Lake Tanganyika
Experience and Lessons Learned Brief
Sven Erik Jorgensen*, Royal Danish University of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Copenhagen, Denmark, sej@dfuni.dk
Gaspard Ntakimazi, University of Burundi, Bujumbura, Burundi
Sixtus Kayombo, Dar es Salaam University, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania* Corresponding author

Introduction.LJDOL%XNDYXNP

5


%8581',%XMXPEXUD
V
RZR
0R\

1

5
VL
.L

OD

JR

JD

UD
V

L5

L5



8YLUD

5


.DVXOX.LJRPD

EH
*RP

/ D

.DOHPLH

0DODJDUDVL5 7 D Q J/XNXJD5

7DERUD
8UDPER5

7$ 1 = $ 1 , $

:
DOD

N H

'52)
&21*2

8JDOD5

0SDQGD
6KDP

D5

D

Q

Background

\

L

N


ZD5
5XQJ

D

The main economic activityof the 10 million people
living in the lake’s drainage
basin is agriculture. The
main agricultural products
include maize, tobacco, rice,sugarcane,coffee,beans,
groundnuts, cassava, cattle
and goats. The socio-economic
statistics for the ripariannations of Lake Tanganyika
are given in Table 1. Tanzania,
Burundi, Zambia and the
Democratic Republic of Congo(DR Congo) all have low levelsof economic development,with gross national incomes'UDLQDJH%DVLQ%RXQGDU\,QWHUQDWLRQDO%RXQGDU\
5LYHU
/DNH
6HOHFWHG&LW\

5:$1'$

/DNH
.LYX

L]L

2.

/$.(7$1*$1<,.$%$6,1

V
5X

Lake Tanganyika has thelargest volume of the three
African Great Rift Valley lakes.
It also is the second deepest,
and the second largest lakein the world by volume,
containing almost 19,000 km3
of water—only Lake Baikal islarger. The lake contains almost
as much freshwater as the ﬁve
North American Great Lakes
combined. It contains a volume
of water seven times more thanthat of Lake Victoria, which is
the largest lake by area in Africa.
It has a length of more than 670
km and an average width of 48
km. The length of the shoreline
is about 1,900 km, of which
43% is rocky, 21% is mixed rockand sand, 31% is sand, and 10%
is marshes. Figure 1 depicts thelake and its basin.

0D

1.

/DNH
5XNZD

6XPEDZDQJD/DNH
0ZHUX:DQWLSD
/DNH
0ZHUX


X5
XE
/XI

0SXOXQJX=$0%,$%RXQGDULHVDQGORFDWLRQVDUHDSSUR[LPDWH
DQGVKRXOGQRWEHFRQVLGHUHGDXWKRULWDWLYH

Figure 1. The Lake Tanganyika Basin.

,/(&6(

0$/$:,/DNH
0DODZL

(GNIs) per capital respectively of US$250, 140, 320 and 110.
However dependence on the lake varies signiﬁcantly between
the riparian countries. Agriculture, livestock raising and theprocessing of these products, as well as mining, are the mainindustries in the drainage basin of Lake Tanganyika.
The lake has a crucial travel and trading role in regard to theneighboring countries of Tanzania, Burundi, DR Congo, andZambia. Bujumbura, Kigoma and Mpulungu serve as shipping
centers for commercial trade between the riparian countries.
Ship lines connect Kigoma (Tanzania), Kalemie (DR Congo) andother coastal towns as an essential part of the inland trafﬁc
system of East Africa.
Although landlocked, Zambia has water resorts on the shoresof Lake Tanganyika in the north part of the country. The
Nsumbu National Park provides world-class game ﬁshing.
Goliath Tiger ﬁsh of over 35 kg and giant catﬁsh of over 50
kg have been caught at the three lodges; namely, Kasaba Bay,
Nkamba Bay Beach and Ndole Bay. The lake also serves as abase for boating expeditions. In February or March of every
year, a national ﬁshing competition attended by ﬁshermanfrom around the world is held at Kasaba Bay.
Tanzania earns some income generated from tourist activities
at Mahale Mountain and Gombe Stream National Parks. The
park’s forested mountain slopes, which help deﬁne the Great
Rift Valley, are home to chimpanzees, which are accustomed
to humans and, therefore, somewhat approachable. Mahale
is rich in plant species that have a major inﬂuence on the lifeof chimpanzees, which utilize 328 food items from 198 plant
species. Some of these plants are used by chimpanzees as
medicine and appetizers.
Burundi’s capital, Bujumbura, with a population of 400,000, is
the largest city at the northeastern end of Lake Tanganyika, andhosts many tourist hotels. The Rusizi Delta National Reserve,
the “Musee Vivant” in Bujumbura and Reptile Park are someof the interesting places to be seen. Uvira and Kalemie in DR
Congo also provide tourist attractions.

Table 1.

