Session 2010-11
Publications on the internet

To be published as HC 710-iv




Environmental Audit Committee

The Impact of UK Overseas Aid on Environmental Protection and Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation

Thursday 24 March 2011

George Jambiya, Lars Mikkel Johannessen and Charles Meshack

ENG JAMES NgeLeja and Frederick Manyika

Darren Welch, Richard Moberley, Zabdiel Kimambo, Gertrude Mapunda Kihunrwa and Magdalena Banasiak

Evidence heard in Public Questions 154 - 189



This is a corrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.


The transcript is an approved formal record of these proceedings. It will be printed in due course.

Oral Evidence

Taken before the Environmental Audit Committee

on Thursday 24 March 2011

Members present:

Joan Walley (Chair)

Peter Aldous

Martin Caton

Simon Kirby

Mark Lazarowicz

Caroline Lucas

Sheryll Murray

Caroline Nokes

Simon Wright


[This evidence was taken by video conference]

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: George Jambiya, Senior Lecturer, University of Dar es Salaam, Lars Mikkel Johannessen, Chair of the Development Partners Group for Environment and Climate Change, and Charles Meshack, Executive Director, Tanzania Forest Conservation Group, gave evidence.

Q154 Chair: I will introduce myself and my Committee. We are the Environmental Audit Select Committee of the House of Commons and we can hear you, so we hope that you can hear us?

Darren Welch: We can but, as I say, it is very faint.

Q155 Chair: We would like to invite each of you to introduce yourselves and to tell us how you feel there is an impact on improved environments as a result of the funding that you are helping with.

Darren Welch: First of all, my name is Darren Welch and I am Head of Office for DfID here in Tanzania, responsible for the British aid programme to Tanzania. I am going to leave you with the first panel that we have convened for you, so you can have your time with them, but my colleague Magdalena Banasiak, who is sat to my right, will sit in on the VC if that is okay, this first bit. I will come back later when you interview me, and Magdalena will help with the note-taking at this end, if that is of assistance to the Committee. So I leave you with Magdalena now.

Q156 Chair: Thank you very much. Would you and your colleagues like to give us a brief overview of the value of the work that you are doing and perhaps tell us where the problems are as well? It is so lovely to have you in our Committee meeting; a very warm welcome.

Magdalena Banasiak: Thank you. Shall we start with my colleague on the right? Charles, would you like to introduce yourself and the organisation you work for?

Charles Meshack: Yes. My name is Charles Meshack and I am the Executive Director of Tanzania Forest Conservation Group. It is a national NGO and it works with communities and forests. Basically, we help communities to improve forest tenure and also improve forest management for their livelihoods.

Q157 Chair: I think we would like to know from you, Charles, if the work that you do is striking the right balance between the environment and the impact of climate change and poverty.

Charles Meshack: Yes. I would say I think the work we are doing is divided into two parts. First is improving forest biodiversity and also water sources improvement. The second, we are looking at involving communities in managing the forests so that might give benefits with the services from the forest. One is improving their livelihood, in terms of collecting wood, and second is having reliable sources of water; these forests normally protect the water. Basically, it is to have reliable water from these forests. Recently we have just signed a contract with DfID accountability fund in Tanzania with regard to the forest, and now we are looking at forest governance.

Q158 Chair: Would your colleagues like to introduce themselves as well, please, and just tell us a little bit about the main issues, the value and the tensions?

Lars Mikkel Johanne s sen: My name is Lars Mikkel Johannessen. I am Counsellor for Development at the Embassy of Denmark and Chair of the Development Partners Group for Environment.

In relation to your overall question on what makes a difference, and whether we strike the right balance between climate change and environment, from a development partners point of view I think there is a rather good balance between our support to the environment, to climate change and then to natural resource management. I think substantially funds are now arriving on climate change, which has not been the case in the past. There is a great need for support on climate change and hence right now any support of that should be welcome. It has certainly been welcomed by the development partners and I seriously hope that it is also welcomed by the Government of Tanzania.

The question on striking the balance between climate change and the environment is a very difficult question to respond to, in the sense that many interventions, especially in adaptation to climate change, very much link to issues of environment. An example, for instance, would be addressing issues of climate change adaptation in urban unplanned settlements; to address these issues, you would need to develop drainage, flood protection and so on. In certain lowlying areas of Dar es Salaam, for instance, that would have a significant impact on the environment and enhance protection from cholera, malaria, diarrhoea and so on. These are environmentally related health issues that would be addressed through issues of climate change. In that sense, I think that it is very difficult to discriminate between what is climate change and what is environment.

When it comes to addressing some of the urban needs, specifically on environment, we have three development partners right now addressing issues on environment. That is Denmark, Canadian CIDA and the UN. Altogether, what we are trying to do specifically is to roll out the Environmental Management Act for the Government of Tanzania, and at the same time we are trying to mainstream environment into various other sectors. But when we then look into the other sectors, there are many other development partners, including DfID, that provide support to these sectors and would, indirectly, also provide support for the environment through the environment unit in individual ministries. I hope that gives a picture of where we are.

Q159 Chair: That is very helpful, thank you. Finally, Mr George Jambiya, we very much welcome you to our Committee and would be interested in your perspective as well.

