Virunga Park: between nature preservation and population development

2017_analyse_parc_des_virunga_cd.jpg
PDF version

The Virunga Park conceals considerable wealth, but today still suffers from numerous threats both with regard to the protection of the environment and the development of the region and local populations. However, the exploitation of resources, economic development and environmental preservation are not contradictory realities and can converge to benefit the greatest number of people. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo) and all its partners must, through active policies, concentrate their efforts around the preservation of this unique world heritage. 2017_analyse_parc_des_virunga_cd.jpg

The Virunga Park: an incredible wealth in danger Located on the edge of the borders of Rwanda, Uganda and the DR Congo, the Virunga Park is today considered one of the jewels of Africa. The park was created in 1925 by King Albert I with a view to protecting this exceptional area. The richness of the landscapes and the fauna sheltered by the park have earned it recognition as World Heritage by UNESCO in 1979. Made up of swamps, volcanoes, lava plains, savannahs and peaks over 5,000 meters above sea level, the park also benefits from considerable animal biodiversity. Many endemic species [1]Une espèce est dite endémique d’une région si elle existe uniquement dans celle-ci. are in fact recorded there as well as the presence of protected species, such as hippos and mountain gorillas. The presence of this exceptional fauna and flora is of high interest in terms of biodiversity, scientific and ecological research and economic development. The park is also full of a wide variety of resources such as wood, oil and gas. Finally, the volcanic activity of the region makes the soils very fertile and suitable for agriculture. The park is today co-managed by the three states mentioned above. On the Congolese side, the State has created a specific body dedicated to the management of the park: the Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation (ICCN). L'Institute has the mandate “to ensure the protection of fauna and flora, to promote biodiversity by promoting scientific research and facilitating ecotourism activities, and to carry out or have studies carried out and to ensure their popularization for scientific and educational purposes in the field of conservation. It has also set itself the objective of ensuring the conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity in cooperation with local communities and its other partners.” While this exceptional zone should benefit from protection and allow economic development of the region, the resources present there and the desires they arouse are an inexhaustible source of conflicts. Due to the presence of multiple stakeholders, and their often divergent interests, numerous threats weigh on the park today. Since 1994, the Virunga Park has been included by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on the list of world heritage in danger. Its presence on this list was reiterated once again in 2017. Multiple conflicts across the park The presence of conflicting interests makes park management very complex and gives rise to numerous tensions between stakeholders. Thus, there are tensions between, on the one hand, the need for heritage preservation and sustainable management of park resources and, on the other hand, the economic appetites that these arouse among national and international stakeholders, private and public. The pressures weighing on the park's resources are numerous: poaching, deforestation, exploration for the exploitation of underground resources. And can be attributed to the various actors present: State, international companies, rebel groups and even local population... The Virunga Park region is one of the most populated in DR Congo. There is a “ population density varying from 6 to 600 inhabitants/km²; it is on average 300 inhabitants/km².” In comparison, the population density in the rest of the country is 37 inhabitants/km² [2]NGONGO R., March 2015, The vulnerability of protected areas in the DRC: the case of Virunga National Park, p22. Today the Virunga park “has 218 species of mammals including 21… Continue reading. This concentration is mainly the result of the displacement of populations during previous conflicts that took place in the region as well as the general demographic explosion of the continent. While there are approximately 8 million inhabitants around the park, a segment of the population lives within its borders. It was estimated in 2006 that 90,000 people lived within the park. In 2014, theUNESCO however, highlighted a significant increase in the number of people present in the park, despite the evacuations of the population led by the ICCN. This concentration of population is not without consequences on the Virunga park to the extent that it adds additional pressure on its resources. Indeed, the population, as in the rest of the country, suffers from bad governance and lives in very precarious conditions both in terms of security and economics. The populations live mainly from fishing and land exploitation. [3]NGONGO R., March 2015, The vulnerability of protected areas in the DRC: the case of Virunga National Park page 7. It is estimated that 50,000 people depend directly on Lake Edouard and its… Continue reading and their practices lead to degradation of the park. Fishing activities, for example, are not regulated and do not allow sufficient renewal of species, therefore leading to a decline in fish resources. Furthermore, land exploitation also has serious ecological repercussions since it contributes to soil exhaustion, loss of fertility and erosion. The activities of the population also have consequences in terms of deforestation, particularly through the expansion of agricultural fields and the production of charcoal -or makala– made from park wood for heating, lighting and cooking. The eco-makala project – Faced with the population's growing demand for coal, and due to the deforestation that this places on the park, the WWF organization and its partners proposed a coal production project.Eco-makala in 2007. This project is based on the planting of trees around the park to counteract the trees destroyed to make charcoal. 