Workshop report. Environmental data management in Tanzania

Transcription

1 Workshop report Environmental data management in Tanzania October 2014 Giraffe Ocean View Hotel Dar es Salaam Ragnvald Larsen

2 Report version: Version 1.0, 9 th of December 2014 Author contact information: Chief Engineer: Ragnvald Larsen rla@miljodir.no Cell: Web:

3 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Table of contents Executive summary... 5 Introduction... 7 Workshop review... 8 Program... 8 Outputs... 9 Evaluation of the workshop The necessities of coordinating environmental information Data sharing in Tanzania Environmental Information Network explained Designing a MoU for EIN in Tanzania Date and partners Recitals Scope Commencement and duration Responsibilities of the parties Miscellaneous Signatures Definitions and references The process ahead - timeline Concluding remarks Appendix A: Proposed EIN stakeholders Appendix B: Participants Appendix C: Workshop program Tuesday 21 st of October Wednesday 22 nd of October Thursday 23 rd of October Appendix D: Evaluation form and responses Appendix E: MoU draft per October References

4

5 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Executive summary The purpose of the workshop was to raise awareness on environmental data management and discuss a way forward towards national level coordination of environmental data and data management. The workshop participants all represented important owners and managers of environmental data in Tanzania. The dialogue and presentations at the workshop pointed to the importance of establishing standards and procedures for sharing environmental information in Tanzania. Currently the lack of afore mentioned has negative implications on the following: coordinated efforts towards cross sector inventories of environmental assets; environmental impact assessments of various sizes; the establishment and continuous maintenance of emergency response systems; and other efforts related to collection, storing and dissemination of environmental information. The workshop advice was that the establishment of an Environmental Information Network (EIN) headed by NEMC and supported by the stakeholders represents a rational way forward. A Memorandum of Understanding for an EIN was discussed. NEMC has a position to take the lead in bringing this process forward. The report sums up the workshop. The author, Ragnvald Larsen, also gives advice for the process towards an environmental information network in Tanzania for the purpose of promoting a knowledge based management of the environment. The workshop and associated processes are funded by the Norwegian government through the Oil for Development Program coordinated by NORAD the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. 5

6

7 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Introduction The 21 st to the 23 rd of October 2014 a workshop on data sharing was held at the Giraffe Ocean View Hotel in Dar es Salaam. It was organized NEMC Tanzania in collaboration with the Norwegian Environment Agency. A representative from the Environmental Protection Agency in Ghana also contributed to the workshop. The purpose of the workshop was to raise awareness on environmental data management and discuss a way forward towards national level coordination of environmental data and data management. The role of the Norwegian Environment Agency in this workshop was to contribute to this process through the facilitation of discussions, presentations and dialogue with the participants. The participants were representatives from owners and users of environmental data in Tanzania. The Norwegian Oil for Development project funded the workshop. This report is been written by Ragnvald Larsen to make information about the process available for the workshop participants, prospective stakeholders, researchers and for our own future reference on the process. It represents the views of the author. References to participant points of view will also be included. In the following chapters, the report will give an overview of the following chapters: The necessities of coordinating environmental information (page 12) explaining why this is important and why it is funded by the Oil for Development program. Data sharing in Tanzania (page 14) is a short recap of the status for data sharing in Tanzania. It points to the work on establishing a National Spatial Data Infrastructure and how the workshop and follow up by NEMC can be part of this bigger picture. Environmental Information Network explained (page 17) by showing how this is a pan-african initiative where UNEP has been tasked with facilitating and supporting the initiative. Designing a MoU for EIN in Tanzania (page 20) is a chapter with feedback from the participants as well as comments from the author of this report. The description is based on a MoU developed in Ghana. 7

8 Workshop review This chapter gives an overview of the workshop, the outcomes and a short peek at the evaluation of the workshop. Program The program was for two and a half days. This is a general overview of the program per day: 1. Reference implementations of environmental data management systems in Norway presented. The history of the process to develop a Spatial Data Infrastructure in Tanzania reviewed. Following an overview of an Environmental Information Network, (see Environmental Information Network explained on page 17). The participants presented their own views and understanding of (environmental) data management in Tanzania. The consensus at the end of the first day was that collection, storage and dissemination of environmental data in Tanzania is an area with many challenges. 2. On day two we discussed if and how the initiative to national Environmental Information Networks (EIN) by the African Ministerial Committee for the Environment (UNEP, 2013) could be a solution to the challenges described on day one. Examples from Uganda and Ghana presented by Roger Lewis Leh (EPA, Ghana). Samaki consultants 1 told about their work with a coastal Sensitivity atlas (IPIECA, 2012) in Tanzania (Samaki consultants, 2011). The day concluded with group work on a Memorandum of Understanding for a Tanzanian EIN. 3. The last day, Thursday, we discussed MoU the further and a way forward under the leadership of NEMC was suggested by the participants. An outline of a clearinghouse for internally or externally distributed information under a MoU for the Environmental Information Network presented. The full program is available in Appendix C: Workshop program on page