George Jambiya: Thank you very much. I currently work at the University of Dar es Salaam where I do research and lecturing. Previously, I used to work with the Worldwide Fund for Nature in Tanzania and I am also a board member of the Tanzania Natural Resource Forum.

With regard to climate change, I think I have nothing much to add to what my colleagues have mentioned, with the exception that there is an intricate link between climate change work and environmental protection work. It is very important that the right balance here is maintained. If you look very closely, I can also make a very clear link between climate change, environmental protection and poverty reduction, in that many of our rural communities are so dependent on environmental resources that any upset in the balance or in the use or abuse of these resources has a direct implication, in terms of their poverty status. Being able to maintain the environment well also implies that they have continued rights and access to these resources.

This also brings me to some more recent work with Tanzania Natural Resource Forum and, indeed, our friends from Tanzania Forest Conservation Group. This is about the issue of rights and access and generally the issues about environmental governance, which are now increasingly coming to the forefront in Tanzania through the support to civil society. I see that as a very critical and important investment made through DfID and that is something that I hope will continue in the longer term, because this is a project that is going to take some time before we see the full range of benefits on the table.

Chair: Thank you. I am now going to pass you over to our Committee member, Martin Caton. Perhaps you might decide among yourselves which of you wants to answer his questions.

Q160 Martin Caton: Good day. Are there in your perception any ways that the environmental impact of UK aid could be improved?

Lars Mikkel Johanne s sen: I think that I would like to start by answering this. I think that, first of all, it is a very interesting and, I think, important one. It is one of these questions where we struggle, not with the UK aid, but any development partner’s aid and the balance. We discuss that basically every day.

I think that it is important to look at the fact that we are joint development partners. We no longer operate as individual development partners. We operate in a joint group, and in that sense it is difficult for me to say whether the UK specifically can improve environment; but as development partners, jointly, we can certainly improve the environment in co-operation with the Government of Tanzania and in cooperation with civil society. I think when we look at it with the Government of Tanzania, what is important now is that we jointly work together to mainstream environment further into various sectors. The way we do that is we try to speak with parliamentarians in the environment committee of Tanzania; you would obviously be very familiar with their work. That is an important element-trying to do that. We also work specifically with programmes where we are rolling out the Environmental Management Act together with the Government of Tanzania.

One place where the Government of the United Kingdom strongly contributes already is that Denmark and DfID together are setting up a fund for civil society to do evidencebased advocacy. I think this is going to be a very, very important element that will seriously improve environment over the long term in Tanzania, and certainly develop the debate on issues relating to environment.

I would just like to encourage-I do not have to encourage this, because the UK actually does it-participation in the Development Partners Group for Environment, where we jointly are always looking at what the current gaps are that need to be filled, in terms of our assistance to the Government of Tanzania, so that it can take responsibility for implementing issues relating to environment.

Let me just finally say that we as development partners are right now in the process of carrying out an analysis of where specifically the gaps are, in terms of the environment, climate change, and natural resource management. Then, within that, we as a collective group of 13 development partners will look to see where we would have comparative advantages in filling these gaps.

Q161 Chair: Do either of your colleagues wish to add to that? George or Charles, do you wish to add to that?

Charles Meshack: Yes. In order to improve the impact of the UK payments, we need to look to support different actors who are working towards the climate change issues and also using forests. We have to support the different sectors-that is, the Government, civil society and the private sector-so that they can bring change, all of them together. The main areas in which the impact could come is in looking at climate change adaptation and mitigation, and also we need to acknowledge capacity building and the climate change. So these could be the type of areas in which the UK aid impact can make a big change.

Chair: Thank you.

Q162 Caroline Nokes: Good morning to you. Mr Johannessen mentioned engagement with civil society. I just wanted to focus a little bit more narrowly on that and ask whether the UK’s development aid office in Tanzania was consulting and engaging enough with local environmental expertise.

George Jambiya: I would like to start with that. Yes, there has been considerable engagement with the local civil society, but there is also the related fact that local civil society needs to be strengthened further, and needs to be given, or to seek for themselves, a much broader mandate to include specific roles in environmental governance. These tend to be higher-level and more difficult issues, but they are certainly more long term, and can be more productive in the long term. The aid that can be provided through that channel is certainly very timely and very welcome. Fortunately, we have a number of umbrella NGOs and a number of NGOs that are very well networked, in for example, the forestry sector, but also in other more general environmental sectors, such as wildlife, forestry, fisheries and water resources. I would like to see further continued support from DfID for civil society.

You narrowed it down to civil society, but I would also like to emphasise the importance of continuing to bring in support, particularly to local government in Tanzania, because this is where a lot of the natural resources are actually being managed. This is where they are located. It is a particularly weak sector in terms of environmental management, so support in that direction would be very strategic and welcome, particularly in the long term. As my colleague pointed out, it is also very, very important not to exclude the private sector, and I think the links to the private sector are still not strong enough.