In recent years, Lake Tanganyika, like many other biologicallysensitive areas, has begun to feel the environmental and socioeconomic effects of increased population pressures. Fishingpractices, for example, have become much more efﬁcient and,
consequently, more destructive. For example, commercial
ﬁshing, began in the mid-1950s, has had an extremely heavy
impact of the ﬁsh stocks and the majority of ﬁsh species.
The ﬁsheries of Lake Tanganyika are by far the most importantsource of animal protein for human consumption in this regionof Central Africa. Lake Tanganyika has traditionally supplied
between 25-40% of the protein needs of the local populationin the four riparian countries. About 45,000 people are directly
involved in the lake ﬁsheries, operating from almost 800
sites. The main ﬁshery product, the “Tanganyika sardine”(Stolothrissa tanganikae, Herring family), also is very important
for the local economy. It constitutes 55-90% of the commercial
ﬁshery and 80-99% of the traditional artisinal ﬁshery (Ruﬂi
2001). A major increase in the number of ﬁshermen has been
observed throughout large parts of the lakeshore. Many
people are now exploiting the more accessible coastal waters,
which are richest in ﬁsh biodiversity and the nursery for mostof the pelagic ﬁsh.
In spite of the need for maintenance of sustainable ﬁsheries
essential for the livelihoods of riparian populations, traditional
approaches to enforcement have had little success, often
being constrained by limited resources. Ornamental ﬁshery is aparticularly serious problem because it is a major threat to thelake’s biodiversity. Reasonable management of this exportable
resource could provide sustainable economic beneﬁts.
The most damaging threat to the lake’s biodiversity, however,appears to be an increased rate of sediment inﬂux, especiallyfrom the heavily-impacted smaller watersheds of northern
Lake Tanganyika, where large-scale deforestation andfarming practices have caused a dramatic increase in the soil
erosion rates. It is noted that Lake Tanganyika is a source ofﬁsh, a means of transportation, a water supply for drinking
and washing, and a receptacle for efﬂuents. Unfortunately,
however, traditional attitudes and responses to land and waterSocio-economic Statistics for Lake Tanganyika’s Riparian Nations.

Item

BurundiDR Congo

Tanzania

ZambiaPopulation growth rate (%)

2.0

3.2

2.4

2.2

Population density (persons/km2)

250

21

36

13

Adult literacy (%)

46

59

74

76

Per capita GNP (US$)

120

110

240

320

School enrolment (% of school age population)

51

78

67

89

Life expectancy (yr)

42

51

47

43

Safe water

48

32

34

62

Health service

20

NA

7

25

Sanitation

49

NA

14

29

Percent of population without access to:

Source:Adapted from Odada et al. (2004).

364

Lake Tanganyika

resource management, as well as waste disposal practices, areno longer sustainable because they cannot keep pace with therapid increase in the human population density.
Pollution will inevitably lead to increased threats to humanhealth associated directly with declining water quality.
In addition, the associated loss of the lake’s ﬁshery, thetraditional protein source, will increase the vulnerability ofthe people living in the region. The population of the region is
expected to grow annually by an average of 2-3% over the next
twenty years. This will inevitably increase the pressures on
the aquatic environment, by increasing the ﬁshery and water
demands, as well as higher land development pressures, withincreased erosion from farms causing more sediment transport
to the lake.

3.

Biophysical Environment

3.1

The Ecosystem

Some basic information about the lake is summarized inTable 2. As shown in Figure 1, major towns around the lake
include Bujumbura (Burundi), Uvira and Kalemie (DR Congo),
Mpulungu (Zambia) and Kigoma (Tanzania). Lake Tanganyika
is located between latitude 3°20' and 8°48' S and between
longitude 29°03' and 31°12' E. The lake is estimated to
be about 12 million years old and is of tectonic origin. The
maximum depth is in the southern part of the lake, whilealmost the same depth (1,250 m) is found in the north central
part of the lake.
The four riparian countries that share the lake, in terms of
surface area, are Burundi (8%), DR Congo (45%), Tanzania(41%), and Zambia (6%). The lake is an important source ofdrinking and domestic water source, as well as an international

Table 2. Basic Information about Lake Tanganika and its
Drainage Basin.
Riparian countries

Burundi, Congo, Tanzania
and Zambia

Altitude (surface)

773 m

Surface area

32,600 km2

Volume18,880 km3

Maximum depth

1,470 mAverage depth

570 m

Residence time

440 years

Drainage area

223,000 km2

Population in drainage area

10 million

Population density indrainage area

45/km2

Length of lake

670 kmLength of shoreline

1,900 kmpH

8.6-9.2

Source:transportation route, among other uses. It is bordered by four
national parks or nature reserves, as follows:•

Rusizi River Nature Reserve (Burundi);•

Gombe River National Park (Tanzania);•

Mahale Mountains National Park (Tanzania); and,•

Nsumbu National Park (Zambia)