9 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Dr. Makota discusses the progress of the workshop. Outputs Rather than going into detail on the discussions at the workshop I will list some of the more important discussions at the workshop: The status of environmental data management was discussed in depth. The conclusion was that current practices for collection, standardisation, storage and dissemination does not promote good decision processes. Samaki consultants represented by Mohammed Nur Mohammed gave an account of the complexity of designing the Tanzania Coastal Sensitivity Atlas (Samaki consultants, 2011). An Environmental Information Network (EIN) should be established under the leadership of NEMC. Stakeholders for an EIN was a theme which god much focus. Who are the relevant stakeholders for an environmental information network? Should non-governmental institutions should be potential partners to an EIN. One of the participants suggested that all data owner should have an option to be partners. Other again were solidly suggesting that it should be necessary. 9

10 An account of discussions and presentations at the workshop is found in the following chapters: The necessities of coordinating environmental information on (page 12) Data sharing in Tanzania (page 14) Environmental Information Network explained (page 17) Designing a MoU for EIN in Tanzania (page 20) Mohammed Nur Mohammed from Samaki consultants presents. Mathew Richmond also with Samaki consultants comments. Evaluation of the workshop The author considers this workshop a good start for the process towards better management of environmental information. Most of the invited institutions were present. It is still considered that broader list of stakeholders would be a preference. This will have to be considered for future processes. The environment regulations in Tanzania places a big responsibility on the shoulders of NEMC. Coordinating the work ahead is a big task. The Norwegian Environment Agency will, as part of the Oil for Development Program contribute with advice and facilitation where required. We distributed am evaluation format the workshop. The feedbacks were generally good. Main findings were: Good stakeholder participation, but missing relevant stakeholders was noted

11 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Workshop was considered relevant Facilitation and presentations were considered good The funding partner will take note of the above feedback. The full evaluation feedback is available in Appendix D: Evaluation form and responses on page 37. Presentations in progress. The audience is listening. 11

12 The necessities of coordinating environmental information Tanzania is a partner to the Oil for Development (OfD) program. The aim of the OfD programme is to reduce poverty by promoting economically, environmentally and socially responsible management of petroleum resources. In an early report from Oil for Development (Norad, 2007) the programs environmental pillar was explained this way: To ensure a sustainable development, it is vital that the exploration and the production of oil and gas resources are carried out without negative long-term effect on the environment. The main challenges are: Taking environmental issues into account in an adequate way when opening areas for drilling and production Carrying out risk assessments and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), and act in line with the conclusions Taking action to avoid accidental pollution and reduce the consequences in case of spills Carrying out environmental monitoring as part of the running activities Limiting the discharge and emissions of hazardous or harmful substances to the air, water and soil Planning and carrying out shut-down and decommissioning in an environmentally acceptable manner Avoid flaring of gas except for safety reasons The environment pillar is an important part of the support to handle planning and emergency response activities related to the development of the Tanzanian petroleum resources. Data management is one of the areas prioritized for collaboration between NEMC and NEA. Environmental data management is a crucial part of any decision making related to the regional, national and global aspects of the environment. Good decisions rest on good quality, up to date, accessible and relevant information. Emergency response systems relies on good information about sensitive areas and resources. Agreeing and adhering to national and international standards is an integral part of managing spatial data. Knowledge about standards and support to use them is something the Norwegian partners can contribute to.

13 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 In Tanzania many government offices, organizations and companies struggle with the different aspects of collecting, storing and disseminating their own information. The Oil for Development program through the Norwegian Environment Agency recognizes that NEA can give relevant contributions. Through discussions with NEMC it has become evident that coordination of environmental data is a good area for collaboration. The author of this report and one of the workshop facilitators, Ragnvald Larsen, presenting. 13

14 Data sharing in Tanzania We can find the history of the process towards a national spatial data infrastructure in Tanzania described in a paper presented at the XXIII FIG Congress in Munich (Kalande & Ondulo, 2006). It has also been subject to research by the Swedish student Jonas Johansson. Johansson did a field study on Spatial Data Infrastructure in Tanzania in 2006 (Johansson, 2006). Exploring the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Initiative in Tanzania. Johansson interviewed several individuals and organizations central to the development of a NSDI plan in Tanzania: University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS) National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited (TANESCO) University of Dar es Salaam Institute of Resource Assessment (UDSM-IRA) Surveys and Mapping Division (SMD) of the Ministry of Lands and Human Settlements Development Dar es Salaam City Council National Environmental Management Council (NEMC) Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security Department of Survey and Urban Planning, Zanzibar Land and Environment (SMOLE) Soil and Water Ltd Tanzania Meteorological Agency SWECO National Development Corporation (NDC) Swedish Geological In his study, he points to the following findings with regards to funding for the NSDI initiative in Tanzania: Funding has turned out to be a factor in the Tanzanian NSDI initiative. Remaining donor funds from the 2002 Population and Housing Census initially enabled the steering committee to hold a few meetings. When that source was depleted, the potential sources of funding of NSDI at the beginning of 2006 seem to be the involved organisations separately. Interesting research is going on today on the topic of national budgeting and SDI, where cross-agency budgeting for SDI have been presented as an option.