Charles Meshack: In addition to what my colleague has mentioned, there has been a lot of consultation in DfID, especially on the nature of climate change. We have also been attending meetings that have been organised to discuss climate change issues. In a way, we seem to be connected on that. Recently, we have started to see the impact of climate change in Tanzania, and there are studies which have been conducted and distributed to civil societies for comments, and hopefully there will be insights through these studies. So it works by sharing the findings of the studies; that enlightens the knowledge of most of civil society. Even though civil society does not work in the same way as DfID, we naturally try to act like a watchdog to the Government. Maybe that is not enough; we also need it to be players. It has to be part of the team, in terms of improving governance, and basically trying to implement the policies that are there, and that are being created by the Government. Civil society can make sure that Government implements them, and that, after a certain time, we evaluate the impact of these policies within the country. There is definitely support coming out for helping, in terms of connecting different groups on the process of climate change.

Chair: Thank you.

Q163 Mark Lazarowicz: I want to follow up one of the answers from Mr Jambiya. You said that the links with the private sector were not very good. What kind of links have you got in mind, and what kind of result would you expect to see from improved links of that nature?

George Jambiya: It is actually our own engagement with the private sector. I might give an example. We have an ongoing problem in the private sector, in terms of a lot of illegal logging, illegal harvesting and illegal exports of timber, but if you look at the manner in which we have been addressing this situation, I do not think we have been fair, in the sense of providing the private sector with enough space, in terms of trying to assist them to move out of the illegal sector and move into the more legal practices. We have been over-reliant on rules, regulations and laws that for many reasons we have been unable to enforce effectively in that way. Clearly, there is the importance of law enforcement on the one side, but I think we also need to provide information, incentives and disincentives that will direct the private sector into more positive practices.

Chair: Our Committee has done quite a lot of work in the past on forestry. If you wish to give us a more detailed response, perhaps in writing, we would be very happy to have that, and obviously to see where we could link up with what is going on internationally on the whole issue of timber and illegal logging. Our next question is from my colleague Sheryll Murray.

Q164 Sheryll Murray: Good morning. To what extent has the UK aligned its work on climate change and environmental protection in Tanzania with the priorities of the Tanzanian Government? Mr Johannessen, may I ask you specifically how good a partner the UK is when it comes to coordinating environmental aid projects with other donors operating in Tanzania?

Lars Mikkel Johanne s sen: If we take the latter first, I am very pleased and very proud to be able to tell parliamentarians in the United Kingdom that DfID is doing a great job in participating in co-ordination with other development partners. In fact, I think that DfID plays a significant role in this, and has done for a long time. It has been a great support for me as Chair of the Development Partners Group to have DfID on board with specialists in climate change, and therefore we have made DfID the focal point for climate change in our group, which is a group of 13 members. Together with Denmark and Finland, DfID is supporting the entire group financially by providing extensive studies and important reports. Just to mention a few examples, I would like to highlight that we have taken stock on the issues relating to climate change, and that has been a joint effort with cofinancing from DfID.

One of the very important things in leading up to Copenhagen was the Climate Witness film, which was entirely supported by DfID, but again part of a joint effort. Then most recently, and probably most importantly, there was the joint adoption of what we call economics of climate change study, basically describing the economic impacts of climate change in Tanzania. In that sense, I am really pleased that DfID and the United Kingdom participate in the Development Partners Group for Environment.

On aligning climate change and environment to the priorities of Tanzania, this is a very good question, and a more difficult one to answer. First of all, on aligning the policies of Tanzania with the environment, I think we all do that jointly as development partners by assisting the Government in rolling out the Environmental Management Act. In fact, the Government of Tanzania has a programme that is called the Environmental Management Act implementation support programme, and I mentioned before that Denmark is supporting that, but all development partners participate in a dialogue around this.

On climate change, we have the National Adaptation Programme of Action. Looking into the details of that, a recent study has shown that we as development partners jointly support quite a bit of that adaptation programme, and part of that comes from DfID. As DfID is part of the Development Partners Group, we are all in this together, basically; I am very pleased to say that.

Q165 Chair: I think we are about to move on to the next panel now. If there is anything else that you wish to say to us that has not been covered, we would be very pleased to hear it, either Charles or George, but if not, thank you so much for making your time available. I hope that you all follow the work of our Committee online and that we can work together and make some valuable recommendations in our current report. Thank you very much indeed.

Lars Mikkel Johanne s sen: Great, thanks.

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Eng James Ngeleja, Principal Environmental Management Officer, National Environmental Management Council of Tanzania, and Frederick Manyika, Principal Forestry Officer, Vice-President’s Office, gave evidence.

Magdalena Banasiak: We had a last-minute apology sent from Mr Muyungi, the Acting Assistant Director for the Division of Environment. On his behalf, James Ngeleja from the National Environmental Management Council will be attending. He is the Principal Environmental Management Officer. Also, Frederick Manyika, the Principal Forestry Officer from the Vice-President’s Office will be attending, so we have representation both from the Vice-President’s Office and the National Environmental Management Council.

Q166 Chair: We are very pleased to have you both in front of our Committee and I hope that we have now resolved the sound issues with the volume. We want to concentrate on aspects of implementation, and I would just like to invite each of you to give a brief introduction of yourselves to our Committee, perhaps starting with Mr Manyika.

Frederick Manyika: Thank you very much. Good morning. My name is Frederick Manyika. I am a Principal Forestry Officer in the Vice-President’s Office. I deal with climate change issues as well as the environmental impact assessment.

Chair: Thank you, and your colleague ?

James Ngeleja : Thank you very much. Good morning. My name is James Ngeleja from the National Environmental Management Council. I also deal with climate change issues. I normally deal with the issues related to technology transfer during COP climate negotiation meetings. Also I take part in the review of environmental impact assessments or statements.

