustainable development of agriculture. https://www.ifpri.org/publication/harnessing-net-primary-productivity- data-monitoring-sustainable-development-agriculture (2016). 8. Sharp, E. R. et al. InVEST 3.5.0.post358+he23ea3e79185 User’s Guide. (2018). 9. USGS. Base Flow in Rivers by Water Science School. https://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/water-science- school/science/base-flow-rivers (2018). Aladejana, O. O., Salami, A. T. & Adetoro, O. I. O. Hydrological responses to land degradation in the Northwest 10.  Benin Owena River Basin, Nigeria. J. Environ. Manage. 225, 300–312 (2018). 128 Annex 4.Madagascar Integrated Landscape Assessment Methodology Supplement USGS. MOD17A3HGF v006 MODIS/Terra Net Primary Production Gap-Filled Yearly L4 Global 500 m SIN Grid. 11.  https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mod17a3hgfv006/ (2022). Styger, E., Rakotondramasy, H. M., Pfeffer, M. J., Fernandes, E. C. M. & Bates, D. M. Influence of slash-and-burn 12.  farming practices on fallow succession and land degradation in the rainforest region of Madagascar. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 119, 257–269 (2007). Wallace, C. S. A., Thenkabail, P 13.  ., Rodriguez, J. R. & Brown, M. K. Fallow-land Algorithm based on Neighborhood and Temporal Anomalies (FANTA) to map planted versus fallowed croplands using MODIS data to assist in drought studies leading to water and food security assessments. GIScience Remote Sens. 54, 258–282 (2017). Zeng, L., Wardlow, B. D., Xiang, D., Hu, S. & Li, D. A review of vegetation phenological metrics extraction using 14.  time-series, multispectral satellite data. Remote Sens. Environ. 237, 111511 (2020). Steven, M. D., Malthus, T. J., Baret, F., Xu, H. & Chopping, M. J. Intercalibration of vegetation indices from 15.  different sensor systems. Remote Sens. Environ. 88, 412–422 (2003). Roy, D. P. et al. Characterization of Landsat-7 to Landsat-8 reflective wavelength and normalized difference 16.  vegetation index continuity. Remote Sens. Environ. 185, 57–70 (2016). Bullock, J. M. & Ding, H. A guide to selecting ecosystem service models for decision-making. (2018). 17.  Neugarten, R. A. et al. Tools for measuring, modelling, and valuing ecosystem services Guidance for Key 18.  Biodiversity Areas, natural World Heritage sites, and protected areas Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 28. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series (2018). Sharp et al. InVEST 3.9.0.post0+ug.gbbfa26d.d20201215 User’s Guide. National Capital Project http://data. 19.  naturalcapitalandresilienceplatform.org/invest-releases/documentation/current_release/index.html (2020). Scordo, F. et al. Modeling Water Yield: Assessing the role of site and region-specific attributes in determining 20.  model performance of the InVEST Seasonal Water Yield Model. Water (Switzerland) 10, 1–42 (2018). ESA Copernicus. Land cover classification gridded maps from 1992 to present derived from satellite 21.  observations. https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/satellite-land-cover?tab=form (2021). Brockmann, C., Boettcher, M. & Kirches, G. Product Quality Assurance Document CDR Land Cover ( brokered from 22.  CCI Land Cover ). (European Space Agency (ESA), 2018). 23. Tsendbazar, N. et al. World Cover Product Validation Report (D12-PVR). https://worldcover2020.esa.int/data/ docs/WorldCover_PVR_V1.1.pdf (2021). 24. FutureWater. Land Use Planning for Enhanced Resilience of Landscapes (LAUREL) Madagascar. https://www. futurewater.eu/projects/laurel/ (2020). UCSB. Index of /products/CHIRPS-2.0/africa_monthly/bils. https://data.chc.ucsb.edu/products/CHIRPS-2.0/ 25.  africa_monthly/bils/ (2021). UCSB. Index of /products/Hobbins_RefET. https://data.chc.ucsb.edu/products/Hobbins_RefET/ (2021). 26.  27. Panagos, P. et al. Global rainfall erosivity assessment based on high-temporal resolution rainfall records. Sci. Rep. 7, 4175 (2017). Hengl, T. et al. African soil properties and nutrients mapped at 30 m spatial resolution using two-scale 28.  ensemble machine learning. Sci. Rep. 11, 1–18 (2021). Anache, J. A. A., Bacchi, C. G. V., Panachuki, E. & Sobrinho, T. A. Assessment of methods for predicting soil 29.  erodibility in soil loss modeling. Geociências 34, 32–40 (2015). 129 Madagascar Country Environmental Analysis Sharpley, A. N. & Williams, J. R. EPIC: The erosion-productivity impact calculator. Technical Bulletin http://agris. 30.  fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US9403696 (1990). Foster, G. R., McCool, D. K., Renard, K. G. & Moldenhauer, W. C. Conversion of the universal soil loss equation to 31.  SI metric units. J. Soil Water Conserv. 36, 355–359 (1981). Zhang, X., Wang, J., Gao, Y. & Wang, L. Variations and controlling factors of vegetation dynamics on the 32.  Qingzang Plateau of China over the recent 20 years. Geogr. Sustain. 2, 74–85 (2021). Wasserman, L. All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference. (Springer, 2004). doi:10.1007/978-0- 33.  387-21736-9_1. StatisticsHowTo. Linear Regression: Simple Steps, Video. Find Equation, Coefficient, Slope - Statistics How 34.  To. https://www.statisticshowto.com/probability-and-statistics/regression-analysis/find-a-linear-regression- equation/ (2022). Minitab. Understanding t-Tests: t-values and t-distributions. https://blog.minitab.com/en/adventures-in- 35.  statistics-2/understanding-t-tests-t-values-and-t-distributions (2016). Leh, M. D. K., Matlock, M. D., Cummings, E. C. & Nalley, L. L. Quantifying and mapping multiple ecosystem 36.  services change in West Africa. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 165, 6–18 (2013). Hamel, P. et al. Sediment delivery modeling in practice : Comparing the effects of watershed 37.  characteristics and data resolution across hydroclimatic regions. Sci. Total Environ. (2016) doi:10.1016/j. scitotenv.2016.12.103. Rakotomamonjy, E. T. Modelisation De L ’ Erosion Hydrique Des Sols Sur Un Bassin Versant d’Avaratrambolo. 38.  vol. 11 (Universite d’Antananarivo, 2016). Mabit, L. et al. Promoting the use of isotopic techniques to combat soil erosion: An overview of the key role 39.  played by the SWMCN Subprogramme of the Joint FAO/IAEA Division over the last 20 years. L. Degrad. Dev. 29, 3077–3091 (2018). Rabesiranana, N. et al. Assessment of soil redistribution rates by 137Cs and 210Pbex in a typical Malagasy 40.  agricultural field. J. Environ. Radioact. 152, 112–118 (2016). 130 1818 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20433 USA Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org/environment