10,000 hectares have already been planted since 2007 and 47,000 are expected to be planted by 2022. The project also facilitates the distribution of low-consumption cooking stoves – which halves the amount of charcoal required for use and also reduces the quantity of CO2 produced. The availability of coal and the organization of its trade also contribute to reducing the illegal production of makala. The project, although it allows small-scale solutions, will not on its own be able to stem the problem of deforestation of the Virunga park which still persists. Between 2001 and 2014 the park lost nearly 23,200 hectares of trees. As coal is not the only cause of deforestation, prevention actions should be more global and develop on a large scale across the different zones of the park. All of these elements are, as we can easily understand, sources of tension between the ICCN, on the one hand, whose mission is to protect the park's resources, and the population, on the other hand, who believe that they have the right to exploit these lands. The conflicts with their respective waves of migration result in the persistence of significant land conflicts in the region. In addition, the creation of the Virunga Park and the various developments in the delimitation of its borders had in fact led to movements of populations who were forced to leave their habitat – to relocate outside the limits of the park. Promises of compensation have not always been respected, further fueling the feeling of injustice . Armed groups – The conflicts in the region have also led armed groups to find refuge in the park (FDLR, Maï-Maï, ADF-Nalu, etc.). The latter illegally exploit and profit from its resources. Today they exercise pressures on populations and park employees and were able to take advantage of the tensions between the population and the ICCN to establish their power in the area by, for example, facilitating access to certain farmers in exchange for part of their harvest. Despite the efforts made, the Congolese authorities are struggling to stem this problem and secure the area. Furthermore, the population takes a dim view of the management of certain economic resource exploitation projects developed by the Congolese state in the park, to the extent that they do not benefit them. The local population feels wronged and deprived of potential economic resources drawn from their immediate environment while the majority of them live in a very precarious situation. The Congolese government has, in fact, not always opted for sustainable and inclusive management of the park, as evidenced by the projects for the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas resources in the subsoil of the park by foreign companies in recent years. last years. As we already pointed out in a previous analysis, and although Congolese legislation prohibits extractive exploitation in national parks, exploration concessions were awarded to international companies in 2007: Total, Eni and Soco, for an area covering nearly 85% of the park. Oil exploitation would have serious consequences in terms of environmental degradation, since it would be a direct threat to the park's animals and could also deprive the local population of its income-generating activities (notably fishing). The exploitation of oil and gas present in the subsoil of Virunga, we can never say it enough, is not a sustainable solution. It could pose a threat to the environment and populations, and reflects a utilitarian and short-term vision on the part of national authorities. Oil exploitation could indeed bring foreign currency to the Congolese state. However, we know that oil is a resource that is tending to disappear, which pollutes enormously and which also does not allow stable development for the surrounding areas and populations. Additionally, the price of oil is volatile and has recently collapsed. Is it really necessary to impose the threats posed by oil exploitation on the populations and the park when other solutions could be found that benefit a large section of the population and preserve the environment? Following significant international mobilization, Total and Eni assured in 2013 that they would not continue their exploration work. The departure of the British company SOCO, which planned to extract oil from underground in the park in 2015, marked the relief of the local population as well as many environmental defense organizations. But the threat is not over since it seems that the Congolese government has just reallocated, via an agreement in principle, the SOCO permit to an offshore company “ Oil Quest International ". This news risks refueling the embers of a conflict that we thought was over. Finally, oil exploitation poses a significant risk to the park to the extent that its world heritage status is not compatible with the possibility of exploring and exploiting underground reserves according to the standards of the Cooperation Organization. and Development (OECD) and UNESCO. Also, the reallocation of an operating permit by the DR Congo could lead to the removal of the world heritage park, which would have the serious consequence of breaking down one of the last barriers which still protects today the park of international economic interests . Preservation of the park and economic development of the region: towards sustainable and inclusive management of the park's resources The Virunga Park and the tensions it generates have already caused a lot of ink to flow. Should we exploit the park's resources for economic profit or preserve the environment at all costs? However, the preservation of the park's riches and the economic development of the region do not seem contradictory to us. Indeed, inclusive and sustainable management could enable economic growth, benefit the population, as well as contribute to the pacification of the region. The population surrounding the park, if it is integrated into the management process and benefits from its economic benefits, will be more inclined to respect the rules for protecting natural resources. In the interest of preserving this incredible heritage, the Justice and Peace Commission believes that it is the duty of the Congolese authorities to find and propose a reconciliation between the demands and needs of local populations and the survival and preservation of the park. . In this regard, we can highlight the important role played by Emmanuel de Mérode, director of the ICCN, in recent years. Several projects have in fact been undertaken to provide solutions to this vast challenge, and deserve to be welcomed although they do not always bring the expected results. The Congolese government, through the ICCN, launched in 2008 the Virunga Alliance. The project aims to bring together around the table all the key players in the park: national institutions, the private sector as well as the local population, for an inclusive dialogue, allowing the implementation of a common project for the sustainable development of Eastern Congo. The project revolves around the development of four themes: renewable energy, sustainable fishing, agro-industry and tourism. The benefits of this project must be shared between the population, who will benefit from its economic spinoffs (access to electricity, improvement in agricultural yields, job creation and increased income), and on the other hand, the park itself which will now be more protected against threats of illegal exploitation of its resources. Efforts were firstly focused on the development of renewable energy, the keystone of the project since it allows direct benefits in the various areas mentioned above. In 2010, the first hydroelectric power station was inaugurated in Mutwanga. It has a production capacity of 0.4 megawatt (MW) of electricity which can benefit more than 3,600 households (or around 