15 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 He also refers to a dialogue with the National Environmental Management Council in Dar where an important issue was raised: Another reason that the steering committee activity has declined, according to NEMC, may be simply that a NSDI is not deemed critical to perform day-to-day work at the involved organisations. Some stakeholders considered this a passing issue and firmly believed that a NSDI will be established soon: Considering global trends however, several respondents believe that NSDI will eventually be established in Tanzania and that it is just a matter of time before that will happen. Based on this report and the paper by Kalande and Ondulo it seems that there is an interest over many years for further work on a National Spatial Data Infrastructure. In a more recent paper (Lubidaa, Pilesjöa, Esplingb, & Runnströma, 2014) base their findings on a questionnaire sent to GIS professionals, predominantly within district GIS officers and some national level institutions. One of their more important findings point to the fact that: [..] a majority of the respondents expressed concern over the low capability of many institutions to collect and manage geographic data in order to cater for the growing demand for geospatial data. The cure is according to the authors: To enhance this, training of staff responsible for spatial data and the establishment of a policy is essential. Their respondents supported this indicating the following: A majority of the responses (79%) showed awareness creation as the main issue to be taken into consideration, while 72% showed lack of policy on the subject matter. Other comments are related to training of staff, storage, and updating issues, as well as the need for a lead organization to oversee SDI implementation. Apart from working on the capacity to collect and store data, it is fundamentally important to establish or acknowledge systems and legal basis for sharing environmental data. Starting up the work with a data exchange mechanism supporting environmental information is in our view a response to the situation description as well as the suggested activities. It is our hope that a bottom up approach related to environmental data infrastructure will increase the institutional as well as thematic capabilities. 15

16 When the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (Kalande & Ondulo, 2006) at some point is established, it is the view of the author of this report that any work related to environmental information must be integrated in a national spatial data infrastructure. On the more informal side the Tanzania GIS User Group (TZGISUG, 2006) deserves some mention. This is a mailing list and informal contact point initiated by David Ericksson, Grant Hopcraft and others in Since then the mailing list has supported thousands of requests for data, contacts and techniques. In 2006 a website was initiated by the author of this report, and has since also supported some data. In around 2012 the caretakers of the website decided against providing data on the website arguing that an official website based on a governmental initiative would be the best way to disseminate such data. I consider the work we now have started on to be an important step forward in establishing systems and practices to support the exchange and use of environmental data in Tanzania. It will however rely on the priorities of Tanzania, NEMC and relevant stakeholder to bring this initiative forward. Establishing a community and practice for sharing environmental data will not only be based on laws and regulations. It will in the end of the day rely on individual capacity, knowledge and motivation of the many professionals involved in the process.

17 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Environmental Information Network explained The Africa Environmental Information Network (AEIN) is a multi-stakeholder capacity building process that aims to harness and enhance access to information and knowledge to support the management of Africa's environmental resources as assets for sustainable development. 2 The AEIN initiative was the outcome of the Africa Environment Outlook preparation process mandated by AMCEN. It is supposed to build capacity for establishing the essential data foundation needed to support country-level sustainable development initiatives, focusing on integrated environmental assessment and reporting. Mr Roger Lewis Leh with the EPA in Ghana explains how Ghana aims at coordinating environmental information. The 11th AMCEN session was held in Brazaville (Congo) the th of May It put forward a request to UNEP in which it was called for the development of an Africa Environmental Information Network. The decision was as follows: Decision 6, 11th AMCEN session Decide: (a) To request the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme to continue mobilizing financial support for capacity-building through 2 (accessed ) 17

18 the Africa Environment Outlook and the Africa Environment Information Network processes and to support the production of the third Africa Environment Outlook report as one of the main components of the programme of work of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment; (b) To call upon Governments to mainstream the findings and policy options identified by the second Africa Environment Outlook report when formulating and implementing their national environmental programmes; ( c) To endorse the proposal for the extension of the Africa Environment Information Network from 12 to 38 countries in Africa to promote data access, sharing and harmonization in the Africa region; (d) To call upon the United Nations Environment Programme to extend further the Africa Environment Information Network to cover all countries in Africa; (e) To call upon Governments to undertake regular national integrated environmental assessments, using Africa Environment Outlook methodologies, to provide input into national reporting processes, making use of the comprehensive Landsat data distributed by the United Nations Environment Programme and data available through other initiatives in Africa, to ensure that the environment is mainstreamed into national plans, including poverty reduction strategy papers. UNEP has since followed up this request tries to implement the request. I see it as important that development cooperation support existing initiatives as far as it is possible. The way I see it AEIN or the national EIN system holds a key to future coordination of environmental information on a pan-african level. In April this year I had the pleasure of being invited to an AEIN network meeting in Kampala, Uganda. The workshop drew representatives form around 20 countries. Its representatives impressed with both presentations and questions. Main contributor and chair of this meeting was Frank Turyatunga, Regional Coordinator in the Division of Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA) at UNEP.