Chair: I am going to hand you over to my colleague Mark Lazarowicz.

Q167 Mark Lazarowicz: Could I begin by asking you how strong a lobby there is for environmental protection in Tanzania? How far is it perceived to be a donorled agenda-or is it not the case that it is perceived that way?

James Ngeleja : No, environmental protection is not a donor-led agenda. Environmental protection is linked to Tanzania’s sustainable development aspirations because obviously we are still dependent on the environment. We are not led by the donors. Rather we work together with development partners to achieve our sustainable development aspirations.

Q168 Mark Lazarowicz: On a more specific point, how did you mainstream environmental considerations and climate change into your country’s poverty reduction strategy? What impacts specifically did mainstreaming these considerations-environment and climate change-have on the strategy? How did it change or how did it develop as a result of those considerations?

Frederick Manyika: My colleague has just mentioned a few of the-[Interruption.]

Magdalena Banasiak: Sorry, can I just interrupt? Is it possible to turn on the mute at your end? We are getting quite a lot of feedback here.

Chair: Sorry, is it possible-

Magdalena Banasiak: To put on the mute at your end.

Chair: Our technicians are trying to do that for you. I will go back to Mr Lazarowicz so he can perhaps just come back to his original question.

Q169 Mark Lazarowicz: What I was looking for was some detail of how environmental considerations and climate change were integrated into the poverty reduction strategy. You may have answered that, but I am afraid the sound was a bit difficult for a couple of minutes, so I do not think we caught the answer.

Frederick Manyika: Yes. The issues of environment have been mentioned in the PRSP. First of all, Tanzania prepared a national strategy for economic growth and property reduction in 1999, whose implementation was concluded in 2005, and now we are in the second phase of the implementation of this strategy. The strategy was prepared in a very consultative manner. Each and every department and each stakeholder and every group were involved in the preparation of the strategy. The stakeholders gave their views and these in time became a strategy which gave us the framework on how the environmental issues and poverty reduction can be welded together. This has been a very good framework or tool to help Tanzania mainstream environment into other sectors. There is also collective national environmental action; each Ministry and every Government department must have an environmental unit. As of now, every environmental department or ministry has an environmental unit, which enables them to come up with a cost with regard to the environment issues it faces, so each department has a budget code for this; in previous times, it was not like that. Again, on the issue of mainstreaming environment into other development plans, each and every project, whether it is a development project or an environmental project, has to be scrutinised against environmental issues or environmental interests; how will it impact the environment before it is approved. So I have confidence that environmental issues are being mainstreamed and will continue to be mainstreamed in the sectors.

Q170 Mark Lazarowicz: As a supplementary to that, you mentioned that different departments have their activities scrutinised to make sure they meet environmental considerations. Who does the scrutinising? Is it within a department? Is it your office? Who is it?

James Ngeleja : To build on what my colleague has said climate change is affecting all sectors of economic growth in Tanzania. In trying to arrest the situation the Environmental Management Act mandates that for each development project an environmental impact assessment has to be undertaken. This is a legal requirement that all developing projects and programmes are subject to environment impact assessments. The whole process has been growing gradually over time through raising awareness with project developers.

Frederick Manyika: In addition to what my colleague has just said, we do have the EIA audit regulations of 2005. There is a national technical committee that is comprised of members from different sectors. Whatever the project-let us say it is on the forest-the committee meets and decides whether that project has met all the environmental requirements before it is approved. All other projects are also subject to such scrutiny. To answer your question about who actually scrutinises, it is the Government, but with the involvement of other stakeholders. At meetings, they are free to provide comments on whether a project has taken on board environmental issues before the project can be approved by the Minister. So a recommendation from that committee can lead to rejection or approval of projects.

Q171 Mark Lazarowicz: My final question is: how does your Government balance the potential conflict between economic growth on the one hand and ensuring environmental sustainability? A big question for all of us.

Chair: A big question.

James Ngeleja : We have the national environment policy, and we also have the respective legislation. These are the environmental management instructions or tools to guide development and environmental sustainability.

Frederick Manyika: Just to add to what my colleague has said on the balance between economic growth and environmental responsibility, I think this is a very challenging issue. It is well known that in Tanzania people depend on natural resources for their means of livelihood, this is a big challenge. However, as my colleague was saying, Tanzania has, through different forums and instruments, managed to balance the two, first by putting in place such environmental impact assessments, which make sure that any project that is considered for implementation meets certain criteria before they are approved. In addition, we are facing a lot of challenges. I will give you one example. In 2006, the President had to sign a decree to evict people from one of the development zones in the Southern Highlands that were impacted by livestock keepers; that area was their means of livelihood. For the purpose of environmental integrity, the President had to say, "No, I think we need to conserve our environment as well". Even though people depend on nature for their livelihood, it has to be sustainable. We had to take people out of an environmentally degraded area, so that sustainability could be achieved, and so that people, for the most part, can continue with the kind of livelihoods and resources that they depend on.

Chair: I am going to turn now to my colleague, Peter Aldous.

Q172 Peter Aldous: It is just on midday here, so good afternoon to you both. My questions relate to the Environmental Management Act that came in in 2004. In that Act, the national environmental impact assessment process was introduced. How successful has that been?

