phase i launch workshop report in south ... - euredd.efi.int

Support to the development of a

Common Mapping Platform in Cameroon

A pilot project undertaken with the assistance of the European Union and the Governments of

France, Germany, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom, commissioned by the European

Forest Institute (EU REDD Facility) to LTS International Ltd, in collaboration with Rainbow

Consult, Ecometrica and Proforest. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the

European Forest Institute's EU REDD Facility and LTS International and can under no

circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of funding organisations.

Report of Project Launch Meetings in South West Region

Submitted to the European Forest Institute by LTS International Ltd in collaboration with

Rainbow Environment Consult, Proforest and Ecometrica 21 May 2015

LTS International Ltd

Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan

Penicuik, EH26 0PL

United Kingdom

Tel. +44 (0)131 440 5500 Fax. +44 (0)131 440 5501 Email. [email protected]

Web. www.ltsi.co.uk Twitter. @LTS_Int

Registered in Scotland Number 100833

Acknowledgment This report covers the Launch meetings conducted by LTS and Rainbow Consult in

the South West Region of Cameroon between 20th and 24th April 2015.

Minutes of the meetings that constitute the bulk of this report were prepared by

Teclaire Same with contributions from the team.

The LTS consortium members would like to express their sincere gratitude to all the

representatives of the Ministries, local, national and international NGOs, and local community

representative in Nguti Municipality who gave their time, ideas and enthusiasm during the

launch meetings.

In particular, the LTS team appreciates the leadership provided for the mission by the Ministry

of Economy, Planning and Regional Development, through the Minister’s representative who

provided valuable insight into the national framework for land use planning, and the staff of

the Regional Delegation, who very ably organised a successful meeting in Buea.

In addition, LTS wishes to express its appreciation to all partners to the “Mapping for Forest

Governance” Project, who participated in and contributed strongly to the mission with their

own funds. Partners of the “Mapping for Forest Governance” project include Rainforest

Foundation UK, FODER (Forêts et Développement Rural) a national NGO, and AJESH (a local

NGO operating in the South West Region). AJESH not only contributed with presentations to

both meetings but took full responsibility for organising the highly successful and much

appreciated meeting in Nguti with the support of the local administration and Nature

Cameroon.

The Mapping for Forest Governance Project is implemented with funding from the Forests,

Governance, Markets and Climate (FGMC) Programme, which is funded by the UK Department

for International Development (DFID). The FGMC programme also co-funds the European

Forestry Institute (EFI), along with the European Union and other donors.

The Centre for Environment and Development (CED) and Greenpeace also sent a team to the

meeting at their own expense, and presented the participatory maps they had prepared for

seven villages.

Lastly, but most importantly, the LTS team would like to thank the Mayor of Nguti for hosting

the meeting in the Council Chambers free of charge, the Member of Parliament for Nguti who

travelled from Yaoundé to Buea for the launch meeting, and the Chiefs and members of the

Communities of Nguti Municipality who walked and travelled for many hours through Nguti’s

notoriously difficult roads to attend the meeting. We very much hope their efforts will finally

be rewarded.

Acronyms

AFD Agence Française de Développement

AMO Appui à la Maitrise d’Oeuvre – A MINADER / MINEPIA project funded by AFD

BMWS Banyang Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CDC Cameroon Development Corporation

CED Centre for Environment and Development

CLIP Consentement Libre, Informé et Préalable (Free Prior Informed Consent)

COMIFAC Commission des Forêts d’Afrique Centrale

CSO Civil Society Organisation

DFID Department for International Development (UK Government)

DO Divisional Officer

EFI European Forest Institute

ESIA Environmental & Social Impact Assessment

EU European Union

FGMC Forest Governance Markets & Climate

FLEGT Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade

FODER Forêts et Développement Rurale (a National NGO)

FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GoC Government of Cameroon

HCS High Carbon Stock

HCV High Conservation Value

INC Institut National de Cartographie

IRAD Institute for Agronomic Research and Development

IRGM Institut De Recherches Géologiques Et Minières

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

KfW German Development Bank

LLMSDP Local Land Management and Sustainable Development Plan

LTS LTS International Ltd (Consulting Firm)

MINADER Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MINAS Ministry of Social Affairs

MINDCAF Ministry of State Property, Surveys and Land Affairs

MINEE Ministry of Energy and Water

MINEPAT Ministry of Economy, Planning and Regional Development.

MINEPDED Ministry of Environment, Protection of Nature and Sustainable Development.

MINEPIA Ministry of Livestock and Animal Industries

MINFOF Ministry of Forestry & Wildlife

MINIMIDT Ministry of Industry Mines and Technological Development

MINPROFF Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and the Family

MINRESI Ministry of Scientific Research and Innovation

MINTP Ministry of Public Works

NGO Non Governmental Organisation

NP National Park

NTFP Non-Timber Forest Product

OE Our Ecosystem

OPM Office of the Prime Minister

PA Protected Area

PLADDT Plan Local d’Aménagement et de Développement Durable du Territoire

PNDP National Community Driven Development Programme

PSMNR Programme for the Sustainable Management of Natural Resources.

REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation

RFA Redevance Forestier Annuel (Annual Area Fee paid by Forest Concession)

RPP Readiness Preparation Proposal

RRI Rights & Resources Initiative

RSPO Roundtable on sustainable palm oil

SRADDT Schéma Régional d’Aménagement et de Développement Durable du

Territoire

VFMC Village Forest Management Committees

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

Contents

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1

2. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT ........................................................ 3

2.1 CONTEXT FOR THE PROJECT ............................................................................................................................. 3

2.1.1 On-going planning processes ........................................................................................................ 4

2.1.2 Scope of the Common Mapping Platform ................................................................................. 5

2.1.3 Rationale for selection of South West Region and Nguti Municipality to pilot the

project ............................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1.4 The Launch Mission ........................................................................................................................... 6

3. MINUTES OF THE MEETING IN BUEA - HEADQUARTERS OF SOUTH WEST REGION . 7

3.1 INTRODUCTION, AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 PRESENTATIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 8

3.3 PLENARY DISCUSSION SESSION ...................................................................................................................... 9

3.4 EXPECTATIONS OF LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS .................................................................................................. 14

3.5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 15

3.6 CLOSING REMARKS ......................................................................................................................................... 15

4. MINUTES OF THE LAUNCH MEETING IN NGUTI – 23 APRIL 2015 ............................. 17

4.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................... 17

4.2 PRESENTATIONS (PART 1) ............................................................................................................................. 17

4.3 FIRST PLENARY DISCUSSION SESSION ......................................................................................................... 18

4.4 PRESENTATIONS (PART 2) ............................................................................................................................. 20

4.5 SECOND PLENARY DISCUSSIONS ................................................................................................................. 22

4.6 IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES TO ADDRESS DURING LOCAL LAND USE PLANNING AND INFORMATION

NEEDS............................................................................................................................................................... 23

4.7 CLOSING REMARKS AND VOTE OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT ................................................................ 30

5. ANNEXES .......................................................................................................................... 32