19 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 The Africa EIN as presented by Frank Turyatunga. 19

20 Designing a MoU for EIN in Tanzania The draft MoU used in the workshop has its origins from a similar process in Ghana. The Environment Protection Agency in Ghana in June arranged a workshop for stakeholders to agree on how to coordinate environmental data. This was the conclusion of a process, which involved a survey process with potential data owners and managers, as well as an earlier workshop. After the meeting in June, the MoU was sent to the EIN stakeholders for formal approval and signatures. This chapter and its sub-chaptes provides a walkthrough of what parts amou for EIN could consist of. At this point a future agreement in Tanzania will be subject to internal processes with NEMC as well as consultations with prospective partners. Comments will be incorporated to a new version that will be subject to discussion on a later workshop. The MoU requires information about partners, legal basis, scope, commencement and duration, the responsibilities of the partners, miscellaneous comments and finally signatures by the partners. As external advisers, we try not to have too strong opinions about many of the issues. For us the most important part has been to support the process towards a better practice for sharing environmental information. Tanzania will have to choose an agreement that is suitable for NEMC and partners. The MoU presented here is a work in progress and should not be viewed as anything definite. It is still clear that a MoU will have to be built up of the parts described below.

21 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 The main parts of a memorandum of understanding for an Environmental Information Network. 21

22 Date and partners The first part contains the document title, date and partners. Deciding who the stakeholders are is a big question in a process like this. The following figure shows a comprehensive list of possible partners as discussed at the workshop: List of data owners and potential partners to the EIN in Tanzania as suggested at the workshop. For a tabulated list please have a look in Appendix A: Proposed EIN stakeholders.

23 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Important questions to the establishment are: Should any data owners and users be invited, only bigger owners, only government institutions? What about the status of NGOs and private companies? Should there be a steering committee? If so, how many members? Who should be represented in the steering committee? The answer to these questions and many other questions will probably be different from those in Ghana and Uganda. History, institutional strengths and capacities, individual representatives and other factors will determine the result. Experience from similar processes indicate that the way forward must be based, not only on who the participants are, but also on on merit. The most important organisations in an EIN are the ones that in the end of the day are able and willing to share and use environmental information. Recitals The recitals give an account of the legal basis for the Memorandum of Understanding for the Environmental Information Network. Although this has not been prepared for Tanzania I am sure the Tanzania Environmental Management Act (Tanzania, 2004) will be central. Among relevant parts, a paragraph in chapter 13 - Environmental information, education and research states that: 172. (1) Every citizen of Tanzania shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (2) and regulations made by the Minister, have freedom of access to publicly held information relating to the implementation of this Act and to the state of the environment and actual and future threats to the environment, including any emissions to water, air or land as well as the disposal and storage of hazardous waste. Furthermore: (4) The Director of Environment and the Director General shall have access to information relating to the implementation of this Act and to the state of the environment and to the actual and future threats to the environment including any emissions to water, air or land as well as the disposal and storage of hazardous waste necessary to enable them to carry out their respective duties in 23

24 terms of the provisions of this Act or any other written law relating to the protection of the environment and the utilization of natural resources. (5) It shall be an offence to refuse to give information requested by the Director of Environment or the Director General for the purposes of performance of their respective functions or the exercise of their powers under this Act. In Ghana the Environmental Protection Agency Act (Ghana, 1994) similarly states the following: Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Agency, 1994 (Act 490) mandates the Executive Director or an Officer of the Agency authorised by the Executive Director to request in writing from a person or request a person to attend at a time and place specified in writing to give information which the Executive Director considers reasonably necessary for the purposes of protecting the environment. Tanzania will of course consider which parts of the regulation are relevant to include in the recitations. It would be advisable that knowledgeable lawyers take part in this process to secure its solid basis. Scope Ghana wrote the following in their scope: The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to establish the framework and responsibilities of the parties to ensure effective collaboration with each other on the collection, sharing and management of environmental information for the management and protection of the Ghanaian environment. It is also to ensure that EPA serves as a channel of communication and focal point between the parties to achieve the objective of section 27 of Act 490 and also its mandate as the lead Environmental Agency in Ghana. In short the scope is to promote environmental information exchange and place EPA as the hub of such a practice. Short and to the point. This could probably be written similarly for Tanzania. NEMC will have to consider this in more detail. Commencement and duration This part of the MoU places the work in a temporal context. Providing a starting point and a point at which the agreement can be revised is important.

