Biodiversity conservation is critical for the continued supply of ecosystem services to secure the sustainability of livelihoods, especially for poor rural people. Therefore, current rates of biodiversity loss, which threaten human survival, need to be curbed using effective interventions. Implementation and decision-making on interventions require timely information. Undertaking a Sustainability Assessment (SA) and structuring this information within a SA framework of components and objectives is one effective way to aid decision-makers. An effective SA framework addresses key sustainability issues and priorities that are aligned with the regulatory policy and legal framework, as well as stakeholder aspirations. Sustainability Assessment development and application is evolving and is more widespread in developed countries than developing countries. Hence, this study sought to investigate how to apply SA in a participatory manner within rural areas in a developing country. Key objectives of the study focused on: i) identification of key aspects that make a SA framework effective; ii) mechanisms of effectively incorporating participation into SA processes; iii) investigations of the perceptions of stakeholders regarding the ecosystem and human conditions required for the sustainability of biodiversity conservation; and iv) determination of stakeholder perceptions on progress towards sustainability. The study was conducted in Lesotho within a trans-boundary project area. The project is known as the MDTP and is a collaborative initiative between Lesotho and South Africa to conserve globally significant biodiversity. A qualitative case study approach was employed through a combination of techniques including a literature review, field observations, key informant interviews, group discussions and workshops to collect data. Study participants consisted of MDTP partners at the national, district and local levels, and some members of the general community. Two SA tools were applied in a complementary manner during the study, namely the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) SA approach and the Community Sustainability Assessment (CSA) approach, developed by the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN). Experiences of applying sustainability assessment in both developed and developing countries revealed that an overall generic SA tool is not practical. There is a need for a context-specific framework consisting of principles, criteria, generic steps, objectives, indicators, a toolkit and other context-specific components. The SA framework employed in this study had to fit biodiversity conservation conditions in rural areas. The SA process revealed that the MDTP partners were knowledgeable about the conditions of sustainability and threats to biodiversity, while members of the general community were unaware of these threats. Regarding progress towards the sustainability of biodiversity in the study area, the results indicated that current practices are unsustainable, more from the point of view of the socio-ecological components than the socio-cultural and spiritual or the socio-economic components. Consequently, there is a need to raise awareness at the community level and implement action plans to realize changes that support the sustainability of biodiversity in the long-term. Key components for a participatory SA framework depend on whether a SA is a partial assessment or a full one. The components of a partial SA framework also depend on whether the focus is on reflection and learning or data handling. Hence, the main components of a participatory sustainability assessment framework comprise: a comprehensive vision of sustainable development; goals towards attaining the vision; a participatory process engaging various stakeholders; a toolkit of appropriate SA tools used for various tasks; relevant principles of sustainability assessment; and sustainability-led decision criteria. There is no blueprint on how to undertake a SA process and no rigid way of integrating participation within the SA processes. The application of a SA requires adaptability and flexibility in specific circumstances. Therefore, the study presents guidelines, key components of a participatory SA process, and highlights the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for applying a SA for biodiversity conservation in rural areas. Key words: sustainability assessment, stakeholder participation, environmental assessment, biodiversity conservation, rural areas, sustainability assessment framework.

The tasks of managing and protecting South Africaâs water resources are being performed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), although the requirement to protect water resources are also entrenched in the policies and acts of other departments. DWAF has also recognized over the past ten years the importance of international co-operation with regards to water issues. As part of South Africaâs commitment to the realization of Agenda 21 and related international water management commitments, the South African Department of Water Affairs and Forestry has committed itself to participating in the Global Surface Water Quality Monitoring Programme. The programme falls under the management of the United Nations Environmental Programme and is administrated by the UN Global Environmental Monitoring System/Water Programme (GEMS/Water). The aim of the study was to develop a strategy that would enable SA to effectively participate in this global water quality monitoring programme, by making use of existing programmes and infrastructure. A very important aspect of this study was also to test the scientific and operational ability of SA to honour this commitment, as the submission of unreliable and irrelevant data for use in international reports by the UN can lead to embarrassment on a political level. Clear objectives, based on international requirements, were formulated to serve as the basis for the design of a scientifically sound monitoring system. Three different types of monitoring data, namely global river flux, global trends, global baseline data were identified as the main focus areas. A wide variety of techniques such as statistical analyses of national water quality data, specialist workshops, meetings with international data users, geographic information system (GIS), performance auditing of existing monitoring programmes and extensive field visits were used to design a monitoring system that would enable SA to meet the set objectives. Special attention was also given to the design of a comprehensive ISO 9001:2000 based quality management system and operational structures that would ensure the production and submission of reliable data in a sustainable manner. The importance of producing a documented monitoring strategy cannot be over emphasized. Such a strategy must clearly link the information needs with monitoring objectives, which in turn must be clearly linked to the design of the monitoring programme During the design process a number of potential shortcomings in the existing systems and programmes were identified and specific recommendations are made. Some of the main recommendations related to the implementation of a quality management system for new and existing national monitoring programmes, placement of sampling sites, alteration of sampling frequencies and expansion of monitoring variables currently being tested for. It was finally concluded that South Africa does have the ability to honour their commitment to the UN GEMS/Water Programme, provided that the recommendations emanating from this study are implemented.