ANNEX 1. IMPORTANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT

ANNEX 2. LETTER OF MINISTER MINEPAT TO EU AMBASSADOR APPROVING THE PROJECT

ANNEX 3. MISSION SCHEDULE - 20–24 APRIL 2015

ANNEX 4. ATTENDANCE LIST: REGIONAL PROJECT LAUNCH MEETING, CONFERENCE HALL OF THE

REGIONAL DELEGATION OF MINEPAT, 21ST APRIL 2015

ANNEX 5. AGENDA FOR THE BUEA MEETING – 21ST APRIL 2015

ANNEX 6. PRESENTATION BY PROFESSOR SOH FOTSING, MINEPAT MINISTER’S REPRESENTATIVE, IN

BUEA

ANNEX 7. PRESENTATION BY THE LTS TEAM LEADER, IN BUEA

ANNEX 8. PRESENTATION BY THE RFUK PROJECT PARTNERS, IN BUEA

ANNEX 9. EXPECTATIONS FOR LOCAL LAND USE PLANNING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAKEHOLDERS IN

NGUTI MUNICIPALITY – PRESENTATION AT BUEA MEETING

ANNEX 10. AGENDA FOR THE NGUTI MEETING – 23RD APRIL 2015

ANNEX 11. ATTENDANCE LIST: PROJECT LAUNCH MEETING, COUNCIL HALL NGUTI, 23RD APRIL 2015

ANNEX 12. PRESENTATION BY PROF SOH FOTSING, MINISTER’S REPRESENTATIVE, IN NGUTI

ANNEX 13. PRESENTATION BY THE LTS PROJECT TEAM LEADER, IN NGUTI

ANNEX 14. PRESENTATION OF BOA PLAIN COMMUNITY MAPPING EXPERIENCE

ANNEX 15. PRESENTATION BY CED / GREENPEACE PROJECT PARTNERS, IN NGUTI

ANNEX 16. PRESENTATION BY THE “MAPPING AND GOVERNANCE IN THE CONGO BASIN” PROJECT

PARTNERS (RFUK, FODER AND AJESH), IN NGUTI

Support to the development of a common mapping platform in Cameroon –

Deliverable 3: Launch Workshop Report Page 1

1. Executive Summary

This report is the output of two project launch meetings conducted by LTS International Ltd

and Rainbow Consult in the South West Region of Cameroon between 20 and 24 April 2015

for the project “Support to the development of a Common Mapping Platform in Cameroon”.

This project is implemented in the context of the 2011 Orientation Law on the Management

and Sustainable Development of Land in Cameroon, and has the full support of the

Cameroon Ministry of Economy, Planning and Regional Development (MINEPAT).

The project aims to develop a “common mapping platform” to share relevant information for

local land use planning with all stakeholders with an interest in land. Relevant information

includes:

• the location and population of towns, villages and hamlets;

• transport infrastructure (roads, tracks, paths), and accessibility of markets;

• how communities use land and understand their own customary tenure;

• the legal status of land that has already been designated to one or another use;

• the suitability of land for different crops such as food crops, cocoa, oil palm and rubber;

• land cover, including urban areas, cropland, forests and fallow;

• the quality of forests, including the carbon stocks and biodiversity.

This data comes from many sources and is managed by different agencies. As a result, it is

not available all in one place. What is available is often incomplete and/or out of date. This

makes it difficult to ensure that stakeholder interests are fairly represented, and to balance

interests during local land use planning. The purpose of the common mapping platform is

therefore to enable the different actors to update relevant information and share it with all

other stakeholders.

The South West Region and Nguti Municipality were selected as the pilot region and

municipality to demonstrate the value of the mapping platform being developed by the

project. The purpose of the launch meetings was, therefore, to present the objectives and

program for implementation of the project at the regional and municipal level, and to gain

the support of the regional government services, the local authorities in the Nguti Municipal

Council area, and the traditional chiefs and people from the rural communities in Nguti. The

launch meetings also brought together the many different initiatives that are working in the

area to see how they can better coordinate their activities. These include national and local

organisations and programmes supporting forest conservation (PSMNR, MINFOF, WWF);

private sector actors developing commercial agricultural plantations (Herakles Farms); and



civil society organisations (Rainforest Foundation UK, FODER, AJESH and CED) supporting

communities to map their lands to help them better defend their interests in any future

discussion about land use.

The interest of EFI’s REDD Facility to support such work is that more informed and

transparent spatial planning, better addressing both social and environmental concerns, is a

pre-requisite for the responsible implementation of REDD+ (Reduced Emissions from

Deforestation and Forest Degradation), as recognized in the REDD+ preparation roadmap of

Cameroon. The goal of improving land use planning evidently goes much beyond REDD+

circles and touches upon a fundamental pillar of Cameroon’s development: the sustainable

management and development of the country’s rich natural resources, which is central to the

achievement of the Vision 2035. At the local level, land use planning can determine the

future development of a council’s land for the council area’s inhabitants’ best interest.

The launch meetings were very well attended, and all stakeholders strongly welcomed the

initiative to prepare a common mapping tool and expressed their willingness to collaborate.



2. Introduction and context of

the project

In April 2014, EFI contracted LTS International, working locally with Rainbow Environment

Consult to implement the project, with the objective of developing an interactive mapping

tool to support the sharing of multi-sectorial information during land use planning. More

details about EFI, LTS and the project are presented in Annex 1.

The mapping platform will provide access to all stakeholders interested in land use in

Cameroon – to local councils and communities, local NGOs, and the local, regional and

national administrative departments. Each of these stakeholders has information that they

have compiled and would like to share to inform those preparing a land use plan.

The project also seeks to guide land management within the context of the implementation

of the Rural Sector Development Strategy and the formulation of national REDD+ strategy.

The Minister of Economy, Planning, and Regional Development (MINEPAT) has given his

blessing for this project and the proposal to test it in Nguti through Letter No.

00527/L/MINEPAT/SG/DGPAT/DATZF of 3 February 2015 (see Annex 2).

2.1 Context for the project

The guiding text for Land Use Planning in Cameroon is the Law No. 2011/008 of 6 May 2011,

providing orientation for the management and sustainable development of land. A copy of

this law can be downloaded from the MINEPAT website by clicking on the link here. The

Ministry has not yet adopted implementing regulations for the law, or a national land use

planning strategy that guides interpretation of this law. However, MINEPAT has launched a

series of tenders recently, which give an indication of how it intends to implement this law.

The following provisional list of known initiatives gives an indication of the context, and

current ‘strategy’ to implement land use planning.



2.1.1 On-going planning processes

1. Preparation of various Land Use Planning documents by MINEPAT:

a) A National Schema for the management and sustainable development of land (as

envisaged by Land Management Law - Call for Expression of Interest, which has been

issued by MINEPAT1);

b) A National Zoning Plan (note that such a plan was not envisaged in the Law No.

2011/008 on Land management, but a Call for Expression of Interest to prepare a

“National Zoning Plan”)has been issued by MINEPAT2

c) A set of Regional land use and sustainable development schemas (RLUSDS) or

Schéma Régional d’Aménagement et de Développement Durable du Territoire

(SRADDT) in French. The preparation of SRADDTs in the South-West Region will be

supported by KfW;

d) Local Land Use and Sustainable Development Plans (LLUSDPs) or Plan Local

d’Aménagement et de Développement Durable du Territoire (PLADDT) in French

(PLADDT) that further define the Regional Schemas for one or more Council areas.

2. MINEPAT has recently drafted a revised National Rural Development Strategy that,

subject to final adoption, guides reconciliation of multi-sectoral interests, with inputs

from all sub-sectoral ministries: agriculture, livestock, forestry and environment. The

strategy aims to guide the reconciliation of multi-sectoral interests. Investment in the

implementation of the plan will be through the Plan National d’Investissement Agricole,

but should also be supported by REDD+.