25 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Responsibilities of the parties The responsibilities of the parties is at the core of what the agreement is all about. It should provide information about administrative issues, who is the lead agency, how meetings are to be organized, what data should be provided and how and more. In Ghana the responsibilities divided in the following sub-chapters: Responsibilities of EPA Responsibilities of the Stakeholder institution Shared responsibilities Funding Data sharing The agreement between EPA and its partners says the following are the responsibilities of EPA: EPA shall; - Serve as the lead Agency and secretariat for the GEIN - Host and coordinate the meetings of the Network - Handle all administrative matters relating to the operation of the Network - Manage and oversee the operation of the EIN clearing house - Receive data and products from the stakeholders for the purpose of the EIN portal and other environmental Products determined by the Network - Solicit for funds for the running of the Network Whereas the stakeholder shall: - Provide thematic data and products to the GEIN for the purpose of building and management of the EIN Portal - Participate in all meetings and deliberations of the GEIN and make contributions as required by the Network Shared responsibilities involve contributions to the formalities for an EIN to work. This involves meetings, contributions to data sharing guidelines, and more. Regulating data sharing could be a very complex issue. In time it might be, but to get the snowball rolling one needs an acceptable level within reach of the stakeholders. In Ghana the data sharing is described this way: - Data may be shared by the owner of the dataset, and will declare ownership or custodianship of the data at the time of provision. - All shared data, metadata, and products shall be free of charge within the GEIN 25

26 and for purposes under GEIN related projects. - Data received from members and used in products should be properly acknowledged. - A clearing house shall be established under EPA. The sharing point makes metadata available for the general public. Open and restricted products are made available through the focal point. Restricted data and products are only accessible for GEIN members. - Members may only distribute their own products. - Data shall be received from members at EPA, reviewed and made available through the EIN portal, which shall be administered by EPA. - Access administration shall be controlled by the secretariat, with the aim of securing coherent chain of custody of data. - The distributed data should be based on national guidelines as prescribe by the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI); and - International standards, such as ISO 19115:2003, for spatial data may also be followed where applicable and relevant. An agreement without clear responsibilities will just become a workshop-club with aimless meetings as their sole outcome. The above could serve as a starting point. I am sure a discussion in Tanzania will have slightly different requirements. Miscellaneous This chapter covers Modification, Termination, Agreement on efforts (Further assurances), Dispute resolution, Confidentiality and Documents and Notices. These are all important parts of a MoU. Modification: How can modifications be made to the MoU? What are the consequences and who s responsibility? Termination: How many days notice should be given for termination of the MoU. Further assurances: Making sure that smaller activities can be associated with the obligations under the MoU. Dispute resolutions: Makes sure that the partners try to solve any discrepancies bilaterally and not involving third parties. This should be done within a given time frame. Confidentiality: Makes sure the partners will not disclose confidential information belonging to the other partners. Documents: Declares that MoU annexes are part of this MoU.

27 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Notices: Makes sure that the partners are clear in their communication with other partners. Signatures The MoU is signed by the contracting partners. The organizations are normally represented by their director or acting director. Definitions and references Some of the terminology and sources for the documents needs further clarifications. Necessary definitions and references should be added in this last part of the MoU. 27

28 The process ahead - timeline Designing a MoU for an EIN in Tanzania will take time. The following figure shows how one could fast track the establishment of an EIN. Even with a process like this establishing a functional EIN will take several years. NEMC should take great care in choosing the initial stakeholders to invite as participants in the EIN. The initial members should be able and willing to contribute quality national data at regular intervals.

29 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Concluding remarks The ambition of the author of this report is to give a basis for the further work towards a system to coordinate environmental data in Tanzania. The ultimate goal for this process is to make sure that our democracies and the politicians have the most relevant and correct information available for their decisions. Being part of establishing, storing and disseminating knowledge is therefore important for all of us. Bad decisions come from the lack of knowledge. The consequences could be all from trivial to the extent of eradicating a species or ecosystem. Good decisions rely not only on the organizations, government bodies, individual researcher, manager, biologist, geographer or other. It also relies on their shared ability to agree on and use standards for the knowledge production and sharing. On a political level it ultimately rely on the politicians ability to use the knowledge base for their decisions. 29

30 Appendix A: Proposed EIN stakeholders Stakeholders, themes for stakeholders mentioned which could be included in the EIN work. The list is based on group work and general feedback at the workshop. Should be covered Themes Fisheries Forestry Resource industry Agriculture General groups All research institutions All institutions dealing with marine and coastal environment All institution dealing with social and economic activities Private sector Private sector Samaki Consultants Ltd. SADA COWI Zanzibar Ministry of land Dept of lands and survey First Vise Presidents office Dept of Environment SMOLE - deals with data Universities University Dodoma College related to natural resources UDSM Institute of Marine sciences GEOLOGY-UDSM Department of Aquatic Sciences and fisheries (DASF ) Institute of Resource Assessment (IRA) Ardhi University School of spatial science School of environmental science and technology Sokoine University of Agriculture NGO International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST) WWF Tanzania Forest Conservation Group SEA SENSE Ministries Ministry Minerals and Energy