30,000 people). In 2015, a second plant was inaugurated by President Kabila in person in Matebe; it has a capacity of 13.6 MW. End of 2018, the construction of the third power station in Lubero should be completed and produce 12.8 MW. Rutshuru – The population welcomed the construction of the power station with enthusiasm. In certain chiefdoms, the population, after being made aware of the merits of protecting the park, joined the project and even graciously offered 6 hectares of their land for its development.. As featured in the documentary “Virunga of hope for an entire people» [4]Documentary film: “Virunga, hope for an entire people”, directed in 2014 by Nicolas Delvaulx. , the production of electricity makes it possible to reduce the pressure exerted on the park's resources and in particular deforestation. In fact, it reduces residents’ dependence on makala from the park. Furthermore, electricity helps improve agricultural yields, the development of trade and the emergence of a local industry. As soon as the first power plant was commissioned, many investors arrived in the region. This led, for example, to the creation of a soap factory, which employs 250 people and produces 40 tons of soap per day. The construction of hydroelectric power stations therefore provides positive benefits for the population. This solution cannot, however, be considered a miracle solution insofar as this type of construction can also lead to negative impacts on the environment and in particular due to the modification of the natural environment by humans and changes what this means for the local fauna and flora. Furthermore, the objectives are not always achieved. The electricity production of the Matebe power station for example peaks today at 3MW for a production capacity of 13.8 MW. The high cost (223$ US) of joining the distribution network allows only a small segment of the population to have access to it. The results therefore need to be qualified. The Alliance Virunga project also plans to solve the problem of overexploitation of fish from Lake Edward by teaching the population better fishing techniques, improving the packaging (cold chain) and marketing processes. The latest state report, however, qualifies the achievement of the expected results: “[fisheries governance] remains characterized by legal conflicts, de facto situations and the illegal exploitation of fish resources by armed groups. The park continued its efforts to maintain the sustainability of fisheries resources [5]Or living aquatic resources. by controlling the number of canoes and fishing equipment, by ensuring the protection of spawning grounds [6]Place where fish reproduce. and fighting against armed groups. Excessive fishing, however, remains a major danger in the medium and long term » . Finally, the development of tourism [7]Beltrade, September 2016 – January 2017, Economic News Bulletin, page 48 constitutes the fourth pillar of the project. It mainly focuses on the quality of the park, the presence of gorillas, or the possibilities for hiking on the volcanoes. Investments are planned in the development of infrastructure and training of reception staff. The Alliance Virunga project provides that 30% of the income generated from the park will be invested in projects for the population. Thanks to this agreement, ten schools and health clinics have already been built as well as more than 53 km of road which allow farmers to sell their crops on the markets. The construction of power plants: a step forward against violence against women? Indirectly, the creation of these power plants protects women who, thanks to electricity, no longer have to go into the forest to collect firewood. However, it is often in these isolated places that women suffer sexual violence. All these activities help create income for the population. Furthermore, according to the researchers, other income could also be derived from the park, particularly through the sale of plants for pharmaceutical use (1.5 million US dollars/year) and research on wildlife and the flora of the park (4 to 5 million per year). In 2013, the total value of the park, in a “stable situation, conducive to economic growth and tourism, [was estimated at] more than 1.1 billion US dollars per year and [could generate] more than 45,000 jobs » . The project therefore provides direct benefits from the operation of the park for local populations even if certain results need to be qualified. It also provides for active consultation of residents. In his latest report to UNESCO, the Congolese government indicated that the ICCN was pursuing its objective of dialogue with local populations and pacification of their relationship. In this context, several activities were carried out in 2016 such as continuing dialogue with traditional leaders, consulting local associations and setting up local community committees. It remains difficult to access information relating to these initiatives, which raises questions about the transparency of the process. This question also deserves to be raised with regard to the private sector which also participates in the Virunga Alliance project. It is difficult to know who the representatives of this sector are today. However, it seems necessary for the proper functioning of the project to be able to identify these actors and the origin of the funds, so as to prevent and, if necessary, identify possible attempts at corruption, for example. Furthermore, and this is a condition sine qua none for the success of the project, the government must increase its efforts in securing the park, which remains a major obstacle to the development of the project. The presence of armed groups in the park continues to fuel illegal resource trafficking and endangers the population and park rangers – several of whom died during the summer of 2017. Finally, this insecurity harms the preservation of the park. park, as well as the development of tourism. The security situation in eastern DR Congo is a challenge that goes beyond the strict borders of the park and that the authorities must try to resolve as quickly as possible given the numerous nuisances that this causes to the country as a whole as well as to the States. neighbors. Although the main responsibility for resource protection lies with the Congolese authorities, projects such as that of Eco-makala have the merit of showing that alternatives exist and are feasible. Justice and Peace encourages this type of initiative and reminds Belgium that it is important to support them. Belgium, like the other member states of the European Union, has a moral duty to contribute to the preservation of world heritage of which Virunga Park is a part. European states also have pragmatic reasons to do so. As part of initiatives to combat global warming, it is worth emphasizing that the park represents, like the Amazon, a real lung of the earth and that its deforestation would have dramatic consequences. Arjuna Decaro and Clara Debeve, Based on the reflection initiated by the members of the Central Africa group of Justice and Peace.