The lake could serve as an example for managing lakes inother developing countries. Because prevention is much morecost effective than abatement, it is important to establish
a management plan at this stage to maintain the lake in an
oligotrophic state. Its residence time is 440 years, which
implies that, if the lake’s water quality deteriorates it will takea very long time for the lake to recover. Many rivers enter thelake, but only the Lukuga River ﬂows out. The lake volume is
18,880 km3, giving the lake an enormous buffer capacity, butalso making it extremely difﬁcult for the lake to recover if it ispolluted. Thus, it is of utmost importance to prevent pollution
and general over-exploitation of the lake in the ﬁrst place.
Fortunately, the lake has received relatively less humanimpact than many other African lakes, including Lake Victoria.
However, the drainage basin population of 10 million is
growing very rapidly (about 2.5% per annum), and theanthropogenic impact on the lake’s water quality is expected
to increase in the coming years. On a lake-wide basis, the lake
is still not polluted; is in an oligotrophic state, and has not yet
suffered from eutrophication. The chlorophyll-a concentrationin the southern lake is approximately 1 µg/L, while it is about 2µg/L in the northern lake, and even about 5 µg/L in the central
lake. The concentration of reactive inorganic nitrogen (mainly
nitrate) is 50-90 µg/L, and the reactive inorganic phosphorus
concentration is 5-10 µg/L.
Limited, but very sensitive, areas (Bujumbura Bay in Burundi;
Kigoma Bay in Tanzania), currently show evidence ofunfavorable water quality changes, due mainly to urban andindustrial runoff. It is a high priority that these places remain
unpolluted, since drinking water for more than 400,000 people
in Bujumbura and 80,000 in Kigoma is withdrawn from thelake. It would be a major catastrophe if the lake, for one reason
or another, became unsuitable as a drinking water source, andits ﬁsh unﬁt for human consumption.
The primary production derived from chlorophyll estimates in1995 is on the order of 0.80-0.86 g C m-2 d-1 in April to May, andmore than three times as much in October to November (2.8g C m-2 d-1); with an annual production of 662 g C m-2 a-1. The
same estimates obtained from radiocarbon measurements
indicate an overall average for the whole lake of 1.2 g C m-2
d-1, or 426 g C m-2 a-1. The annual production of herbivorous
copepods (secondary production) is estimated to be 23 g C m-2
a-1 (Sarvala et al. 1999).

Adapted from Odada et al. (2004).

Experience and Lessons Learned Brief

365

The lake contains around 500 endemic species out of the totalof 2,156 species (Coulter et al. 1991). The number of species
inhabiting the lake is 325 ﬁsh, 759 algae, 81 aquatic plants,
219 crustaceans, and 171 birds. This includes about 200
species of cichlids. The lake has 8 species of crab, 15 species ofshrimp and about 60 species of snails. Although the lake hasa uniquely high biodiversity, it is endangered. As previously
noted, the lake is important for its ﬁshery (commercial,subsistence and ornamental ﬁshing). The estimated ﬁshharvest in Lake Tanganyika is 165,000-200,000 tons/year(Mölsä et al. 1999), comprising a primary protein source.
The lake’s ecosystem is sensitive to climatic conditions. There
are two main weather seasons. The wet season, usuallyfrom September to May, is characterized by high humidity,
considerable precipitation and frequent thunderstorms.
Heating of the lake takes place mainly during the beginning of
this season (i.e., from September to November). As a result,thermal stratiﬁcation establishes all over the lake, with thetemperature difference between the surface and bottom waterlayers within 4°C. The dry season from May to August has dry
weather and strong southern and southeastern winds. The lakeloses heat by evaporation caused by strong winds. The coolingis strongest in the southern basin, from May to September(Coulter et al. 1991).
Southeastern winds drive warm epilimnion surface water
towards the north end of the lake, while water ﬂows south as a
deep current, causing upwelling along the southern coast. This
results in a tilting of the epilimnion (Lewis 1995). Thermocline
depths at Bujumbura and Kigoma were 74-83 m in the dry
season of 1993, while the epilimnion in the south end was
reduced in May and disappeared in June during the upwelling(Lewis 1995). The productivity of the lake is highly dependent
on these hydrodynamic states and climatic conditions,particularly wind and temperature. As mentioned above, themonsoon wind from the southeast causes the accumulation ofwater in the epilimnion, thereby deepening the thermocline in
the north, while deep, rich waters upwell in the southern end(Plisnier and Coenen 2001).
After the dry season, when the wind force weakens,
oscillations of the metalimnion form waves. These waves
inﬂuence the thermocline depth. Consequently, a regularpulse of production is induced when the deep eutrophic
waters are able to reach the biotic and euphotic zone, where
photosynthesis takes place. Thermocline depth rises and falls
several times over course of a the year. When the thermocline
is deep, the production is high (i.e., the production pulses
follow the rhythm of the thermocline). The water transparency
follows a similar, ﬂuctuating pattern. There is no oxygen in thewater below 100-200 m (Coulter et al. 1991).
An increase in air temperature has been noted at stations
around Lake Tanganyika since the 1960s (a mean increase ofabout 0.7°C in the north and 0.9°C in the south). During thesame period, the wind speed over the lake seems to havedecreased; the yearly mean speeds at Bujumbura ﬂuctuated366