31 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Tanzania Petroleum Development Cooperation (TPDC) Ministry of Land Mapping and Surveys Division The National Land Use Planning Commission (NLUPC) Ministry of livestock and fisheries Development Marine parks and reserves unit Ministry of natural resources and tourism Wildlife Division. Tanzania tourist board Antiquities department Ministry of Water RUBADA etc. river basin authorities (Ministry of Water) Institutes TAFIRI TAFORI TAWIRI Tanzania Bird Atlas Tanzania Mammal Atlas Conservation Information Monitoring Unit Other National Bureau of statistics Ngorongoro Conservation Area Authority (NCAA) DSFA-Deep Sea Fisheries Authority National Environment Management Council (NEMC) SUMATRA TANAPA Tanzania Forest Services (TFS) Tanzania Metereological Agency (TMA) Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) Prime Ministers office Prime Minister's Office Regional Administration and Local Government (PMO- RALG) PMO-Disaster management Vise Presidents Office (VPO) Division of the Environment 31

32 Appendix B: Participants S/N INSTITUTION/ORGANISATIO NAME ADDRESS N 1 NEMC Dr. Vedast Makota makota65@yahoo.com 2 NEMC ObadiaMachupa omachupa@yahoo.com 3 NEMC Lewis Nzali lmnzali5@hotmail.com 4 NEMC Elias Chundu echunduu@yahoo.com eliaschundu@gmail.com 5 NEMC Francis Nyamhanga fcesc83@yahoo.com 6 NEMC Edna E.lutanjuka 7 NEMC Athumani Bwanali 8 Marine Parks and Reserves Jarros Mahenge jmahenge@yahoo.com Unit 9 Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Settlement Johnson Kashaija johnsebby2006@yahoo.co m Development 10 MEM-Ministry of Energy and Mona Wahlen mona.wahlen@npd.no Minerals(NPD) 11 SUMATRA Capt. E.E. Marijani emmanuel.marijani@sumat ra.or.tz 12 Samaki Consultant Matthew Richmond matt@samaki.net 13 WCST-Wildlife conservation Paul Nnyiti paulnnyiti@yahoo.com society of Tanzania 14 Marine parksreserve unit Magreth Mchome maggiemchome@gmail.co m 15 Norwegian Environment Ragnvald Larsen rla@miljodir.no Agency (NEA) 16 Vice President s Office Eng. Onespholy okamukuru@gmail.com Environmental Division 17 Ardhi University Dr. Charles Kihauke kihaupe@yahoo.com 18 ArdhiUniversity Dr.AnesMahenge anesimahenge@yahoo.com 19 ArdhiUniversity John Saue saulejohna@gmail.com 20 ArdhiUniversity Dr. Shadrack M.M Sabai sabai@aru.ac.tz sabaismm@gmail.com 21 UDSM-Department of Lulu T. Kaaya lkaaya@udsm.ac.tz Aquatic science and fisheries(dasf) 22 DASF Dr.PaulOnyango onyango-paul@yahoo.com

33 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October DASF Prosper Mfilinge pmfilinge@udsm.ac.tz 24 IMS-Institute of marine Dr. Christopher Muhando cmuhando@gmail.com sciences Zanzibar 25 IMS-Institute of marine Daud J. Msangameno msanga@ims.udsm.ac.tz sciences Zanzibar 26 MNRT-Ministry of Natural Hassan Namkeleja namkeleja@mnrt.go.tz resources and tourism (Wildlife division) 27 MNRT-Ministry of Natural Gwamaka Mwasalemba gwamaka@mnrt.go.tz resources and tourism (Wildlife division) 28 MNRT-Ministry of Natural Ndilahomba Phillip ndilahombap@gmail.com resources and tourism (Beekeeping division) 29 MNRT-Ministry of Natural Ezekielseushi resources and tourism 30 MNRT-Ministry of Natural S.A. Okudo silvanus64@mnrt.go.tz resources and tourism (Wildlife division) 31 Ministry of Livestock & Kimasa Buyomba bujukimu@gmail.com Fisheries Development 32 Marine parksreserve unit Modest Kiwia modestkiwia@gmail.com Samaki consultant 33 Environmental Protection Agency, Ghana 34 Ministry of Livestock & Fisheries Development (fisheriesdepartment) Mohammed Nur Mohammed Rodger Lewis Leh Owen Kibona marijanmn@yahoo.co.uk roger.leh@epa.gov.gh owenmwajeka@yahoo.com 33