Global land use trends have resulted in extensive transformation and loss of biodiversity in natural landscapes. In South Africa these trends are apparent in the Grassland Biome. Although it has a very high level of biodiversity and provides essential ecosystem services for economic development, only 2% is formally protected and it is one of the most threatened biomes in the country. With over 60% transformed and less than 1% formally protected, the Mistbelt Grassland of KwaZulu-Natal is a priority for urgent conservation attention. The continued transformation of natural landscapes due to economic pressures and the limited opportunity for an increase in protected areas where production and development needs must be met, presents a challenge to biodiversity conservation. This study was motivated by the need for a strategic focus in the evaluation of the impacts of land use on the biodiversity integrity of landscapes in order to facilitate integrated environmental management and guide land use decisions that would promote conservation of biodiversity and sustainable development. A methodology for this evaluation is proposed that exploits the hierarchical approach to characterizing biodiversity and employs multi-criteria analysis in the form of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and decision-making by experts. Separate evaluations of the impacts of land use on biodiversity integrity in the Mistbelt Grassland of KwaZulu-Natal and the moist sub-biome of the Grassland Biome were conducted to examine the application of the methodology at the vegetation-type and biome levels. Accordingly, five land uses and fourteen biodiversity indicators were selected for the Mistbelt Grassland study, and ten land uses and fifty-two indicators for the Grassland Biome study. Indicators for the integrity of landscape composition, structure and function were selected. The overall relative weights for land uses were obtained from rankings of the impacts of each land use on indicator criteria. Relative impacts of land uses on landscape composition, function and structure were consistent and provided an unambiguous statement of the overall impact on biodiversity integrity. The greatest impact of land use was associated with that on landscape structure and was the result of the extent of transformation and fragmentation. The integrity of grassland habitat is important for landscape composition, while nutrient leakage and fire regime are considered important for landscape function. Urban settlements were considered to have the greatest negative impact on biodiversity, while timber plantations, croplands and rural settlements also had a high impact. Pastures and livestock ranching were associated with low impacts. Against the benchmark of conservation, activities like game ranching, livestock ranching and tourism accounted for slight impacts on biodiversity integrity and are recommended for the maintenance of landscape biodiversity. While timber plantations, dairy farming, rural settlements and croplands were considered to make little contribution to the maintenance of biodiversity, their spatial orientation was considered to be critical for the maintenance of regional connectivity and the biodiversity integrity of the greater landscape. In accordance with the methodology employed and insights obtained in the evaluation of land use impacts on biodiversity integrity, the Land Use Evaluation Model is proposed as an integrated environmental management tool. Within a single integrated, cost-effective evaluation procedure that allows for input by key stakeholders, the hierarchy of decisions in the Analytic Hierarchy Process can be expanded to accommodate a limitless number of indicator criteria to rank the impacts of alternative development plans or projects on the social, economic and biodiversity components of the environment. An examination was made of the Land Use Evaluation Model in strategic environmental assessments and its role in facilitating environmental impact assessment and the integrated development planning processes.

The South African National Water Act adopted in 1998, is implemented by means of the National Water Resource Strategy. The NWRS provides the framework for the management of the water resources. Some of the protective measures are designated Resource Directed Measures such as the establishment of the Reserve. The NWA establishes the âReserveâ consisting of an unallocated portion of water that is not subject to competition with other water uses. It refers to both the quality and quantity of water and is made up from two distinct parts, namely the basic human needs reserve and the Ecological Reserve. The Ecological Reserve describes the quantity, quality and flow variability required to protect and maintain the aquatic ecosystems of the water resource on a sustainable basis. All other water demands are controlled by permits and licenses and met only after the Reserve is secured. The Ecological Reserve has to be set for every major river in the country to be able to comply with the NWA. Most of the rivers, except the largest rivers in the semi-arid west of southern Africa, are non-perennial with variable flow regimes, governed by stochastic events, with the highest variability in intermittent and ephemeral rivers. This variability is a key factor in shaping the biotic community structure of ephemeral or non-perennial systems. The hypothesis for the research was that the current, existing water quality methodology for determining the water quality component of the Ecological Reserve, which was developed for perennial rivers, could be used for non-perennial rivers. This hypothesis was addressed in a phased approach. The existing methodologies were identified through a literature review and from the information collected it was decided to use the holistic approach methodologies. The Proposed method described and approved by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry for use on the perennial rivers was applied to the Seekoei River, an example of a typical non-perennial river. The existing methodology could be used as it is for the water quality component of the Reserve determination. However, the fish, invertebrate and riparian vegetation components of the existing methodology had severe limitations and an alternative methodology was proposed. Six limitations were identified from the Seekoei River study for all the components and were the following: the establishment