Attachments

Virunga Park between nature preservation and sustainable development

Notes

Notes
↑1 Une espèce est dite endémique d’une région si elle existe uniquement dans celle-ci.
↑2 NGONGO R., March 2015, The vulnerability of protected areas in the DRC: the case of Virunga National Park, p22. Today the Virunga Park “has 218 species of mammals including 21 endemic to the Rift, 706 species of birds including 23 endemic, 109 reptiles including 11 endemic, 78 species of amphibians including 21 endemic, 21 species of endemic butterflies, 2,077 plants including 230 endemic species.
↑3 NGONGO R., March 2015, The vulnerability of protected areas in the DRC: the case of Virunga National Park page 7. It is estimated that 50,000 people directly depend on Lake Edouard and its fish for food and employment.
↑4 Documentary film: “Virunga, hope for an entire people”, directed in 2014 by Nicolas Delvaulx.
↑5 Or living aquatic resources.
↑6 Place where fish reproduce.
↑7 Beltrade, September 2016 – January 2017, Economic News Bulletin, page 48
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Print
E-mail

In the news

Stay informed

Subscribe to our online newsletter and receive complete monthly information.

Register

Get involved with us!

I'm in

Follow us on the networks

Facebook X-twitter Linkedin Youtube Instagram Envelope
With the support of :

Privacy Policy | Justice & Peace – Chaussée Saint-Pierre, 208 at 1040 Brussels Tel: +32 (0) 2 896 95 00 info@justicepaix.be | WebDesign by Suburbs asbl

Our queer news in your inbox?

Complete this form to be kept up to date with our educational news (training, educational tools, etc.)

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Firstname name