34 Appendix C: Workshop program The below is an account of the actual program for the workshop. Tuesday 21 st of October Day one of the workshop is where we hope higher level officers/representatives from the invited institutions will participate. It is an arena where we will avoid the more technical issues, but focus on policy level issues. So this day is where we will map out the challenges of sharing or not sharing environmental information data. It is also where we will put forward the idea of an Environmental Information Network. 09:00 Registration 09:30 Opening - Welcome address, NEMC 09:40 Participants self-introduction 10:00 Environmental data management, current practices ad challenges The perspective of data sharing from NEMC: A legal and regulatory perspective (Vedast Makota) A practical perspective (Obadia Machupa) 10:40 Overview of environment data management in Norway (Larsen) 11:00 Coffee/Tea Break 11:30 Petroleum development and environmental data in Ghana. An overview of challenges and processes. Overview of coastal surveys. What challenges lie ahead in structuring and using the data? Working on environmental issues with the Norwegian Environment Agency (Roger Lewis Leh) 12:00 Brief report from participating institutions on initiatives on national level data management. Possibly a review of the process of establishing a National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Tanzania. 13:00 Lunch 14:00 An African perspective of environmental information management the Environmental Information Network EIN. Examples from Uganda and Ghana. How an agreement was made for a MoU in Ghana. (Lewis Leh and Larsen)

35 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October :00 Coffee/Tea break 15:30 Discussion/plenary. How can we combine our efforts through establishing an EIN network in Tanzania? What are the challenges? What are the potential positive outcomes? 16:30 Close of day 1 Wednesday 22 nd of October Day two of the workshop is where we will keep the discussion on a more practical level. We will have to look at who were present on day one and who are new on day two. We should have a more practical level focus and thus get an overview of the participants/stakeholders data sets if relevant. We should also involve them in thinking towards a national level agreement for sharing environmental data. To get things on a practical level SAMAKI consultants present their work and challenges along the road. 09:00 Registration 09:30 Opening recap from day one (Larsen) 09:40 Participants self-introduction 10:00 A practical approach to data sharing in Norway (Larsen) 10:30 Using spatial data in Tanzania - challenges (Machupa) 11:00 Coffee/tea break 11:30 An overview of the TanSEA project. Data acquisition and management. (Mr Mohammed Nur, Associate and Matthew Richmond, Managing Director of Samaki Consultants 12:00 Discussion 12:20 Participants to fill in form describing of own core data sets/products. Delivered to Akwilapo and Larsen for review. 12:40 Walktrough of the Ghana MoU for EIN (Roger Lewis Leh) 13:00 Lunch 14:00 Walktrough of the Ghana MoU for EIN, continued (Roger Lewis Leh) 35

36 14:15 Group work designing a Memorandum of Understanding for a Tanzania Environmental Information Network. What should go into such an agreement on environmental data sharing and coordination? Note down points from the Ghana EIN which are not acceptable in a Tanzanian context. 15:15 Coffee/tea break 15:45 Group presentations. Outputs to be delivered to Larsen/Akwilapo for review and presentation on Thursday. 16:30 Close of day 1 Thursday 23 rd of October On day three of the workshop we will recap the group work of Wednesday. Larsen and Lewis Leh will give an overview of results from the group work. An outline of the plan for further interaction with the stakeholders will be given by Dr Makota. Suggestion for a national clearing house for environmental data presented. 09:00 Registration 09:30 Opening (Dr Makota) 09:35 Recap from yesterday (Larsen) 09:40 Surveys and mapping (Johnson Kashaija) 10:00 Group work results presented and further discussed. (Larsen/Lewis Leh) 11:00 Coffee/tea break 11:30 Presentation of the essentials of a clearing house. (Larsen) Discussion. 11:40 An outline of the work ahead of us towards a Tanzania EIN (Dr. Makota) 11:55 Evaluation form distributed. 12:00 Close workshop Dr Makota 12:45 Lunch

37 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Appendix D: Evaluation form and responses At the end of the workshop a workshop evaluation form was distributed. 12 forms were returned by respondents to the evaluator Roger Lewis Leh. He completed the evaluation analysis and presents the findings as such: Question 1a: Wanted to know the suitability or otherwise of the Conference Venue The majority of the respondents (70%) were satisfied with the venue with scores from Thirty (30%) said somehow and were clearly not satisfied with the venue. Question 1b: Wanted to know if the participants were satisfied with the servicing of the workshop. All participants indicated their satisfaction with scores ranging from 6-10 indications of being highly satisfied with the servicing of the workshop Question 1c: Was to find out if the facilities provided for the workshop was adequate for the purpose. The response was very positive for this as well with 90% of participants responding with scores of Even the remaining 10% scored 6 which is to say very good. Question 2a: Participation of Stakeholders - this was to find out how well the issues were presented and articulated by the stakeholders. This also was scored by 50% of respondents with the highest score of 10 and the rest was spread between 6 and 9 indicating very good to excellent presentation and articulation by stakeholders. Question 2b: Relevance of Workshop - this question was to find out how relevant the workshop objectives were to participants. 25% of respondents scored this with the highest score of 10 while 45% scored it with 9 and 30% scored it 5 and 7. This also indicates that on a scale of 1-10 the participants say the objectives of the workshop were very relevant to them. (Some of them indicated in writing very relevant ) Question 3a: Facilitation of Workshop - this was to find out how the facilitators performed in articulating and presenting the issues. 37