Lake Tanganyika

between 1.4-2.5 m/s from 1964 and 1979, and between 0.5-1.5
m/s between 1986 and 1990 (Plisnier 1997).
These climatic changes seem to have caused an increase of
surface water temperature of 0.40°C during the dry season,and 0.28°C during the wet season near Bujumbura, a greater
stratiﬁcation (upwelling becoming rarer, even in the south), a
shallower thermocline and oxygenated water layer, a decreasein water transparency, and a higher surface primary production
and zooplankton development in the north, compared to thesouth. These limnological changes in the lake (mainly lower
water mixing and transparency) seem to have a negative impact
on the catchability of Lates stappersii (a visual predator) in thenorth, and Clupeids abundance in the south (Plisnier 1997).
In the south of Lake Tanganyika, it has always been observedthat the dry and windy season was a period of increased
clupeid abundance, probably related to an increase inphytoplankton during the upwelling period. In the last 10 to
15 years, climatic changes have probably reduced upwellingin the south, resulting in a decrease in turbulence and wave
amplitude for the whole lake, which would cause the lake to beless dynamic (Plisnier 1997).
Clupeids distribution patterns also may have changed,
probably due to a reduced migratory behavior. The very low
level of Stolothrissa tanganicae catches in the south overthe last decades suggests there could be a change in theirdistribution pattern, related to environmental conditions.
Climatic changes probably affect other aspects of the ecologyof the lake and its drainage area as well. According to Verburg
et al. (2003), there is no doubt that the climatic changes play amajor role in the lake dynamics.

3.2

Threats to the Ecosystem

There have been a number of studies of the lake over thelast 15 years (Odada et al. 2004) which have provided a goodunderstanding of its chemistry, hydrology and ecology. Thesestudies include the following:•

Lake Tanganyika Research (LTR) Project “Research for
the Management of the Fisheries on Lake Tanganyika”(GCP/RAF/271/FIN);•

Pollution Control and Other Measures to Protect
Biodiversity in Lake Tanganyika (LTBP) UNDP/GEF RAF/
92/G32;•

Limnologic and Paleolimnologic Investigations of Lake
Tanganyika by University of Arizona researchers;•

Global Warming is Choking the Life Out of Lake
Tanganyika by Steve Connor;•

Nyanza Project by National Science Foundation (NSF)—
A project for Research Experience for Undergraduatesnorthern drainage area, and around 50% of the central
areas, have been cleared of their natural vegetation,
leading to increased erosion. The Malagarasi and Rusizi
Rivers provide a major share of the inﬂowing waters
to the lake, also contributing most of the suspended
solids load to the lake. Siltation is the most damaging
threat to the lake’s biodiversity, especially siltation fromthe heavily-impacted smaller watersheds of northern
Lake Tanganyika, where large-scale deforestation andfarming practices have led to a dramatic increase in soil
erosion rates. The freshly eroded sediments entering thelake adversely affect its biodiversity, not only becauseof decreasing species habitat, but also because of
efﬁciently complexing certain essential nutrients/traceelements.

(REU) funded by the NSF Paleoclimate Program,
University of Arizona;•

CLIMLAKE—Climate variability and ecological dynamics
in Lake Tanganyika—DWTC-project IGBP/PAGE, IDEAL;•

Recent ENSO and paleo-ENSO events during the last1000 years in Lake Tanganyika—DWTC-Duurzame
Ontwikkeling; and,•

UNDP/GEF/UNOPS Lake
Planning Project (LTMP).

Tanganyika

Management

Based on these studies, the following are identiﬁed as themain threats facing Lake Tanganyika.
1.

2.

Over-exploitation of the biological resources becauseof very high ﬁshing pressure and the use of destructive
methods, reducing the ﬁshery potential and the uniquebiodiversity. Annual recorded ﬁsh catches on Lake
Tanganyika have shown an upward trend since 1970s,
standing today at about 200,000 tons. Recent estimates
per country indicate a yield of about 21,000 tons for
Burundi in 1992 (94.5 kg/ha/yr), 55,000 tons during
1994-95 for Tanzania (60 kg/ha/yr), 12,900 tons forZambia (69 kg/ha/yr), and 90,000 tons in the DR Congo(34 kg/ha/yr). These estimates translate into an averagecatch range between 54-66 kg/ha/yr for the whole lake
(Lindqvist et al. 1999). Thus, the actual catches are muchhigher for Burundi and Zambia than elsewhere, while
for the Tanzania and DR Congo waters, representing
86% of the total lake, the ﬁgures are much lower. Such
differences probably reﬂect greater ﬁshing intensity inthe northern and southern parts of the lake, rather than
the actual lake productivity. The observed ﬁsh yields in
Burundi (94.5 and 111.5 kg/ha/yr, respectively in 1992
and 1995) are close to the potential yield of 100 kg/ha
estimated by Coulter (1977). This means that, on a lakewide scale, Lake Tanganyika is probably under-ﬁshed,but that the ﬁshery pressures are very high in the northand the south. Evidence of over-ﬁshing in Burundian andZambian waters is suggested in that the trend of catch
per unit effort (CPUE) for industrial units (purse seiners)
has been declining. Nightly CPUE for commercial units in
Burundi decreased from 166 kg in 1994 to 111 kg in 1996;
in Mpulungu, it dropped from 877 kg in 1994 to 535 kg
in 1996. The decline in catchable stocks of L. stappersii
around the vicinity of Mpulungu is not compensated,even with an increased duration of ﬁshing trips. In thenorthern end of the lake, commercial units have stopped
their activity; L. stappersii now make up only around
20% of the commercial catch, with juveniles accounting
for most of this contribution.