3. MINEPAT has indicated that it will prepare a National Land Use Planning Strategy with

GIZ support. However, this proposal has been stalled for some time. The intention is that

the strategy would clarify the land use planning processes, steps, responsibilities,

partnerships, tools, etc.

4. A National REDD+ Strategy by the Ministry of Environment, Nature Protection and

Sustainable Development (MINEPDED, REDD+ Coordination Unit) is being prepared with

support from the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. A study on drivers of

deforestation in the South West region has been conducted (funded by GIZ).

1 Avis d’Appel à Manifestation d’intérêt No. 02/2014/AAMI/MINEPAT du 22 Avril 2014 pour la présélection des

cabinets d’études, entreprises ou groupements en vue de l’élaboration du Schéma National d’Aménagement et

de Développement du Territoire du Cameroun.

2 Avis d’Appel à Manifestation d’intérêt No. 01/2014/AAMI/MINEPAT du 22 Avril 2014 pour la présélection des

cabinets d’études, entreprises ou groupements en vue de l’élaboration du Plan de Zonage du Territoire National

du Cameroun.



2.1.2 Scope of the Common Mapping Platform

Initially, the platform will be developed to support the participatory preparation of PLADDTs

as envisaged in the 2011 Law on Land Management. These PLADDTs are prepared and

adopted by the respective councils and should be completed prior to the designation of land

for any particular use. The platform is being designed to help stakeholders explore how

REDD+ might influence decisions about land use during local land use planning.

Once the tool has been tested and proven useful at the local council level, it will be further

developed to support the preparation of a Regional Schema for Land Management and

Sustainable Development (SRADDT). However, it will only be able to support regional

planning when sufficient up-to-date data has been compiled to support its use at this scale.

In the longer term, LTS expects that such a tool would have applications for more detailed

Environmental and Social Impact Assessments of specific projects.

In particular, the consortium envisaged that the tool must be developed in such a way that

ensures that environmental and social safeguards are implemented - a pre-requisite for

REDD+ and many other projects – and are adequately addressed to the satisfaction of all

stakeholders.

If the pilot project proves successful, the common mapping platform will be fully developed

and transferred to a Cameroonian government institution, each administration keeping

control of official data within the scope of its mandate. In this light, MINEPAT would take the

lead to ensure good institutional coordination for the success of this project.

2.1.3 Rationale for selection of South West Region and Nguti

Municipality to pilot the project

After consultations with Stakeholders during the inception mission, LTS International and

Rainbow Consult proposed the South-West Region, and specifically Nguti Municipality, as a

good place to test the mapping tool. It was chosen because of the high conservation values

and existing network of Protected Areas, the opportunities, and also the potential conflicts,

surrounding proposed new agro-industrial plantations and new road infrastructure, as well

as the dynamic smallholder farming sector. Specifically:

• There are high conservation values in the area

– High biodiversity and many Protected Areas;

– Proposals to create new corridors between Protected Areas (PSMNR).

• There are new opportunities for development

– New Kumba-Mamfe road (AfDB);

– A rapid increase in smallholder farming;

– New agro-industrial plantations (Herakles / SGSoc).



• There is a high risk of conflicts

– Potential conflicts between all of the above;

– Need to find ways to minimise conflicts through better land use planning.

• There is an accelerating rate of deforestation in SW Region.

– Interest to develop REDD+ projects to address this;

– Interest in implementing REDD+ projects (WWF, KfW).

• Other organisations are already mapping in the area and there is a lot of data

available

– CED with Greenpeace;

– FODER / AJESH with Rainforest Foundation UK;

– Herakles.

• The people of Nguti have a long experience of negotiating land use. They have:

– Created the Nguti Council Forest and three Community Forests;

– Negotiated with private sector (Herakles);

– Negotiated with MINFOF, WCS and WWF about boundaries of Protected

Areas.

The experiences gained by the people of Nguti during all the above processes will allow the

project to learn from the people of Nguti and apply the lessons learned to the land use

planning process, and the development of the tool.

2.1.4 The Launch Mission

LTS International and Rainbow Consult conducted a launch mission to South West Region

from 20 to 24 June 2015 to present the project to representatives of relevant Regional

Delegations Programs, and Nguti Municipal leaders, Nguti Municipal Council, the Divisional

Administration and the communities of Nguti Sub-Division (the Mission Schedule is attached

in Annex 3). The main objectives of the mission was to launch the project and gain support

from regional and local stakeholders. The mission resulted in a widespread expression of

support for the project concept.

This report is the summary of the preparation for and the findings of this 5-day mission to

Nguti. During the mission, a Launch Meeting was held in Buea on 21 April and one in Nguti

on 23 April.



3. Minutes of the meeting in Buea -

Headquarters of South West Region

3.1 Introduction, and objectives

A first meeting was held on 21 April in Buea with government agencies, civil society

organisations (CSOs), private sector representatives and development partners:

• Representative of MINEPAT;

• Representatives of the Regional Delegations central to land management,

including MINEPAT, MINFOF, MINADER, MINEPDED and MINTP. (MINDCAF was

invited but did not attend);

• The Mayor of Nguti;

• The Member of Parliament for Nguti;

• International NGOs: including Rainforest Foundation UK, and Rights and

Resources Initiative;

• Civil Society: including national NGOs (FODER), local NGO People Earthwise

(which currently holds the Presidency of the Regional REDD+ Platform), and local

NGOs (AJESH and Nature Cameroon); and

• Development Programmes: PNDP, PSMNR.

The full list of meeting participants is attached (Annex 4). Subsequent follow up meetings

and exchanges were conducted with PNDP and PSMNR to explore scope for further

synergies and data exchange.

The objectives of the launch meeting were to:

• Raise awareness on the objectives for developing an interactive mapping tool to

improve transparency in land use planning;

• Understand all stakeholder interests;

• Share ideas about what type of decisions a mapping tool should be able to support;

• Agree what spatial information (thematic maps) are needed to make these

decisions;

• Gain the support of regional and local stakeholders for the project;

• Build synergies with other initiatives and actors; and

• To plan for field data collection and get support for field work.

The meeting agenda is attached in Annex 5.



3.2 Presentations

The opening and welcome remarks were given by the representative of the regional delegate

MINEPAT, Mme Stephanie Tchouateu, Regional Chief of Service of Economic Affairs and

Programming.

The first presentation was an overview of the national land use planning and sustainable

development framework made by the MINEPAT focal point, Prof Bertin Soh Fotsing, Head of

the Cartography Unit at MINEPAT. The presentation was divided into four main parts:

• A general introduction highlighting the key definitions of land use planning, as well

as the motivations and main issues highlighted in the law no. 2011/008 of 06 May

2011 to lay down conditions for national land use planning and sustainable

development.

• Secondly, the presentation explained some of the existing land use challenges and

problems: the lack of coherence and coordination in the actions and development

strategies of different ministerial departments and other stakeholders; the need for

effective border planning and sustainable development; etc.

• The third aspect of this presentation outlined the previous experiences and efforts of

MINEPAT and other ministries and actors in terms of land use planning.

• Fourthly, geographical information systems (GIS) was presented as the main tool to

aid the land use planning process with explanation on how this information will be

integrated in a generic land use map accessible online.

The full text of the presentation is available in Annex 6. This presentation was immediately

followed by a brief discussion during which questions were asked and contributions made by

different participants.

The presentation by MINEPAT was followed by a presentation from James Acworth, project

Team Leader from LTS International. He introduced the general project donors,

implementing partners, objectives and the future uses Annex 7.