38 Clearly, 40% responding to this question scored 9 and another 40% scored 10, 10% scored 5 and another 10% scored 6. The indication here is that overwhelmingly, participants think the facilitators did a good job at presenting and facilitating the issues Question 3b: Relevance of facilitators presentations to the workshop objectives Here 10% of all respondents indicated the facilitation was good scoring it from 5 as the lowest to between 8 and 10 points, indicating very good to excellent. The indication here therefore is that participants think the facilitators did an excellent job at presenting issues and facilitating the workshop. Question 3c: General satisfaction with facilitation 90% of all respondents indicated they were very satisfied with facilitation scoring it from 8 to 10 points. Only 10% scored it with a 5 which was average. The indication here therefore is that there was a general satisfaction with facilitators who did an excellent job at presenting issues and facilitating the workshop. Question 4: Did Workshop meet your pre workshop expectations? The response of this followed the general trend of good to very good and excellent as the response. A low score of 4 was recorded for 10% while the 40% recorded from 7-9 and 50% recorded 10 points Question 5: Any other suggestions for improving the next meeting? This was open ended and responses were as follows: Other relevant institutions not represented should be included in the next meeting Transport should be provided for participants The workshop is good and helps us to gain inputs which are relevant to matter intended but the facilitators should provide allowance to the participants, although we are getting good inputs, but allowance is very important. The venue is far from we are coming from, so there is a need of facilitators to facilitate allowances to cover fuel or transport precise information delivery to paper presenters so that they present well-workshop focused papers There is the need for prior full information. Area for presentation should be chosen by organizer to suit the seminar objectives Workshop facilitator must facilitate transport to the workshop venue and return for participants (0-20km) where the workshop is being held.

39 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 Air conditioning at venue was not working properly, especially the first day 39

40 Appendix E: MoU draft per October 2014 This is a copy of a draft MoU as presented by one of the groups. The document has since been slightly changed. It does in no way represent the result of a finalized process. TANZANIA ENVIRONMENT INFORMATION NETWORK (GEIN) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) TANZANIA ENVIRONMENT INFORMATION NETWORK (TEIN) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) is made this day of (Effective Date) Between THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (the EPA which term shall where the context requires include its assigns and duly authorised officers) of P. O. Box M326, Ministries Post Office, Accra Ghana. And ENVIRONMENTAL STAKEHOLDER (the STAKEHOLDER which term shall where the context requires include its assigns and duly authorised officers). Recitals A. The fundamental human rights and freedoms enshrined in Chapter Five of the 1992 Constitution provides that environmental obligations should be addressed through Human Rights and Human Rights complements arrangements for environmental protection and promote effective protection of environment, that is access to information and right to participation; B. The Environmental Protection Agency is a statutory body established by the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994 (Act 490) and is responsible for protecting the environment in Ghana; C. Section 27 of the Environmental Protection Agency, 1994 (Act 490) mandates the Executive Director or an Officer of the Agency authorised by the Executive Director to request in writing from a person or request a person to attend at a time and place specified in writing to give information which the Executive Director considers reasonably necessary for the purposes of protecting the environment. D. Meeting the regional and international obligation in environment protection

41 Environmental data management a workshop review rd of October 2014 E. The Tanzania Environmental Information Network consist of those who are able and willing to provide data to national and regional level management tasks pertaining to the environment; F. The members of TEIN all represent owners and users of spatial and non-spatial data important for the management of Tanzanian nature and environment. Products are original data sets and derived data sets either directly or from a combination of two or more data sets or products. G. The tasks of TEIN includes but not limited to the preparation of thematic maps and data for spatial analysis for official and public use H. The Parties are concerned about the state of the Tanzanian environment and have resolved to collaborate with each other for the management and protection of the environment. A. SCOPE OF THE MOU A.1 Purpose The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to establish the framework and responsibilities of the parties to ensure effective collaboration with each other on the collection, sharing and management of environmental information for the management and protection of the Tanzanian environment. It is also to ensure that NEMC serves as a channel of communication and focal point between the parties to achieve the objective of section 27 of Act 490 and also its mandate as the lead Environmental Agency in Tanzania. THE PARTIES HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1.0 COMMENCEMENT AND DURATION This MOU shall come into effect immediately after signatures have been appended by the parties hereto and shall be valid for a period of two (2) years and subject to review for further periods and terms to be agreed on between the parties. The initial membership shall consist of the following institutions as listed in annex 1 (continue to list all institutions invited to this workshop) The initial membership shall be a closed group. Subsequent membership shall be by formal application RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES 41