3.

Untreated wastewater discharges, including industrial
and domestic wastewater from large cities such as
Bujumbura in Burundi, Kigoma in Tanzania, Uvira andKalemie in Congo, and Mpulungu in Zambia. Thesewaters might contain nutrients, organic matters, heavy
metals (mercury, chromium), pesticides, ash residues as
cement, and fuel from ports, harbors, shipping places
and boats, etc.

4.

Agricultural runoff, particularly via the Malagarasi
and Rusizi Rivers. The agricultural expansion in theregion could be accompanied by an increased use ofagrochemicals.

5.

Increased
population,
urbanizationandindustrialization. The annual population growthrate of most countries in the region is 2.5-3.1%. This
progressive increase in population pressure (thisregion has one of the world’s greatest rural population
densities) has forced a change in land use from pristine
tropical forests, to small agricultural plots located on
steep, denuded slopes bordering the lake. As a result,accelerated erosion rates supply streams and rivers
with an increased suspended particulate load, which
is deposited as ﬁne-grained silts and clays in the lake’s
rocky deltas. Record sediment accumulation rates inhighly impacted river systems can reach up to 100 cm/yr.
Unfortunately, traditional attitudes and responses toland and water resource management, as well as waste
disposal practices, are no longer sustainable because
they cannot keep pace with the rapid increase in humanpopulation density.

6.

Increased tourism that will cause increased impacts
on the lake, if not properly planned. Some are of theopinion, however, that the local infrastructure is not yet
on a level that would allow mass tourism.

Siltation, due to erosion in the drainage area as a resultof increased deforestation. The topsoil is transported to
the lake, where it joins fertilizers and pesticides washedfrom the lake’s drainage area. An astounding 100% of the7.

Recent studies indicate that global climate change iscausing impacts to the lake.

Experience and Lessons Learned Brief367

Of the two ﬁrst threats noted above, over-exploitation isthought to be the most acute for short-term ﬁshery potential,
while siltation is the most detrimental factor affecting thelake’s biodiversity and long-term resource potential.

4.

There are a large number of local and international NGOs in thefour riparian countries, although most of them do not have thenecessary resources for action.

4.1.1 Burundi
Bujumbura, the capital city of Burundi, located on the shoresof the lake, depends on it both as a source of drinking waterand as a receptacle of wastewater. Increased populationand poor agriculture practices in the catchment accelerate
erosion and sediment transport to the lake. Unfortunately, theactivities of national institutions involved in lake management
are not harmonized.

•

368

•

The Ministry of Health has interest in wastewaterdisposal and sanitation problems in inhabited zones,
but has no special interest in the lake.

•

INECN also has the national responsibility forbiodiversity, although its conservation activities
concentrate on national parks and reserves; no ofﬁcial
Reserve or National Park has been established in thelake’s waters.

•

In regard to biodiversity, some studies have been doneat the University of Burundi through short projects andstudent studies. Most focus on ﬁsh population structure
and biodiversity evaluation in different lake habitats.

•

No national institution has the responsibility to monitor
or control sediment transportation to the lake. The
exact impacts of sediment on the lake’s biodiversity
and water quality is still to be established. The Ministryof Agriculture only concentrates on controlling erosion
on cultivated land, while the Ministry of Public Worksconcentrates on controlling erosion and land slides
along roads. Action to decrease sediment transportation
to the lake should be under the technical services inthese two ministries.

National Institutions

It would be expected that the national institutions involved in
Lake Tanganyika management efforts have the capability to
act in matters of biological stock management, biodiversity
conservation, water quality and pollution control, decreasing
sediment transport to the lake, etc., and in a harmonized way
with the other riparian countries. A common feature, however,is that each government at least has agencies responsible forﬁsheries, with local ofﬁces at or near the lake, even though
the involvement in other aspects of lake management at thenational level is not highly developed.

•

A wastewater treatment plant has been installed, withWorld Bank funding, to treat about 40% of the urban
and industrial wastewaters from Bujumbura. The
treatment plant is under the responsibility of the city of
Bujumbura, but has yet to function properly.

Management Environment

Management implementation arrangements for Lake
Tanganyika are complex because its drainage basin comprises
four riparian countries. Thus, any approach to improve theunderstanding and subsequent management of the lakemust have an international and regional perspective. The
main problems to be addressed include lack of resources
for the involved institutions; poor enforcement of existing
regulations; lack of appropriate regulations for the lake; andlack of institutional coordination.