James Ngeleja : Thank you. The environmental impact assessment has been successful since it started. We have reviewed about 300 development projects, and as my colleague said, these have undergone an approval process through public and sectoral participation. However we are facing a lot of challenges and this is an area in which we need support from development partners including DfID. We are facing challenges of mainstreaming climate change in the EIA process.

Frederick Manyika: Just to continue from what my colleague has said on this issue of how successful the EIA process has been, I think you might be aware of two projects that were rejected due to non compliance on environmental requirements. These are big projects which we are not supporting because of environmental concerns, even though the projects were economically viable. I can give you one of the projects: it was on prawn farming in southern Tanzania. This project was put off as the process requires that projects be subject to a public hearing and inputs of all stakeholders are taken on board. The stakeholders gave their views, and they are against implementation of the project, so the project was not approved. That was back in 1998. Again, another project in the northern part of Tanzania, at Lake Natron. That project was economically viable. However, with respect to the environmental part of it, there were a lot of concerns from the public. So this project did not go through, and it was required to be revised because Tanzania abides by its environmental standards and legislation. Those are two major examples of how successful the EIA process has been, even though we are facing a lot of challenges, as my colleague has pointed out.

Q173 Peter Aldous: Thank you very much for those answers. Just moving on, also in the Environmental Management Act, sector environmental units were mandated. What has the experience been of those?

James Ngeleja : The Environmental Management Act requires that environmental management officers are established at the sector and district levels, going as far up as the ward level. But again, the establishment requires resources and competent human capacities.

Q174 Chair: What we would like to know is whether they do the job that they are there to do?

James Ngeleja : Yes, I was coming to that, thank you. The challenge is based on the capacities. We have come to realise that some of our environmental management officers do not have effective environmental management capacities. This is an area which we think could be improved with the support of DfID representation here. We and DfID could look into capacity building in order to further enhance the implementation of the Environmental Management Act at local levels. Remember, it is hardly five years since we started implementing the Environmental Management Act.

Frederick Manyika: In addition to what my colleague has said about all the challenges, I think among the challenges was the issue of environmental management officers. The public sector did not have that kind of officer or establishment in place, so that has also been a challenge, but due to the importance of the environment, the Vice-President’s Office has been working hand in hand with the President’s Office on public sector capacity building. By this year, a new establishment on Environmental Officers will be put in place to clear all the hurdles that have hindered implementation of some programmes. Some of local government administrations were unable to appoint or to recruit that kind of officers they require in their respective areas because of absence of any legal instrument When that kind of instrument is put in place, I think it will improve our environmental integrity, in terms of having the officers who have environmental experience in place.

Q175 Peter Aldous: Thank you very much for that. I have a final question: is there any more work that the UK can do to assist you with embedding the environmental impact assessments to help make them more effective?

James Ngeleja : Actually, we have soon to approach DfID on the gaps that we have mentioned, which are in the area of capacity building of our environmental management officers, and the mainstreaming of climate change issues in our EIA process. To single out a good project that I understand DfID is behind, there is the issue of supporting ecosystem management linked to ensuring sustainable energy in rural areas. DfID is behind a project in Ifakara, where it will support hybrid sustainable energy networks through the use of small microhydro in combination with biomass. We find that to be an example of the implementation of a climate change adaptation and mitigation initiative. In this kind of project, there is the mainstreaming of climate change into the EIA process, support to the implementation of the Environmental Management Act, capacity building, on environmental management focussed on the issue of developing secure and sustainable energy in rural areas.

Frederick Manyika: Environmental processes are challenging, and there is a move to continually monitor the collective impact agreement on the ground. As of now, the National Environment Management Council does not have offices in all the regions of Tanzania. This has been, of course, difficult in implementing or making sure that measures are strictly enforced. In my opinion, on how DfID can assist, first of all, there is the issue of establishing zonal offices. NEMC have already established offices in Mwanza, Mbeya, and in Arusha, but Tanzania is a big country, so we need some offices in other areas. There is also an issue of awareness of the whole issue of climate change impact. The department has worked very closely with DfID on the awareness programme; we are actively supporting students in the youth awareness programme. I think these kind of initiatives should continue, because every year there are new students who need this kind of knowledge and awareness.

Also, for MPs, we have a new members of Parliament in the Parliamentary standing committee on the Land, Natural Resources and Environment. They are now meeting as we are talking here. These MPs need to understand issues of environment and climate change and we should work hand in hand to attempt to give them an oversight of what climate change is, why environmental impact is important, and how it can sustain livelihoods. Another issue that I consider to be important is that several countries including Tanzania have prepared a National Adaptation Programme of Action – NAPAs. Tanzania prepared its NAPA in 2006, which has identified about 14 priority projects but only one project has received funding from the Global Environment Facility – GEF. The NAPA was supposed to address immediate and urgent actions needed to assist communities to adapt to climate change. Its (NAPA) implementation was supposed to start as soon as possible but we are now six years down the line. As of now the priority of the local community might have changed therefore we need to go to the people to see what their attitude is now.

Also, on mitigation, as my colleague has said, we stand a better chance of benefiting from mitigation in the forestry sector, and in the energy sector; we have a lot of hydro potentials, as well as other energy sources.