The presentation also situated this mapping tool project within the on-going national land

use planning process and other initiatives such as decentralisation and REDD+ readiness. The

creation of a spatial mapping tool is important to bring together all existing information,

which is currently dispersed amongst different ministries and organisations. This tool will

equally help update existing information and create a publicly available system accessible to

all. It will represent diverse interests, land uses and environmental and social impacts.

The third presentation was a combined presentation by RFUK, FODER and AJESH, and was

delivered by Nora Serrat of Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK). It focused on the objectives

and activities of the “mapping and forest governance programme” and its contribution to the



common mapping platform. The DFID Forest Governance Markets and Climate (FGMC)

funded programme is aimed at mapping customary tenure. Regarding the degree of

community participation in the customary land uses, FODER noted that not all communities

were actively involved and there is still need to identify mapping skills in different

communities. FODER also highlighted the importance of using a local facilitator, who

understands the project and activities to introduce the project in the local communities. The

presentation is available at Annex 8.

AJESH also gave a brief overview of the steps and stages before and during the community

mapping. The first step is information and prospection, which includes the identification of

local resource persons to act as an entry point to the community. There are currently some

villages opposing the data collection activities due to the challenges and suspicion created

by Herakles Farms. Some villages are insisting on having a letter of approval from the

Divisional Officer (DO).

3.3 Plenary Discussion Session

Regional REDD Platform representative (Benjamin Serkfem): How does the Ministry

(MINEPAT) plan to respond to the existing land use challenges created by the multiple land

uses and plans by different stakeholder groups? How can civil society organisations

participate in enhancing this plan?

• The Minister’s representative responded that MINEPAT is currently trying to

consolidate the multiple isolated actions that other departments have already put

in place in the past, through a common tool beginning with the creation of PNDP.

Because of the overlap between different land uses, it is advisable to plan at the

national level and move progressively to the regional and local levels through the

creation of the local development plans.

• Pertaining to the responsibility of CSO’s in land use planning, they are to act as the

watchdog of local interest, bringing to the attention of the administration what has

been done and ensuring effective checks and balances between different groups.

MINFOF/PSMNR-SWR: Mr Bakia pointed out that prior to privatisation of Cameroon

Development Corporation (CDC), MINFOF initiated the creation of Technical Operational

Units (TOUs) as a forum for inter-ministerial participation on local land use planning. The

TOUs were created by a Decision (Arrêté) of the Prime Minister. The new 2011 land use

planning law has introduced new actors – what are the responsibilities of the different sub

groups, what are the areas of overlap and how can such conflicts of interest be resolved?



• The problem of inefficiency and conflicts in authority is due to governance

weaknesses because the laws in force have clearly defined roles and responsibilities

of different actors.

MINADER Representative: What mechanism has MINEPAT put in place to resolve the

current problem of wrong, or out of date, data currently used in development planning?

• Tools and methods used for data collection are currently not harmonised or are

inadequate, thereby failing to be fit for purpose. In addition, the topographic maps,

which date back to the 1920s, are a weak basis on which to make reliable planning.

This land use planning process will help update and harmonise information created

through a uniform tool.

In relation to the system of data collection the representative of PNDP highlighted that they

have made some progress in standardising data collection methods, but some local NGOS

do not respect the procedure which creates problems in harmonizing the data during the

creation of the council development plans.

MINFOF/PSMNR-SWR Representative: Mr Bakia expressed his worry about the

ever-growing number of projects and consultancies all doing the same thing under different

names. He recommended there should be a meeting to bring together national experts to

collaborate to ensure continuity. It is also advisable to have one regional coordination unit

for land use planning efforts in the region to ensure coordination and effective local

development.

• How then do we get a clear-cut and central point of decision-making? How do these

actors and ministries collaborate to harmonize the different data already collected?

• What is the link between the REDD land use planning and this project?

• Will the project also take into account demographic data and projections in the map?

• How will this project fit into the broader programme given the multiple ongoing

projects?

MINEPDED Regional Delegate: What regulations exist to implement law on land use

planning? The Team Leader agreed that guidelines and a clear decision defining how land

use plans are prepared should come from MINEPAT. There is a need for a regulation to

define the content of land use plans.

MINFOF/PSMNR-SWR Representative: There have also been issues with land use planning

in Korup, including challenges with defining Permanent Use Zones (PUZ). This meant that

PUZs and their allocation and uses were defined at a local level by local communities

following guidelines and bylaws for land use that were developed by MINFOF. The Chief,

Community Representatives and the Divisional Officer then signed an agreement for

management and use of the PUZ, which included guidelines for land allocation.



PNDP Representative: PNDP has already developed some community maps under PNDP –

e.g. for Manyemen. But AJESH noted that there are presently many versions of maps in

Manyemen by PNDP, Herakles, etc. each prepared with their own objective and often

different information. There is a need for a comprehensive compilation of all data to

understand the situation.

Mayor of Nguti: Regarding the local suspicion of NGOs and projects, the mayor has had

meetings with communities to help change the suspicious mind-set of local communities

and improve collaboration but they are yet to be convinced.

MINFOF/PSMNR-SWR Representative: noted that communities also need to be made

aware of their rights and limitations to enable them to understand the importance of the

mapping process and how they can improve their tenure security. This can also prevent a

situation where one individual sells out a huge area of land for smallholders at the expense

of other local community members.

Regional REDD Platform representative (Benjamin Serkfem): If mapping is perceived

wrongly by local communities, CSOs should effectively play their independent role in

protecting local interests and rights, rather than giving the impression that they are working

for different ministries, CSOs should be watchdogs to protect the voiceless. During the

Yaoundé conference organized by the NGO Centre for Environment and Development (CED)

on Governance in Natural Resource Management, it was revealed that land management still

follows a colonial model, giving out land to investors. However, in practise, producers do not

need the land, they need the yield from the land.

There was discussion and feedback from different ministries regarding availability of data

and on-going or planned data collection and mapping activities.

The facilitator requested each ministry to provide a brief overview of data that they hold or

are currently collecting:

MINADER: The Regional Consultative Forum for Rural Development coordinated by

MINADER / MINEPIA is a multi-stakeholder forum where different ministries, CSOs, farmers

etc. are represented. Can this forum not become a central unit for collaboration? Why is

MINEPAT not assuming its responsibility by coordinating existing efforts?

According to James Ojong a representative from MINADER, a soil suitability map for rubber

was developed in 1990, but it is difficult to get socio-economic data on agriculture because

of lack of a specific standard for data collection and measurement. There is currently no plan

by MINADER to update the soil map at the regional level, but there is a plan to update this

data at national level.



MINTP: Why cannot MINEPAT take responsibility to coordinate territorial administration

given that it is a cross-sectoral transversal ministry to which all issues are addressed:

Planning, Economy, land use planning etc.?

MINEPAT: MINEPAT has launched the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the National Zoning

Plan, the National Schema (land use planning “scheme”), and four Regional Schemas (land

use planning schemes). In May 2014, MINEPAT consulted with all Ministries / administrations

at the regional level to approve the methodology. Regional Schemas should be updated

every three years so that they can integrate new information and proposals periodically. KfW

is supporting the preparation of the Regional Schemas in the North and South-West Regions

– because there are a number of interesting issues in South-West (REDD+, etc.). This was one

of the reasons for selecting SW Region. MINEPAT has opted to fund the preparation of

Regional Schemas (SRADDTs) in the South and East Regions – because of a major

programme for mining projects, including the mines in Congo – to manage the Mbalam /

Kribi area (a huge area across two Regions). If Cameroon does not clarify its intention to

develop railway infrastructure to extract iron ore through Cameroon, then Congo will send its

ore out by other routes. Due to the complexities of the sectors, the Prime Minister is

sometimes called upon to arbitrate between ministries.