of reference conditions; suitable hydrological modeling; understanding pools and the connectivity between pools; the surface water/groundwater interactions and the extrapolation of data. When comparing the DWA Proposed methodology (Eight step method) applied to the Seekoei River and the Prototype Methodology (Eleven phase method) as applied to the Mokolo River there were several similarities for the water quality input into both methodologies: ï· An understanding of the catchment to be able to identify the water quality constituent that will be important for that specific river is required. ï· Water quality data, both historical and present day data are required â more data are better and improve the confidence in the output. ï· Standard water quality methods could be applied to both methodologies. ï· Both require input into a model where response curves were drawn based on different future catchment development scenarios. The water quality component did not change from the Seekoei River application as the basic steps were the same. The standard methods could be applied to the Mokolo River. The current methodologies were equally usable to determine the water quality component of the Ecological Reserve for non-perennial rivers as the same basic methods were used to determine the water quality component of the Reserve. The limitations identified in the Seekoei River study were also the limiting in the Mokolo River study. The key issue is the hydrological modelling. Without a suitable hydrological model the other the other limitations can also not be addressed. The lack of water quality data remains the single most challenging aspect of determining the water quality status of a river, perennial and non-perennial, especially the lack of historical data. One should be cautious in interpreting once-off sampling data or patchy historical data. The confidence in the data used for the EWA sites were low in many instances as a result of either very little data to no data or patchy historical data. This underlines the importance of systematic monitoring over time, as sampling once is not sufficient to draw credible conclusions. The only way to compensate for a lack of date is to use expert knowledge, local knowledge and catchment information (land use, potential pollution sources, soil types, land cover and geology).

Human-wildlife conflict is affecting a number of aspects of society as a result of increased competition for resources such as food and space. To address the complexity, management of human wildlife conflict needs to be innovative to achieve a difficult but possible win-win solution for both humans and wildlife. As an important form of human-wildlife conflict, aircraft-wildlife collisions (AWCs), more commonly known as bird strikes, require even greater imagination and innovation to solve. AWCs have the potential to cause loss of life to humans, and annual losses in damages as a result of such collisions runs in excess of US$ 3 billion per year to the aviation industry. Due to lack of accurate reporting of AWCs in Namibia (and Africa as a whole) losses have been impossible to quantify locally. In addition to direct damage, airlines, airports and individuals have been litigated in Europe and the USA for indirect damages resulting from AWCs. A number of studies have identified an increasing trend in AWCs globally as a result of higher flight volumes and increases in risk bird populations. Flight safety in Africa is of concern internationally, and AWCs are an important safety aspect which need to be understood better. Very little empirical research on the extent or causes of AWCs in Africa have been published. At Namibiaâs two major airports, Hosea Kutako International and Eros (domestic), 128 AWC incidents were recorded between 2006 and 2010. Although none led to human injury or death, two major incidents lead to costs in excess of N$ 20 million and N$ 1million respectively. Publications on AWC minimisation strategies and techniques on the continent are limited to South Africa and Uganda. This is problematic, as mitigation measures for AWCs in Africa are therefore mostly based on research in foreign ecosystems; while we know that local knowledge of AWC factors, such as bird and mammal population dynamics and climatic seasonality are critical to the success of AWC management. This study is the first scientific investigation into any aspect of AWCs in Namibia. It aims to understand the relationship between ecosystem components and their effect on the risk of aircraft-wildlife collisions occurring at Hosea Kutako and Eros airports. Monitoring of ecosystem components such as insects and small mammals are useful to airport wildlife management as they are relatively quick and inexpensive tools for determining ecosystem health and functioning and can indicate varying environmental contexts and responses. These ecosystem components and others such as vegetation and avian communities were explored. The study found that modelling the abovementioned ecosystem factors to predict the risk of AWCs would be marginally accurate, but still useful in understanding the system, as well as the effects of various management actions on that system. Systems modelling was found to have the potential to map the complexity of influences on AWCs and make them understandable to airport management in order to allow more informed decision making and resourcing regarding the management of AWC risk. The international obligation placed on airport staff to control wildlife hazards in the vicinity of airports is often difficult to fulfil, especially at smaller airports or in countries with inadequate resources and capacity. In addition to this, research into wildlife habitat, species and their habits at airports has predominantly originated in Europe and North America, and hence mitigation measures are most effective in these conditions, and less effective elsewhere. Based on the context of its literature and empirical research, this study proposes a toolkit which was designed to guide airports in Southern Africa to minimise risk of aircraftwildlife collisions. It is based on the understanding of ecosystems in the vicinity of the two airports on which this study was based, but also on the broader understanding of capacity and resources available to many Southern African countries. It also considers the recommended practices of ICAO, global best practice and promotes a multi-stakeholder management approach.