Peter Aldous: That is a brilliant answer. Many thanks indeed for that.

Q176 Chair : Thank you. Well, I am afraid there we must leave it, because we have other witnesses to interview as part of our inquiry today, so can I thank you both so much for making time for us, and we look forward to continuing to have an exchange with you. Thank you very much indeed.

Frederick Manyika: Thank you.

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Darren Welch, Head of Office, DfID Tanzania, Richard Moberley, Senior Economic Adviser, DfID Tanzania, Zabdiel Kimambo, Governance Adviser, DfID Tanzania, Gertrude Mapunda Kihunrwa, Social Policy Adviser, DfID Tanzania, and Magdalena Banasiak, Climate Change Adviser, DfID Tanzania, gave evidence.

Q177 Chair : Can you hear me okay, Mr Welch?

Darren Welch: Yes, we can hear you loud and clear now.

Chair : That’s wonderful. Well, welcome back, and I am sure you will appreciate that we do have time constraints at this end, so if I may, I would like to get straight into this third panel discussion, and hand over to my colleague, Neil Carmichael.

Q178 Neil Carmichael: Hello there. Great to be in touch with you in this way. Bilateral aid is the theme that I am pursuing. What I really want to know is, first of all, what proportion of DfID aid is directed towards the environment.

Darren Welch: Good afternoon. It is quite difficult, as you might imagine, to say exactly what proportion of the bilateral programme is specifically on environment, because it is a cross-cutting issue, in terms of what we do. Also, the money we give directly to the Government of Tanzania is spent on a number of cross-cutting environmental issues, but we have had a go at this. We have done some analysis, and we calculate that about 7.5% of our operational grant for the next four years will be targeted specifically at the environment. That will be about £48 million. That is on the environment. In addition, we are also expecting to programme about £11 million on climate change. Overall, that brings us to just under £60 million, or about 9% of our total programme over the next four years.

Q179 Neil Carmichael: Thank you. What impact will DfID’s bilateral aid review have?

Darren Welch: Well, we completed the bilateral aid review relatively recently, as you will know, and Ministers at DfID have decided that Tanzania will benefit from a modest increase over the next period. We are getting a 12% uplift by year four-that is, 2014-15. We will be spending about £643 million over that period. We are planning, as part of that, a significant increase in our engagement on climate change and environmental services.

As you will know, we carried out here a strategic programme review last year, particularly in the early part of the year, and that meant we were really well placed when the bilateral aid review was launched to put forward very ambitious and creative ideas for what we might do on climate change. Climate change is such a threat to Tanzania that it is going to be an important part of our programming.

Of course, climate change is a priority in DfID’s departmental structural reform plan, and we were also invited under the BAR process to make a bid specifically for climate change work. We put £10 million forwards for pilot work under the BAR process on climate change to help us get started, to build the evidence base for what we need to do in future, but we are going to be looking to bid for additional funds from the centre under the International Climate Fund, for which Whitehall has set aside a lot of money. We are expecting to make a bid for that as well. The BAR has been a great opportunity for us to prioritise work, specifically around climate change, but also environmental services-water, for example.

Q180 Neil Carmichael: Thank you. One last question, in connection with the country implementation plan for the next four years: how will that be adjusted to reflect what you have just said?

Darren Welch: We have an operational plan that we have agreed with our headquarters. As I say, climate change will be a large part of that. We will get started more or less immediately on that. We have, indeed, already launched a number of initiatives. The water work we are going to do will need more scoping. There is some really innovative stuff happening there around collaboration with China that we would like to tell you more about if there was time. We are trying to work with the Chinese Government, bringing some of their expertise into Tanzania, and are trying to help China engage in Africa in a way that is very positive-working with us, leveraging our resources and their expertise, to help Tanzania manage its water resources better. That will be the sort of thing that our country plan will need to adapt to include. We are going to do more work on advocacy with civil society. As you have heard from the colleague who spoke earlier, Tanzania is fortunate enough to have some very good, local civil society organisations working on environment and climate issues. With that support, we are launching this new fund that will provide them with additional support to take the work further, so there are a range of areas for the future for us.

Neil Carmichael: Thank you very much indeed for those very succinct answers.

Q181 Chair : On that point, in respect of the additional funds that you referred to for civil society, how much is there a need for distance learning, and on the people who will be, if you like, implementing this work, is there a whole issue about access to training and learning? Is that something that you are looking at, in terms of the UK expertise that there is?

Darren Welch: I haven’t really thought that through very carefully. We don’t make a link in our aid programme between the UK’s commercial offerings and Tanzania’s development needs. We’re quite careful to keep those things distinct. We provide Tanzania with aid, which we want to be used in the way that delivers the very, very best value. The UK has fantastic expertise to offer, so if that can be brought from the UK, there is no particular problem with that, as long as it is the best value. We will think about distance learning; that is a good point.

Chair : If I could just add to that, I wasn’t necessarily thinking about the commercial sector. I was thinking about, for example, the Centre for Alternative Technology and university courses that create integrated environmental design, and so on, in terms of expertise and up-skilling people. We would be very interested in your thoughts on that, but meanwhile, in the interests of time, I have to hand you over to my colleague, Sheryll Murray.

