The Biodiversity Planning Forum was established in 2004 to provide an opportunity for individuals, agencies and departments involved in spatial biodiversity planning to share and synthesise valuable lessons from biodiversity planning projects across South Africa. The Forum is intended primarily for those involved in the technical aspects of biodiversity planning and the production of systematic biodiversity plans and associated products. This includes people from conservation agencies, provincial environmental and conservation departments, conservation NGOs, universities and research institutes (national and international), and biome programmes, as well as independent biodiversity planning consultants. The core focus of
the Forum is on systematic biodiversity planning, with a key theme being “planning for implementation” or planning that lays the basis for implementation of the planning outputs.
The annual Forum is held in a different province each year and is co-hosted by SANBI and the provincial conservation authority, and sometimes by the provin-cial environmental department. This provides an opportunity for particular provinces to showcase their biodiversity planning work.
The Biodiversity Planning Forum has grown substan-tially since its inception in 2004, from 40 people to 184 in 2010. The benefi ts of a Forum of this type include providing knowledge sharing opportunities for biodiversity planners in the country, and creating an effective interface between the few scientists who do the systematic biodiversity planning and the practitioners who implement the resulting biodiversity
planning tools. Participants at the Biodiversity Planning Forum
64
Chapter 3The South African experience has been that systematic biodiversity planning has provided a powerful platform for mainstreaming biodiversity in planning and decision-making across a range of sectors including agriculture and other production sectors, urban and rural develop-ment, municipal development planning and environ-mental assessment. In some provinces and districts there has been signifi cant progress in making the transi-tion from planning to implementatransi-tion, resulting in real integration of biodiversity priorities into the policies, programmes and day-to-day work of other sectors.
At the same time, this area of work faces a number of challenges, key amongst which is the uneven spread of technical capacity across the country, which means that some provinces and districts are only just beginning this type of work. Another challenge is that systematic biodiversity plans could lose their value if they are not updated regularly. The updating process, and building capacity to implement the plans, will require ongoing
4 Why these tools work in South Africa
commitment of resources by government in partner-ship with civil society and donor institutions.
There is still much to be achieved, but the reasons for success so far include the following:
• Adhering to the principles of systematic biodiversity planning has enabled the development of biodiver-sity sector plans that provide clear maps of areas important for biodiversity based on best available science, and guidelines that can be implemented to achieve biodiversity targets, whilst supporting appropriate development. Maps are powerful tools for interacting with other sectors, and the principles of biodiversity planning, including setting explicit biodiversity targets, provide a rational, constructive platform for engaging with sectors whose interests are different from those of the biodiversity sector.
• Explicit incorporation of climate change design principles at a landscape scale into systematic biodiversity plans provides land-use planners and
Low-cost housing development, Oudtshoorn, Western Cape
contributed signifi cantly to ensuring that biodiver-sity planning tools are accessible to a wide range of end-users. The provision of on-line support services such as the Land Use Decision Support Tool, means that users can readily obtain workplace-based support in the use of biodiversity data.
• Availability of land cover data and information on vegetation types for the whole country has meant that these two data layers can be used as a starting point for systematic biodiversity planning in any part of the country. It is possible to perform rapid biodiversity assessments even with only a few key data layers, and it is sometimes best to do this rather than waiting for large volumes of detailed biodiver-sity data to be available. A simple, rapidly generated plan is better than having no plan at all, especially in areas requiring urgent action.
• The existence of national guidelines for producing biodiversity sector plans, and the Biodiversity Planning Forum that enables effective information exchange and lesson sharing, promote greater consistency in the planning tools that are generated.
• The time that has been dedicated to setting up effective working relationships has made the differ-ence to the effectiveness with which biodiversity has been integrated into land-use planning and decision-making in South Africa. Maps and guidelines alone have little impact. Successful outcomes on the ground require ongoing involvement and commitment from a range of scientists, NGOs and implementers working in multiple sectors. Cross-sectoral partner-ships, locally-based champions, ongoing capacity building and workplace-based support are needed to ensure successful transition from planning to implementation.
decision-makers with real opportunities to make spatial decisions that maximise risk-avoidance, reduce biodiversity loss, enhance ecosystem resilience and maintain ecosystem services – even in the face of climate change.
• Although the use of systematic biodiversity plans is not unique to South Africa, the country’s biodiver-sity planners have placed considerable emphasis on interpreting the scientifi c results of biodiversity planning for a wide range of end-users. The provision of practical land-use guidelines that accompany the maps of biodiversity priority areas makes them meaningful and useful to practitioners in other fi elds, and the move towards standardising terminol-ogy (CBAs and ESAs) and the “look and feel” of the maps increases their usefulness.
• The outputs of biodiversity planning processes have been geared for ease of use in a range of operating environments, including the biodiversity sector and many other sectors. Stakeholders from sectors other than biodiversity have been included as partners in the planning process. Considerable time and effort have been invested in setting up and maintaining innovative cross-sectoral partnerships that enable ongoing follow-up with practitioners who are using the planning tools on a day-to-day basis.
• The legal requirement for all municipalities to have an integrated development plan and spatial develop-ment framework has provided probably the single most strategic opportunity for building biodiversity opportunities and constraints into land-use planning and decision-making at the local level.
• Promoting maximum availability of biodiversity data (including spatial biodiversity plans) by making it freely available through web-based technology has
View from Helderberg, Western Cape, showing a mix of land-use types