MINEPDED: MINEPDED does not have a sector, but is involved in the activities of all other

sectors that impact on the environment. The main activity of the ministry is to remind the

other sectors to assess the environmental impact of their projects. Mapping and land use

planning is important because it is currently challenging for MINEPDED to put in place and

follow-up development plans until the different land use options are clearly identified. In the

context of the REDD+ process, MINEPDED is also putting in place a strategy and national

Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV).

MINEPAT Minister’s Representative: Professor Soh pointed out that like MINEPAT,

MINEPDED is a transversal Ministry that takes into account all sectors and should identify the

risks. The workshop held in Douala last week by the Centre d’Information et de

Documentation Environnementale (CIDE), a division of MINEPDED, was to put in place a data

management system to take into account all the natural and environmental risks in one

system. This initiative is led by M. Ondoua and M. Ntep.

MINEPIA: Has data on livestock etc. (e.g. on cattle at Twin Lakes, Muanengouba) but it has

difficulty collecting data and GIS points on existing animal and fishing resources due to lack

of adequate tools and no suitable methodology. There is also lack of coherence between the

data of different ministries. The challenge is how to ensure that the methodology and data

are the same in all ministries. There is a need to involve all the sectorial ministers for this.

MINEPIA hosts a platform to share data, but how can data about marine fisheries be

collected and integrated on such a platform? A statistics unit has been created at MINEPIA



and personnel have been trained on how to collect data and integrate land use maps.

However the training provided by the AFD funded AMO programme is not very helpful for

land use planning. If EFI can provide more training to the head of services in the statistics

units of each ministry, it will be an asset for data collection and land use planning.

• Audience members asked: How will the Port at Limbe be integrated? What will

MINEPIA’s role be regarding fisheries? What approach will be used to make different

investments coherent?

MINTP: The Ministry of Public Works mainly focuses on development and maintenance of

roads and is not directly involved in land issues. It has a road network map of the region

although this information is not up-to-date. The data collection on roads is done centrally

and the information is available on the ministry’s website.

• MINEPAT – Prof Soh commented to MINTP that they need to think about how roads

impact on other land uses and work in synergy with others to update the road

network map.

• MINADER – Is there possibility to update the land suitability map?

• PSMNR – Has data on the different types of roads within the TOUs. This information

is collected with GPS every time a PSMNR team goes to the field. Thus the data for

SW Region is updated. PSMNR also have standard data attributes and a system of

classifying the roads which might be different from the road classification criteria of

MINTP standard for road data. But will it be kept up-to-date?

• There is need to coordinate and standardise data compilation on roads.

MINFOF: MINFOF / PSMNR has a well-structured database for South West with a variety of

data on biodiversity and Conservation Areas, Production Forest Reserves, FMUs managed by

forest industries, Community Forests, Council Forest Areas, base layers on rivers, etc. MINFOF

has also collected data on road networks and other land uses such as agriculture and mining.

They follow-up projects that encroach into permanent forest estates. PSMNR has equally

done rigorous land use planning for two villages in Korup Park. But communities have

problems finding the funds to manage them, although there are strategies to protect forests

from outsiders.

There is a constant reconstruction of administrative boundaries – every 5-10 years, Divisions/

Sub-Divisions are changing – which creates a challenge in long term planning. For example

some communities in one council area are found in other regions e.g. in Nguti, there is a

community in Littoral that is seen to be within Nguti Sub-Division.



Forestry entities can be managed through one or more councils. It is also possible to manage

corridors by generating benefits for communities from REDD+. MINFOF is trying to do all of

the above in the context of the National Forest Policy to maintain 30% of land under

conservation.

• REDD+ Platform representative: We must recognise that there is a major problem

with data sharing, or to have statistics on the number of children in schools. There is

need for a change of culture to facilitate more data exchange.

Regarding the problem of coordination and information sharing, the MINFOF/PSMNR

representative noted that the Regional Consultative Platform has requested all data to be

made available for others to use. All ministries are competing for land, often in the same

area. The Technical Operations Units (TOUs) created by Prime Ministerial Decree seeks to

facilitate the coordination of inter-ministerial collaboration. Though MINFOF is the technical

lead of TOUs, MINEPAT and DO chair the meetings.

There are inconsistencies in the allocation of agricultural concessions. For example, CDC and

Herakles have leaseholds, whereas PAMOL has a nucleus and cluster structure. This means

that PAMOL does not have a leasehold of its own but negotiates access to land with local

chiefs and outgrowers (mainly thousands of community members), who plant on their own

land.

3.4 Expectations of local Stakeholders

The facilitator then invited the mayor to express the expectations of local stakeholders of a

land use planning process. In summary, the mayor noted the need for the following:

• Urban planning to avoid haphazard development;

• Sustainability of forest resources which are illegally exploited / inefficiently managed;

• Reduced poaching in Protected Areas;

• Improved sanitation / reduction of water diseases by protection of water sources;

• Improved standard of living of population – map agricultural land and move to

‘second generation’ methods of agriculture;

• Contribute to the creation of an enabling environment, to enrich development.

• Enable Nguti Council as facilitator to engage all citizens in implementation,

monitoring, and efficient utilisation of resources.

• Through micro-projects, productive sectors such as agriculture, forestry and tourism

could increase the wealth of the population;

• Allow Nguti Council to improve road access to ease marketing of produce, and

access to services.

A full copy of the Mayor’s presentation can be found in Annex 9.



3.5 Conclusions

Everybody appreciated EFI’s approach. Before adopting the common mapping platform, it

was recommended that:

1. All stakeholders are made aware of the difficulties on the ground.

2. Ensure communities are engaged with the exercise and aware of its objectives.

3. All administrations should be involved in providing and sharing geo-referenced data

in a standard format. Mapping is a strategic investment of any country. For example

Obama insisted that every state has its own cartographic unit. Since the Cameroon

Government is in the process of preparing a new base map (1:25,000) it is a key time

to ensure that all ministries adopt a common tool to share data.

With these recommendations, all participants unanimously adopted the laudable project for

its contribution in the development of the country.

3.6 Closing remarks

The Member of Parliament for Nguti Sub-Division - Honourable Clarah EYABI

concluded that the meeting had been very instructive. She requested that MINEPAT organise

a working session at the national assembly to inform parliamentarians about all the

difficulties in the field, noting that MPs are unaware of such challenges, because most MPs

are not technicians in this field. This will enable MPs to make informed decisions and come

up with solutions to meet the 2035 development vision. With regard to the Nguti Council,

the MP noted that she always works in synergy with the mayor who already made an

excellent presentation giving details on the council area. Notwithstanding this, she made a

general request for a report of the day’s activities to be distributed to participants after the

workshop for future reference.

The Representative of the Minister MINEPAT Yaoundé – Prof Soh Fotsing expressed his

satisfaction with the presentations and was happy that other actors such as RFUK are

heading in the same direction. This project creates opportunities to guarantee a more

efficient data collection strategy and avoid replication. He equally advised the different

sectors to update their information to facilitate the creation of a common mapping tool.