Q182 Sheryll Murray: Hello again. What environmental safeguards were in place before DfID decided to provide direct budgetary support to the Tanzanian Government, and do you monitor the environmental impact of the Government’s wider policy decisions?

Chair: I am very happy for whichever colleague you wish to answer that question.

Darren Welch: I think we caught the question. I have to say the link was a little bit dodgy at that point. I think it was about how we monitor the Government’s environmental practices using our general budget support. What I am going to do is ask my colleague Richard Moberley-our senior economist here, who looks after the budget support programme-to respond. Did I get that question right?

Sheryll Murray: Yes, you did.

Chair : Yes, absolutely.

Richard Moberley: Okay, the first thing to note is that before we give general budget support we do require that Tanzania demonstrates good governance and adherence to the rule of law and makes progress in improving its performance in those areas. Tanzania, as you might be aware, has a fairly good set of environmental laws and legislation, so that provides a good basis for the initial thinking about the environment and general budget support.

The second thing to note is that general budget support provides a very strong platform for dialogue and discussion with the Government on environmental issues. I think you heard from our Danish colleague a bit about the engagement they have had there. It provides an opportunity for development partners including DfID to talk in some detail about the policies that the Government is pursuing and how they are implementing them, and to help the Government to think through how to have a more effective impact on the environment.

Finally, though, specifically related to general budget support, we have with other development partners set in place a performance assessment framework that seeks to monitor indicators relating to the full range of Government business, and this includes indicators relating to the environment and the implementation of environmental policies. We monitor that on an annual basis, and then the performance assessment framework is revised on the basis of discussion between us and the Government, identifying key priorities for the next year.

Q183 Sheryll Murray: Thank you very much. How do you engage with the Tanzanian Government on environmental issues, what future budget support is planned and how will climate change and environmental issues be addressed?

Richard Moberley: In terms of how we engage with the Government on the environment, the Government of course leads its own strategy in terms of the environment and we support that. The Government convenes and chairs an environment working group that development partners and the Government jointly sit on.

Because in the development community here we try to ensure that not all the development partners at all times turn up to every single meeting, we have delegated the lead on the environmental working group to Denmark and to Finland. They basically are tasked with trying to represent development partners’ views in those discussions. However, according to the issue that is being discussed, other development partners may come along, so the UK and DfID frequently attend, particularly when issues related to climate change are raised.

In addition to that, DfID actively participates in the Development Partners Group, which is a co-ordinated body on environment-the Government partner which helps to develop the lines that are discussed in the environmental working group. The Development Partners Group works closely with the Government through the environmental working group and in other fora, and the main focus is its discussions around implementation of the Environmental Management Act and implementation of the achievement of the indicators under the general performance assessment framework.

Darren Welch: Shall I tell the panel about the future budget support? Tanzania receives more budget support than any other country from the UK. We gave £103.5 million last year in direct budget support, and it has been that figure for the last two years; that is out of a total programme of £150 million-that is what we currently spend in Tanzania. For the future, that is likely to come down. Following the bilateral aid review, we are undergoing a process of rebalancing our portfolio here, and in future, the budget support will not be quite at that level.

Sheryll Murray: Thank you very much for that.

Q184 Neil Carmichael: Environmental mainstreaming is the theme of this question. What difference has the strategic climate programme review made?

Darren Welch: I think Magdalena will take that one. She led on the review for us.

Chair : Thank you very much.

Magdalena Banasiak: The strategic programme review for us has offered a huge opportunity to step back and look at the issues of climate change, in terms of our future programming. We volunteered to be one of the pilot countries-one of the six countries across the DfID country offices. It was an opportunity to carry out some analytical work, and also to look at how climate change and the environment can be incorporated across our programme and integrated, looking at the kind of risks and opportunities.

One of the significant pieces of work that we undertook under the strategic programme review was on economics of climate change, which was mentioned by other stakeholders here, which involved civil society, Government and the private sector. It was looking at the significance of climate change for the Tanzanian economy, and it illustrated that by 2030, 2% of GDP will be lost annually in the Tanzanian economy. It was very much trying to place climate change as an economic issue, not just an environmental issue-obviously that is important as well-and to illustrate the significance of climate change for Tanzanian growth.

To illustrate some of the results of our strategic programme review for us as an office, we have integrated climate change across our portfolio and in particular in our work on wealth creation in agriculture, water resources and governance-so, in particular, our support for civil society. We have identified priority sectors for future engagement-who we should be engaging with and how. That was very much underpinned by the political economy analysis. It was an opportunity to raise awareness across the office of the significance of climate change portfolios. Finally, it has also increased demand for advisory capacity in the office. From April this year, we will be increasing our advisory capacity from 50% to 100% on climate change and the environment.

Finally, the strategic programme review was not just for us in DfID but also for other development partners. The analytical work that we undertook as part of the strategic programme review has been used to work with Government on the economics of climate change and with the Ministry of Finance, but it will also inform our joint donor framework on climate change and our joint donor programming going forward.

Q185 Neil Carmichael: So overall has it had a positive impact?

Magdalena Banasiak: In short, yes.

Chair : That is what we wanted to hear, thank you.

Q186 Neil Carmichael: That is good, thank you. One last question on this issue. A new business case process has replaced the environmental screening note process. In practical terms, how is this going to be different from the previous ways?