4.1•

Fisheries management and associated activities areunder the responsibility of the Department of Water,
Fish Culture and Fisheries, in the Ministry of Agricultureand Livestock. This institution has few resources toimplement regulations prepared through the support ofdifferent FAO projects since the 1960s, as well as fromother donors.
Water quality monitoring and pollution control areunder the responsibility of the National Institute ofEnvironment and Nature Conservation (INECN), in
the Ministry of Land Management and Environment.
However, it does not have an equipped laboratory andother resources for performing its tasks.

Lake Tanganyika

4.1.2 Democratic Republic of Congo•

DR Congo’s Ministry of Scientiﬁc Research has a Natural
Sciences Research Centre (CRSN) at Uvira.

•

The Centre d’Actions et de Développement etd’Initiatives Communautaires (CADIC), a local NGO
in South Kivu Province, is involved in community
development, including ﬁsheries-related activities.

4.1.3 Tanzania•

The National Environmental Management Council(NECM), under the President’s Ofﬁce, has the mandate
for all environmental matters. The UNDP/GEF LTBP
project was coordinated by this institution.

•

Tanzania’s Ministry of Scientiﬁc Research includes the
Tanzanian Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI), with aregional ofﬁce at Kigoma. The FAO/FNNIDA LTR project
was coordinated by this institution.

•

Tanzania National Parks (TANAPA) is responsible formanagement and tourism in important Parks bordering
Lake Tanganyika; Gombe Stream National Park and
Mahale Mountain National Park.

•

Tanganyika Catchment Reforestation (TACARE), a local
NGO, focuses on women’s development, especiallycommunity development training focusing on improving
the standard of living in the region of Lake Tanganyika,
while also promoting reforestation, curbing soil erosion,and delivering conservation education to the local
population.

4.1.4 Zambia
•

•

4.2

The Zambian Ministry of Agriculture has a Department of
Fishery (DOF), with a provincial ﬁshery ofﬁce at Mbala.
The FAO/FNNIDA LTR project was coordinated by thisinstitution.
Environmental Council of Zambia (ECZ), under the
President’s Ofﬁce, has the mandate for all environmental
matters. The UNDP/GEF LTBP project was coordinatedby this institution.

Regional Mechanisms

Since the 1960s, lake management coordinated at theregional level has been concerned only with ﬁsheries, throughFAO projects working at national levels and coordinatedperiodically by the FAO Committee for Inland Fisheries
for Africa (CIFA). The latter has had a Sub-Committee forLake Tanganyika since the 1970s. Issues such as ﬁsh stock
management, ﬁshing regulations, ﬁsheries statistics andinformation, post-harvest processing and ﬁsh marketing, etc.,
have been discussed nationally and regionally in those FAO
meetings. Unfortunately, most of the recommendations issued
in these meetings have not been implemented in a coordinatedregional program. Laws and regulations regarding ﬁshing andassociated activities also are yet to be harmonized across thelake.
In the 1990s, the following two projects, with a lake-wide
view to address Lake Tanganyika management issues, were
undertaken:•

FAO/FINNIDA Lake Tanganyika Research Project (LTR),
from 1992-1999; and,•

UNDP/GEF Lake Tanganyika Biodiversity Project (LTBP),
from 1995-2000.

These two projects had institutional and managerial
components. All the projects had signiﬁcant researchcomponents, with much of our understanding about the lake
and its ﬁshery garnered through these projects. The FAO/FINNIDA project (LTR) came up with a Framework Fisheries
Management Plan (FFMP) in 1999.
The other aspects of lake management (biological diversity
conservation, water quality and pollution control, habitat
protection, etc.) had not been addressed at a regional level
before the UNDP/GEF Lake Tanganyika Biodiversity Project(LTBP). The LTBP outcomes are a Transboundary Diagnostic

Analysis (TDA), a Strategic Action Program (SAP) and a
Convention for the Management of the Lake between the four
riparian countries.
Other initiatives were limited geographically, focused on
limnology, biodiversity and ﬁsh ecology, and did not have amanagement component. Those applicable for the northernpart of the lake include:•

UNESCO/MAB/DANIDA Ecotones Project at Universityof Burundi (1991-1994);•

Centre Régional de Recherches en Hydrobiologie
Appliquée (1992-1995), sponsored by Belgian
Government aid to Burundi and DR Congo; and,•

Ecological and Limnological Studies on Lake Tanganyika
and its Adjacent Regions (1985 –1995) by Japanese
research teams in localized places around the lake,sponsored by the Japanese Government.

The outputs of these local projects was incorporated in LTBP’sliterature data, especially for biodiversity evaluations of thelake.