The Representative of the Regional Delegate MINEPAT concluded the meeting by stating

that all participants have had the opportunity to discuss the subject in detail. She

appreciated the patience of all participants which contributed in the fruitful discussions and

outcome of the meeting.

The meeting closed at around 3 pm with a group photograph (Figure 1).



Figure 1. Group photo from the meeting in Buea - Headquarters of South West Region



4. Minutes of the Launch Meeting in

Nguti – 23 April 2015

A second meeting was held on 23 April in the Nguti Council Hall. The launch meeting was

attended by:

• The Representative of the Minister of MINEPAT;

• Representatives of the Divisional Delegations of MINEPAT, MINFOF, MINADER,

MINEFOP (Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and the Family). Conservators of

Korup National Park, Bakossi National Park and Banyang Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary. The

Regional Coordinator of Technical Operational Units representing the Regional

Delegate of MINFOF. MINDCAF and MINEPDED were invited but did not attend;

• The representative of the Mayor of Nguti;

• The Alternate for the Member of Parliament for Nguti;

• The Chief, and a youth and women’s representative from each of the nine Clans of

Nguti Council Area.

• International NGOs: Rainforest Foundation UK, Rights and Resources Initiative and

WWF;

• Civil Society: National NGOs including CED and FODER; local NGOs including AJESH

and Nature Cameroon;

• The Private Sector: A representative of Herakles Farms (an agro-industrial palm

plantation company); and

• Development partners (PSMNR, WWF).

The full list of meeting participants is attached (Annex 10). The meeting agenda is attached

in Annex 11.

4.1 Introduction

The meeting was opened by the Assistant DO who appreciated the initiative and called on

participants to actively participate in the discussions during the meeting. The second deputy

mayor then welcomed all participants to the meeting on behalf of the council. There was also

a self-introduction of participants before the presentations.

4.2 Presentations (Part 1)

The first presentation was given by Prof Soh, representative of the Minister, MINEPAT. This

presentation gave a brief overview of the 2011 law and highlighted the challenges of the

absence of a harmonised land use plan for all sectors. He also highlighted the lack of

coordination, conflicting land uses and duplication of efforts. He then narrowed down to the



links between national and local land use plans focusing on the relevance of the council

development plan which highlights the needs and interests of the council and local groups.

The presentation also explained that the 2011 Law on Land Use Planning provides for the

negotiation of a “Contract Plan” between the government and the council after its council

development plan has been made. The phases, mode of application, duration and financial

requirements for the establishment and implementation of the contract plan were equally

elaborated upon. The full presentation is available at Error! Reference source not found..

The presentation by MINEPAT was followed by a presentation from James Acworth, project

Team Leader from LTS International. He introduced the general project donors,

implementing partners, objectives and the future uses Annex 13.

4.3 First Plenary Discussion Session

The facilitator opened the floor and took a series of questions:

• Eyeni Eyeni – Representative Nguti youths: Given the current conflicts between

different activities, will this mapping tool help to bring order?

• How was Herakles Farms allocated the 4% of land in the Nguti Council Area without

community consent? Is an investor supposed to just implement its project without

consultation? Who should be consulted and how should the process be carried out?

• Fredy – CED: At what stage will communities be involved in this project? When will

consultations be made to integrate the opinions and concerns of local communities?

• Abie Nelson: How did Herakles Farms come into communities without the

knowledge of the communities? How do the communities benefit from setting aside

huge portions of their land for conservation?

• Ekane Eric (Babubock village) – Aboh Ngoe youths’ representative: Will the data

collected also include information about minerals underground?

• Monge Julius: Should communities remain enclaved because of conservation? What

measures can be put in place to alleviate the suffering and dis-enclave local

communities?

• What will happen if the data collected and mapping discover that current farmland is

unsuitable for agriculture, will communities be evicted from such areas?

• Macnight – CED: How will the project guarantee effective community participation

by all stakeholders and avoid elite capture of the process?

• Ngwese Dominic – Nature Cameroon: Given that most communities were not

adequately consulted during the creation of national parks, has MINFOF put in place

a communication strategy to communicate the effects of the 2015 finance laws, which

seems to reduce the share of revenues that goes to local communities?

• Is it possible to redistribute to local communities some of the land from other land

uses such as conservation and FMUs because the 40% currently available for

community use cannot adequately meet community needs?



Contributions and response to questions

• Prof Soh noted that national land use planning is aimed at solving some of the

existing land use conflicts mentioned by the participants. However, the law is still to

be implemented because land use planning is still to be realised. Future land use

plans will consider the needs of communities after careful analysis of the situation by

the government to avoid the current land use conflicts. This decision will also be

based on the relative importance and economic value of the different land uses and

resources of the different sectors.

• The representative of the Divisional Delegate of MINEPAT equally highlighted that

the current bottom–up development approach requires that government integrates

community concerns prior to any development planning. Regarding the finance law,

he argued that communities should hold their representatives in Parliament

responsible if the laws do not protect their interests.

• According to the MINFOF representative, there are several channels through which

communities can benefit from conservation and protected areas. Forest royalties are

paid to local communities from forest revenues. The Programme for Sustainable

Management of Natural Resources (PSMNR) has also introduced the idea of

“Conservation Development Agreements” that are negotiated between MINFOF and

the communities with engagements on the responsibilities of respective parties.

There are equally community hunting zones created within national parks to enable

communities to benefit from the parks. Income generated from tourism will also be

redistributed for development of the affected communities.

• According to the conservator of Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary, 29 village forest

management committees, which serve as a social platform at the local level, have

been created for information-sharing, to gather information on community needs

and to see how conservation can contribute to these needs. Based on the outcome of

meetings and the needs of the communities, the PSMNR has agreed to build a bridge

in the area. The park also brings direct benefits in terms of employment and revenue

generation. Every month workers are selected from different villages for joint patrol

with MINFOF. This ensures that every community benefits from these wages. There

has also been the creation of Common Initiative Groups (CIGs) and collection points

for non-timber forest products (NTFPs).

• The Conservator of the Korup National Park equally mentioned that development

activities are implemented by the projects based on the issues in the management

plan.

The LTS team leader, James Acworth, equally mentioned REDD+ as one way that

communities may be able to benefit from conservation in the future, through the money

paid in by REDD+ projects. Regarding gaining of prior consent, he added local land use

plans are prepared by, and adopted by, the Local Council. As a result, the Local Council will



not adopt the plan if it is not in agreement with the proposals. The Local Council needs to

consult the local communities during this local land use planning process. The obligation to

obtain Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC - or CLIP in French) imposes the need for all

projects and investors to have community consent prior to any project implementation. The

purpose of this meeting is also to inform the communities at the very beginning of the

mapping project and obtain consent to proceed. Regarding minerals, there may not be any

information available for Nguti, but whatever is available from MINIMIDT (Ministry of

Industry Mines and Technological Development) will be made available on the mapping

platform.

4.4 Presentations (Part 2)

After the coffee break there were some presentations of practical examples of previous,

ongoing and planned mapping exercises carried out in the Nguti Council Area and other

areas in Ndian.

The first of these presentations was made by Mr Molua Micheal of Mbongo Village, Ndian

Division who described the process of preparing the Boa Plain Community Land Use Map in

1998-99. He explained the importance of this map in helping to inform community land use

decisions and also in lobbying for the redistribution of part of the CDC leasehold to release

more land for community use. This case clearly demonstrated the need for communities to

map their land uses so as to understand the availability of land and make informed decisions

for future use. Mr Molua’s presentation is available at Error! Reference source not found.

and the Boa Plain Community Land Use Map is presented in Figure .