Magdalena Banasiak: I think for us the significant issues are the fact that climate change as well as environment will be incorporated into this new business case and the planning environmental assessment. It will also look at the different stages of the process-the management and the commercial case that we make.

It will cover spends of over £500. Previously it was any spend that was over £1 million, so there will be more scrutiny there. It also highlights the co-benefits and win-wins-not just the risks, but where the opportunities are as well. We are at a relatively early stage. We have only had two business cases in the office so far, but from our experience so far, we had a strategic case on the cotton sector, which I was involved in at quite an early stage, and this identified opportunities up-front for how we can address climate change and environmental issues such as conservation agriculture, water resources management and how we can ensure that environmental issues are addressed up-front in the project. I think this is a very different approach to how we previously undertook our environmental screening note.

Neil Carmichael: Okay, thanks very much.

Q187 Peter Aldous: A couple of questions. First of all, relating to NGOs, how much of DfID Tanzania’s funding is channelled through NGOs, and do you feel that local NGOs may be better placed to engage and have an impact on local environmental issues?

Darren Welch: I am going to ask Zabdiel Kimambo, one of our Tanzanian members of staff who looks after our work in civil society, to come in on that one.

Zabdiel Kimambo: Thank you very much. During the current financial year, 2010-11, at DfID Tanzania, we were able to channel a total of around £8.407 million that was channelled to the NGOs and this accounts for around 18% of our non-budget support spend in Tanzania; so just under 20% of our total spend was through civil society. We are likely going to increase that proportion as we move forward in the coming four years, especially as the proportion of our non-budget support is planned to increase. In terms of the capacity of local organisations to engage, we are quite aware-you had a very useful interaction with two of our partners-that local organisations here are better placed to have some impact on environmental issues.

There are two levels. At the local level, for example through the Foundation for Civil Society-that programme for which DfID provides support-in 2009 we were able to support about 31 local groups who were able to mobilise members locally to address and better understand the issues of environmental conservation, forest and land laws, and policy, creating awareness and enabling citizens at a local level to understand the provision in the laws and policies, and to be able locally to engage with the local government and hold the decision makers to account.

At national level, we have been providing support especially to the two organisations whose representatives you met earlier-the Natural Resource Forum and the Tanzanian Forest Conservation Group. The support that we provide to the Natural Resource Forum is aiming to increase the ability of citizens to hold Government to account for natural resource governance, as they pointed out during the meeting you had with them. Also, the Tanzanian Forest Conservation Group is heavily focusing on improving the governance within the forest sector and ensuring that citizens benefit from forest ecosystem and so on. These two organisations I mentioned are better known in Tanzania for their contribution to a very successfully mounted campaign that highlighted a lot of challenges of governance in the forest sector through the publication of the TRAFFIC report. Thank you.

Q188 Peter Aldous: Thank you very much for that. A final question from me: how do you take environmental considerations into account when you are dealing with the private sector?

Darren Welch: I will take that one. This office hasn’t engaged directly with the private sector very extensively in the past, except to learn from the private sector about some of the challenges it has in growing and producing jobs. We used the information that we learned from them in our dialogue with Government to try to improve private sector development.

We haven’t given much direct support to the private sector. I think this is changing. We have identified this as an area we need to do more in, and we have just launched, or are in the process of launching, two new challenge funds that will provide direct support to the private sector, and I think you will be encouraged to hear that these two funds both have very strong environmental components.

The first one, launched last year, is a private sector challenge fund focusing on increasing access to low-cost clean energy in rural areas and helping smallholder farmers build their resilience to climate change. It is the renewable energy and climate technology fund-REACT for short-and this fund is aiming to leverage in £2.50 of private sector investment for every £1 that we are putting into the fund. It is very much about renewable energy and climate technology.

The second fund is working in the agri-business sector and that is looking to provide funding to businesses that can boost agricultural productivity and lift rural incomes; 85% of Tanzanians make their living from the land in very, very low-technology farming methods. We are trying to change that and tackle the worst poverty here. It is quite interesting; this particular fund will use a scoring system when it assesses proposals that will favour those projects that have a sound business plan and that commercialise and scale-up environmentally friendly technology and techniques, so those businesses that come to us with a really sound environmental proposal will be favoured under the fund. Each of those funds is worth £5 million just in their pilot phase, so that is just a couple of examples of how we are starting to engage more directly with the private sector on environmental issues.

Peter Aldous: That is very encouraging, thank you.

Q189 Chair : Mr Welch, I am afraid that the time available to us in Committee has come to an end. I am very conscious that not all your colleagues have had a chance to share with us the really important work that you are doing, particularly on water and social protection. Thank you for coming along, as it were, or staying at home today and saving on our carbon footprint. You have raised many questions. I hope that in the course of our inquiry, if not through this particular exchange today, we can perhaps continue the dialogue and that your experience can inform our report, which is looking at the wider perspective of where international aid goes. I thank you again, and your colleagues and those on the previous panels, and we hope that this is the start of a long-standing relationship between work in our Parliament and work in the country there. Thank you very much indeed.

Darren Welch: Thank you to you and to the Committee. We are, of course, at your disposal, so if there is any further information required after this by way of written evidence, please do get in touch. We have lots to share, and we are very happy to do so. Thank you.

Chair : Thank you very much indeed.