4.2.1 LTR’s Framework Fisheries Management Plan
(FFMP)(Note: This section draws heavily on FAO (1999).)
LTR’s Framework Fisheries Management Plan (FFMP) was
endorsed by the FAO Committee for Inland Fisheries for Africa(CIFA) in 1999, being the ﬁrst important mechanism that
could facilitate regional management of the lake’s resources(especially ﬁsheries) in a sustainable way.
The conclusion of the LTR studies on Lake Tanganyika ﬁsheries
is that, under current circumstances, none of the ﬁsheries
management institutions within the four riparian states is ina position to effectively carry out the tasks entrusted to themby national legislation. The principal deﬁciencies common
to institutional frameworks can be summarized as follows:(a) inadequate budgetary allocations to ﬁsheries sectors bycentral governments; (b) inadequate research funding; (c) lackof human resources and equipment; (d) poor to non-existentenforcement of ﬁsheries regulations; and (e) insufﬁcient
linkages between central administration and ﬁeld agents at
the local level.
To solve the problem, LTR proposed the FFMP to the Lake
Tanganyika riparian nations. The governments have ratiﬁed
a convention (see section 4.2.2 for more detailed discussion
on the convention), necessitating the formation of the Lake
Tanganyika Management Authority to reduce pressures on
the lake resources. The convention harmonizes management
policies, laws, regulations monitoring and data exchange,and provides a forum for the countries to engage in lake
management discussions.

Experience and Lessons Learned Brief

369

The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF) provides
a framework of basic policy orientation, through which the
FFMP may be accommodated in an integrated fashion. It
calls for establishment of responsible ﬁsheries management,
which will be elaborated, adjusted, and reviewed as partof an ongoing process. Other issues covered by the CCRF
are: (a) policy matrix; (b) partnership and resource access;(c) institutional and legal modalities; (d) harmonization ofﬁshing regulations; and (e) possible input controls to regulate
ﬁshing.
Adoption of CCRF Policy Matrix. First, in order to ensure thatthe four riparian states act with a common set of development
objectives in mind, it is important that their respective
competent authorities implement the CCRF as the policy matrix
for the shared ﬁsheries of Lake Tanganyika. It also is importantthat the respective competent authorities adopt and pursue
management policy directions in support of: (a) adaptive orinteractive management practices allowing for adjustments inﬁshing pressures, and for ﬂexible application of management
treatments appropriate to different circumstances encounteredaround the lakeshore; (b) multi-disciplinary monitoring
capability for measurements of continuity and change acrossa range of biophysical and socio-economic parameters,
as appropriate to the complexities of ecosystem-humansystem interactions; (c) partnerships with local stakeholder
groups in management decision-making and in fashioning
modalities of enforcement and compliance; (d) allocation ofaccess and ﬁshing rights at the local community level; and(e) use of integrated development strategies and coastal
area management models at the local level, both in order toaccommodate complex interactions and possible conﬂicts
between ﬁshing and non-ﬁshing activities and, at national andregional ‘macro-levels’, to foster economic diversiﬁcation to
reduce pressures on the ﬁshery resource base.
Partnership Arrangements and Local Control of Resource
Access. Establishment of co-management structures andoperational arrangements around the lakeshore would be an
important step in promoting local community participationin the management of the lake. Because attitudes towards
co-management appear to vary by country, co-management
arrangements must be encouraged in a somewhat ﬂexible
manner, depending on local pre-dispositions. Community
outreach activities, with a strong environmental education
component, will be crucial for building local awarenessand acceptance of responsibility in ﬁsheries regulation
decision-making and compliance processes. Local attitudes
towards various forms of access limitation are not uniform.
Nevertheless, it is clear that a ‘free-for-all’ or unlimited accessregime will be impossible to sustain in the face of growing
population pressures within the Lake Tanganyika region.
Licensing mechanisms, in combination with allocation of use
rights by zone or water territory between individual ﬁshingcommunities, would seem to be the most appropriate way ofcountering the ‘race to ﬁsh’.

370

Lake Tanganyika

Institutional Modalities. The FFMP proposes to modify theTerms of Reference of the CIFA Sub-Committee for Lake
Tanganyika, in order to allow it to function more effectively asa mechanism to facilitate co-ordination of regional ﬁsheriesrelated matters, and especially to:•

Facilitate discussions for all related ﬁsheries matters,
including coastal zone management, environment andwater quality;•

Promote the exchange and dissemination of informationand data;•

Develop and recommend conservation and management
measures;•

Facilitate periodic elaboration and implementation ofa regional ﬁsheries management plan and monitoring
program;•Harmonize national measures for the sustainableutilization of the lake’s living resources;•

Facilitate the harmonization of ﬁsheries regulations for
Lake Tanganyika; and,•

Explore ways and means of establishing an autonomousinter-governmental organization or arrangement.

Legal Modalities. Actions that can be immediately undertaken
in all four riparian states, on the basis of existing legal
framework to implement or facilitate the measures proposedin the FFMP, include:•

Implementation of the FAO Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries;•

Use of existing traditional institutional arrangements
and customary ﬁshing rights, where appropriate, forenhancing local control of ﬁsheries resource access;and,•Organize and conduct an awareness campaign designed
to inform local ﬁshers of FFMP objectives, and enlist
their support for its implementation.