Figure 2. The Boa Plain Community Land Use Map (prepared in 1998)



The second presentation was made by Macnight Ngwese of CED, who made a review of the

participatory mapping process in some communities around the Herakles Farms project

areas. These maps were made upon the request of the communities. The case of two

communities in Ndian, where land has been allocated to Herakles Farms, was an eye opener

to communities and raised awareness of the need for communities to carry out land use

mapping before deciding to allocate land to investors. It also demonstrated the

co-management and use of the same forest area by two or more communities and

concluded that the land use decisions of one community could affect other neighbouring

communities which are using the same resources. His presentation is available in Error!

Reference source not found..

The third presentation was made by Harrison Nnoko of AJESH, who presented the mapping

and forest governance programme currently implemented in the South and South West

Regions funded by Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK) and implemented by FODER and AJESH.

The project, which is aimed at helping communities’ document customary land tenure

through participatory mapping, will support communities in producing community land use

maps and train them on how to use these maps for future land use planning and to protect

their customary land rights. Some examples of communities where this exercise has been

completed was also presented and a representative of one of these communities, Mr Ekenge,

gave a brief overview of the entire process including the training, data collection and the use

of this map for community decision-making. The presentation is provided in Error!

Reference source not found..

4.5 Second Plenary Discussions

Questions

• Why has the problem of Boa community still not been resolved since 1998 when the

mapping exercise was done and the request for land distribution made?

• Who will compensate CDC for the surrender of this land given that they have been

paying taxes to government?

• What is done with the maps after the mapping exercise, are copies given to the

government to inform them of the existing conflicts? How will these maps be used by

the government?

• Can the project executants developing these maps inform communities of any future

projects that plan to invest in their area? This will enable communities to better

prepare and increase their bargaining power before the arrival of the investor.

Responses and contributions



Molua Michael explained that the Boa Plain community has not yet received land because

their map was developed after land was already allocated to CDC and the process of

redistribution is complex. However, the negotiations are ongoing. CDC is presently

demarcating all its land in preparation for ceding some of it back to the local community. He

emphasised that the Nguti Council has the advantage of creating their maps before any long

term land use decisions are made. This way their needs will be integrated in development

planning.

With regards to the mapping process, community heads and opinion leaders were advised

on the need to be honest during the mapping process so as to ensure that data collected is

reliable and reflects the reality on the ground. The CED Representative, Macnight Ngwese

equally mentioned some of the benefits that the map has already had for communities such

as a common management agreement between MINFOF and communities made possible by

the participatory mapping. He also mentioned that CED has an ongoing process to hand

over maps to government and local administration.

4.6 Identification of issues to address during local land use

planning and information needs

In the final session, James Acworth asked a series of questions to the floor, relating to the

key issues that need to be addressed in a land use plan. First, he laid out the type of issues

that might be addressed in a local land use plan, and then asked the plenary a series of

questions about how they see that such issues might be addressed during a land use

planning process, and what information would be needed to support decision making.

First, he reminded participants of the type of issues that need to be addressed in a local land

use plan:

• Local Land Use Plans can balance interests in land:

o Meeting local food security needs;

o Managing forests for community use;

o Producing commodities for the nation and export markets;

o Protecting biodiversity, carbon stocks and the environment.

• Local Land Use Plans can be used to prioritise investments in infrastructure:

o Roads;

o Markets;

o Other infrastructure.

• Local Land Use Plans can also guide private investments:

o Where to invest and in what?

o Who should be given access to land?

He then led the participants through a series of questions:



Question 1. How to identify and secure farmland for the future needs of the

community?

• Where is your farmland today?

• Where will you need land to farm in the future?

• How will you identify areas that are best for farming?

• How will you identify areas that cannot be farmed (hilly or swampy areas)?

• How will you map these areas?

• What information do you need to help you map farmland?

• How can you secure your own farmland in the future?

Answers:

• Chiefs: If we reserve land as “village land for future use”, individuals sell it. Instead he

recommended allocating land to families - they will not sell it.

• Youths: There are no boundaries between communities. Communities have already

sold all the land, leaving none for the youth. The Youths proposed solution was to go

back to MINFOF and renegotiate boundaries of the Protected Areas to make room

for future farming needs.

• Women: Support family agriculture. Many Common Initiative Groups (CIGs) are only

on paper. The Government should give help to families with priority to CIGs.

• Government: On the issue of farmland, MINADER stated that they are supporting

farming cooperatives. They are identifying considerable areas for farmland. The

Ministry of Agriculture will be distributing tractors to farmers, and they therefore

expect them to have access to land. Farmers are being encouraged to move to

second generation agriculture. They can only do this if they can locate areas of land

for that purpose. According to the OHADA “Uniform Act relating to Cooperative

Companies Law” (adopted on 15 December 2010) all CIGs are supposed to be

transformed into cooperatives. These cooperatives should be business inclined and

profit-making. Areas should be identified for maize cultivation, cassava production.

He said it was important to organise farming so that it is possible for the Ministry to

inspect, etc.

• MINEPIA: Recommended intensifying livestock production on smaller areas of land.

On the question of how to secure community farmland:

• MP: If you break land down to the individual level, one can then give title to

individual land owners. One can use the community maps to secure title for

communities / individuals.



• Chief: The chief with money can clear more land than poor people, which is unfair.

We need to think how to address this.

Question 2. How to secure forests for future needs of Community?

Nguti has experience with creating Community forests:

• How did you choose the areas for your community forests?

• What have you learned from the experience?

• How would you do it better in future?

• Do any other communities in Nguti Municipality want to create their own Community

Forest?

Answers:

• Chiefs: Some traditional areas were put aside by our forefathers as community

forests. But the youth now want to clear it for farming. The forest has a boundary with

the neighbouring village. There are conflicts over this land. For now, people are

hunting there. They need to clarify the use of these areas for the future. This raises

many challenges. He concluded that the village needs help to develop a community

forest.

• Youths: In the case of Manyemen Community Forest, some people fear that

individuals will benefit, but not the overall community. Some farms were already

inside the community forest before it was created. The question is now whether these

farmers should be forced to quit or not. They want to demarcate the farms within the

community forest. In future, they need to give enough buffer zones around

community forests to allow space for future activities.

• Women: There is a need to identify the benefits of the forest to the community and

to allow space for development. Some former villages, that have been abandoned by

people who have moved to other areas, should be reallocated to be used for other

things.

• Government: Management of a community forest is an agreement between

government and the community. The community create a Village Forest Management

Committees (VFMC). If VFMC brings up an issue to DO or Chief of Post, it is assumed

to be a valid concern. In order to secure farmland within permanent forests or

community forests, people need to bring the issue up through the VFMC.

• Private sector: Alfred Akumsi (Herakles Farms) expressed that he is very happy with

this exercise and the proposal to prepare a local land use plan. But he stressed that



this should have been done six years ago. If all the community interests were on a

common map, it would have been much easier to identify where investors can and

cannot go. That is why Herakles boundary lines pass through farms and not through

Forest Reserves.

• CED: The procedures to get Community Forests are too complicated and expensive

for communities. Herakles did prepare maps of community farmland, but they had

their own interests. During the field surveys, when the survey team got to the end of

big farms they said they were tired and stopped – so the smaller farms further into

the forest were included in Herakles leasehold.

Question 3. How to negotiate with Government / Conservation Organisations for

Protected Areas?

