Development and climate change in Tanzania: focus on Mount Kilimanjaro

Abstract

This report presents the integrated case study for Tanzania carried out under an OECD project on Development and Climate Change. The report is structured around a three-tiered framework. First, recent climate trends and climate change scenarios for Tanzania are assessed, and key sectoral impacts are identified and ranked along multiple indicators to establish priorities for adaptation. Second, donor portfolios in Tanzania are analyzed to examine the proportion of donor activities affected by climate risks. A desk analysis of donor strategies and project documents as well as national plans is conducted to assess the degree of attention to climate change concerns in development planning and assistance. Third, an indepth analysis is conducted for climate change impacts and response strategies for Mount Kilimanjaro – a critical ecosystem, biodiversity hotspot, and source of freshwater. This part of the analysis draws upon extended field research by a case study consultant in collaboration with national and international partners. Analysis of recent climate trends reveals that climate change poses significant risks for Tanzania. While projected changes in precipitation are uncertain, there is a high likelihood of temperature increases as well as sea level rise. Climate change scenarios across multiple general circulation models show increases in country averaged mean temperatures of 1.3°C and 2.2°C projected by 2050 and 2100, which are broadly consistent, though lower than, projections used in Tanzania’s Initial National Communication. The sectors potentially impacted by climate change include agriculture, forests, water resources, coastal resources, human health, as well as energy, industry and transport. While uncertainties in climate change and impact projections pose a challenge for anticipatory adaptation in any country, Tanzania’s case has several specific characteristics that might suggest the need for a differentiated adaptation strategy. First, the climate change projections which form the basis of national assessments rely on an older generation of climate models which project higher temperature increases than more recent models analyzed in the present study. Updating of climate scenarios and impact projections through the use of multiple and more recent models might therefore be advisable prior to the formulation of aggressive (and potentially expensive) adaptation responses. A second characteristic feature of Tanzania is that certain sectors such as agriculture and water resources are projected to experience both negative and positive impacts under climate change – for example, while production of maize is projected to decline, the production of two cash crops (coffee and cotton) is projected to increase. The implication for adaptation therefore may be to not only cushion adverse impacts, but also to harness positive opportunities. A third key characteristic is that unlike most other countries where the need for adaptation relies on projections of future impacts, some discernible trends in climate and attendant impacts are already underway in Tanzania. Such impacts – as is the case of the Kilimanjaro ecosystem - argue for more immediate adaptation responses as opposed to a “wait and see” strategy. Tanzania receives close to a billion US dollars of Official Development Assistance (ODA) annually. Analysis of donor portfolios in Tanzania using the OECD-World Bank Creditor Reporting System (CRS) database reveals that between 12-25% of development assistance (by aid amount) or 20-30% of donor projects (by number) are in sectors potentially affected by climate risks. However, these numbers are only indicative at best, given that any classification based on sectors suffers from oversimplification the reader is referred to the main report for a more nuanced interpretation. Donor and government documents generally do not mention climate change explicitly, although frequent references are made to the impacts of climate variability and their linkages to economic performance. There is COM/ENV/EPOC/DCD/DAC(2003)5/FINAL 7 however considerable synergy between priorities of at least some national plans and measures that might be required for climate change adaptation, such as water conservation, improving agricultural resilience, and forest conservation. However, some of these goals (such as water conservation) had been articulated, though not successfully implemented in previous plans. Therefore, a key obstacle facing “mainstreaming” is not synergies at the level of planning documents, but rather the successful implementation of such plans. The in-depth sector analysis focuses on the climate change impacts and policy responses on the Mount Kilimanjaro ecosystem. Glaciers on Mount Kilimanjaro have been in a general state of retreat on account of natural causes for over a hundred and fifty years. Due to a decline in precipitation coupled with a local warming trend that has been recorded in the second half of the twentieth century Kilimanjaro’s ice cap is now projected to vanish entirely by as early as 2020. The symbolism of this loss is indeed significant, and furthermore the loss of the ice cap would also imply that valuable records of past climates contained in its ice cores would also be irreplaceably destroyed. From a physical and socio economic perspective however, this analysis concludes that the impact of the loss of the ice cap is likely to be very limited. Much more significant is the enhancement in the intensity and risk of forest fires on Mount Kilimanjaro as a consequence of the increase in temperatures and a concomitant decline in precipitation over the past several decades. Forest fires have resulted in the replacement of the fog intercepting subalpine forest belt by low lying shrub which has already seriously impacted the hydrological balance of the mountain as fog intercepting cloud forests play a key role in the water budgets of high altitude drainage basins. A continuation of current trends in climatic changes, fire frequency, and human influence could result in the loss of most of the remaining subalpine Erica forests in a matter of years. With this, Mount Kilimanjaro will have lost its most effective water catchment. Among the more immediate adaptation responses identified by this report are institutional measures such as the inclusion of the forest belt into the Kilimanjaro National Park and the creation of a paramilitary ranger group to deter logging, as well as better investments in early warning systems, particularly the purchase of one or two aircraft for aerial surveillance. There is also a need to limit cross-border migration of big game from neighbouring Amboseli, which is adding to the stress on the Kilimanjaro ecosystem. In addition to short term solutions there is acritical need to develop a comprehensive and holistic development plan focusing on fire-risk and forest destruction, livelihood needs of the local population as well as on conservation strategies to ensure the long term sustainability of the valuable resources of the Kilimanjaro ecosystem.