Nguti has experience with negotiating with Government over the creation of Protected Areas

and boundaries.

• How did you negotiate with Government?

• What have you learned from the experience?

• How do you think it could be done better in future?

Answers:

• There was no time to discuss this topic during the plenary, but various comments

during the workshop suggested that some communities had not been adequately

consulted during the establishment of new Protected Area boundaries and that there

was need to revisit some of them in light of current pressures on land.

• This question will need to be addressed during any local land use planning process in

future.

Question 4. How to identify areas for ‘development’ that are available to outsiders?

Many people are looking for land: locals, nationals, and foreigners. Nguti therefore has

experience of negotiating with outsiders.

• What have you learned?

• If you had to identify land for investors (or smallholders), how would you do it this

time?

• What type of investor do you want in Nguti?



Answers:

• There was no time to discuss this topic during the plenary, but various comments

during the workshop suggested that some communities did not feel that the

government had consulted with them adequately during the allocation of land to

outside investors. Herakles expressed that they intend to set aside about 30% of the

forested land within their concession for conservation and community use. This

suggests there is still an opportunity for communities to negotiate which areas within

the Herakles lease should be retained as forests.

• This question will need to be addressed during any local land use planning process in

future.

Question 5. How to identify priorities for government investment in road

infrastructure?

Nguti has prepared its Community Development Plan:

• How do you map the roads and paths you use and the state that they are in?

• How do you prioritise the areas that need to be dis-enclaved with better roads?

• How can you do this better?

Answers:

• Chiefs: have written several letters to DO. Finally had a visit from DO and the MP and

hope that they will get a better response. But not yet solved. Some communities are

only 25 minutes from the road, but across the Moungo River. There is need for a

bridge. About 10-15 villages could benefit from that road so it is a top priority. Put it

in their Council Development Plan. If maps can give an opening that show there is a

problem with transport, it might help. It is dangerous for communities without a

bridge. Nguti Sub-Division is one of the most enclaved. If there is a way to strengthen

the argument with maps, it would be good. People still use headload for many

kilometres. The issue of roads should be highlighted. Especially those on the other

side of the Banyang Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary (BMWS).

• The Chief of one Lower Nkongo Mbo village trekked 17 hours to get to where there

is a bike. He then had to pass through three regions to get back to the Nguti

Municipal Headquarters in the South West. Government should degazette part of the

Banyang Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary (BMWS) so that a road can leave Nguti to the

hinterland. Conservation should not be “killing people” through refusing the

construction of roads, which makes the hinterlands accessible.



• He suggested that they need to create a new administrative unit for the enclaved

areas to the East of BMWS.

• The Nguti Sub-Division has been hijacked by a few individuals who were fortunate

enough to be blessed by education from their ancestors. Today we are crying about

the Mbo Hinterland but this is not a new cry. It has been an issue for generations.

Sincerely speaking a PNDP diagnostic study and preparation of the Council

Development Plan was prepared by one of the Chief’s colleagues but it was poorly

done. Need to act now to balance development in the Municipality.

• Chief of Lekwe: Very happy about this workshop. Mbo hinterland – Only three

priorities: 1. Road, 2. Road, 3. Road!!! There is too much suffering in that area.

• Youths: Nature Cameroon advised that government should not degazette any part of

the Protected Areas. He said they were gazetted with the support of the Chiefs. But

he agreed that we need to find a balance between conservation and livelihoods.

• It was also stressed that better data can support better lobbying for development: the

villages of Nguti produce a lot of cocoa and coffee. But there is no data on how much

is produced or where. If the Chiefs, or Council, had good data they would be able to

argue better for roads to facilitate the extraction of produce.

• Women: Need to take into account the activities of people within the villages. For

example, women grow crops that they cannot sell, even though they could help the

economy of the country. Rural women are neglected. Activities need to be taken into

consideration. Much of the cassava they convert to fufu and gari but it is very difficult

to process and sell.

• Government: The Assistant Divisional Officer expressed that he is a witness to the

difficult access in Nguti. He added that development follows administration, and the

creation of administrative posts in the hinterland might trigger more development.

• MINEPAT: This year, MINEPAT started the development of a strategic plan of

infrastructure. The database of infrastructure is based on local plans for development

– what they have done with PNDP. If roads that are needed were not included in the

PNDPs, the plan is unlikely to include them. It is not too late to negotiate a contract

plan with MINEPAT. MINEPAT Divisional Delegate: Council Development Plan – It is

true that it has been completed, but it can be updated with PNDP. When they carried

out the exercise, some people thought it would not materialise but MINEPAT is trying

to follow up with implementation.



• EFI Project: we will create a new map layer showing all settlements and all routes out

of villages to support arguments for better infrastructure.

4.7 Closing remarks and vote of support for the project

On behalf of the traditional rulers of the different clans represented, the Chief of Baro

expressed their gratitude to the organisers of the meeting and the other NGOs and

participants especially the Boa Plain community representative who shared their experience

on community land use mapping with them. He thanked the team for bringing this project to

their communities and all the chiefs unanimously approved the next steps of the project and

pledged their support to the project team, who will be sent to the field for data collection.

The chiefs equally nominated Nature Cameroon as the main entry point and link between

communities and the project.

The representatives from MINEPAT expressed their satisfaction with the attendance and

active participation of the participants and reiterated the government’s commitment and

support for the project and requested that the communities become actively involved in the

process, which will contribute to their development.

The second deputy mayor equally thanked the organisers of the launch meeting for the very

informative session and expressed the gratitude of the council to the project for choosing

Nguti Council as the pilot project, and pledged the support of the council in the process.

The Assistant Divisional Officer was equally impressed by the meeting and the positive

attitude of the organisers, especially the Team Leader whose efforts to express himself in the

local language was proof of his commitment and the project to get closer to the

communities. He pledged the support of the local administration to support the project and

continue to push for the disenclavement of the hinterlands and the development of the

council area.



Figure 3. Group photo from the Launch Meeting in Nguti



5. Annexes

Annex 1. Important background information about the project

Annex 2. Letter of Minister MINEPAT to EU Ambassador approving the Project

Annex 3. Mission Schedule - 20–24 April 2015

Annex 4. Attendance list: Regional Project Launch Meeting, Conference Hall of the Regional

Delegation of MINEPAT, 21st April 2015

Annex 5. Agenda for the Buea Meeting – 21st April 2015

Annex 6. Presentation by Professor Soh Fotsing, MINEPAT Minister’s Representative, in Buea

Annex 7. Presentation by the LTS team leader, in Buea

Annex 8. Presentation by the RFUK Project Partners, in Buea

Annex 9. Expectations for local land use planning from the perspective of Stakeholders in Nguti

Municipality – Presentation at Buea meeting

Annex 10. Agenda for the Nguti Meeting – 23rd April 2015

Annex 11. Attendance list: Project Launch Meeting, Council Hall Nguti, 23rd April 2015

Annex 12. Presentation by Prof Soh Fotsing, Minister’s Representative, in Nguti

Annex 13. Presentation by the LTS Project team leader, in Nguti

Annex 14. Presentation of Boa Plain Community mapping Experience

Annex 15. Presentation by CED / Greenpeace Project Partners, in Nguti

Annex 16. Presentation by the “Mapping and Governance in the Congo Basin” Project Partners (RFUK,

FODER and AJESH), in Nguti

Full text of the annexes is in a separate document.

phase i launch workshop report in south ... - euredd.efi.int

Documents