In Zambia and Tanzania, where ﬁshing operations in Lake
Tanganyika remain virtually unregulated, drafting of acomprehensive set of regulations applicable to the lakeﬁsheries is recommended. The regulations should address
the following tasks: (a) devising various classes of ﬁshingunits or categories of ﬁshing operations; (b) determining
which classes of ﬁshing units are required to carry a ﬁshinglicense; (c) determining the number of ﬁshing licenses thatcan be issued for industrial ﬁshing units; (d) determining
prohibited or authorized methods of ﬁshing and restrictions
on certain methods of ﬁshing (e.g., banning or gradual phasingout of beach seining); (e) establishing prohibited ﬁshing areas(for all purposes, or for the protection of spawning grounds,
and/or in respect of any ﬁshing method or any species ofﬁsh); (f ) establishing and demarcating prohibited industrial
ﬁshing areas and beach seining areas; (g) establishing closed
times and/or closed seasons for ﬁshing; (h) setting gear
speciﬁcations (mesh sizes, height and length of nets and otherﬁshing implements); and (i) banning the introduction of nonnative species of ﬁsh and aquatic plants.

southern end of the lake. Management measures should focus
on the gradual, but eventually total, retirement/phasing out
of beach seining on the lake. As a step toward achieving thisobjective, ‘beach seining prohibited’ areas should be identiﬁed
and established. Initiatives to restrict beach seining would
require important complementary measures, in the form ofenvironmental education, and the utilization of other gear andmethod options, as viable alternatives to the practice.

For DR Congo and Burundi, it is recommended that reviewsof ﬁsheries regulations applicable to Lake Tanganyika be
conducted in light of the ﬁndings and conclusions of the
FFMP. In DR Congo, ﬁsheries regulations applicable to Lake
Tanganyika should include provisions for: (a) banning the
introduction of any non-native species of ﬁsh and aquaticplants; (b) limiting the number of industrial ﬁshing licenses
that can be issued; (c) banning beach seining throughout
Lake Tanganyika waters falling under DR Congo jurisdiction;and (d) reviewing the classiﬁcation of ﬁshing units with a viewto harmonizing ﬁsheries regulations. In Burundi, ﬁsheries
regulations applicable to Lake Tanganyika should include: (a)banning beach seining throughout Lake Tanganyika waters
placed under Burundi jurisdiction; (b) modifying, if necessary,the limit imposed on the number of industrial ﬁshing licenses
that can be issued in the Burundi portion of Lake Tanganyika;
and (c) reviewing the classiﬁcation of ﬁshing units, with thegoal of harmonizing ﬁsheries regulations.

There are also indications of high exploitation pressure on
L. stappersii within the extreme northern waters of Lake
Tanganyika, although in this case a result of a concentrationof artisanal liftnetting, on top of a history of industrial purse
seining. For this reason, ‘off-limits’ areas for industrial units
should be considered for both the extreme north and extreme
south sub-basins of the lake. The establishment of prohibitedﬁshing areas would need to be complemented by the devisingof alternative enforcement schemes, such as the involvementof ﬁshers and local communities in enforcement activities.

Harmonization of Fisheries Regulations. Emphasis should beplaced on three speciﬁc measures, including: (a) elaborationof a common classiﬁcation of ﬁshing units or categorizationof ﬁshing operations; (b) development of mechanisms ofmanagement in partnership, including measures to ensure
consultation with ﬁshers and other stakeholders prior todevising ﬁsheries regulations; and (c) improvement ofenforcement of ﬁsheries legislation; including reassessment of
the regime of sanctions provided for in existing legislation.
Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance (MCS). The Lake
Tanganyika Monitoring Program (LTMP), designed under LTR
auspices, is consistent with the CCRF guidelines in as much as:(a) its feasibility is undeniably one of its underlying principles(proposed monitoring measures have been thoroughly
tailored to the availability of both human and equipment
resources in each research station around the lake); (b) the
cost of implementation has clearly been kept to a minimum;and (c) it reﬂects the characteristics of the local ﬁsheries.
A timeframe and ﬁnancial scheme designed to ensure thelong-term sustainability of the monitoring program should beincorporated in the LTMP, bearing in mind that current funding
for the LTMP is of limited duration. It is further recommended
that a comprehensive set of regulations be developed in all
four riparian states, and that periodic frame surveys, designed
to assess the state of the ﬁshing industry, be required in every
ﬁsheries legislation.
Possible Technical Measures to Regulate Fishing. The beachseine is an especially serious problem impacting ﬁshing in the

Input Controls to Regulate Fishing. It is recommended thatlicensing ceilings be established for both industrial units inthe south and liftnet units in the north end of the lake. In thecase of the purse seine ﬁshery, efforts should be reduced tolevels that prevailed ten years ago. That is, licensing measures
should aim at the gradual retirement or transfer to otherﬁshing zones of units that entered the southern ﬁshery within
the last decade. The implementation of licensing ceilings forboth industrial ﬁshing units in the south, and liftnet units inthe north, should be accompanied by the inclusion of speciﬁc
provisions in the FFMP encouraging the negotiation andconclusion of access agreements between riparian states.
Such a measure is designed to ensure the redeployment ofﬁshing units that would no longer be authorized to operate intheir traditional ﬁshing grounds.

4.2.2 LTBP’s Outputs: Transboundary Diagnostic
Analysis (TDA), Strategic Action Program (SAP)and Convention(Note: See West (2001) for an extensive discussion on the LTBP
project.)
One of the immediate objectives of the UNDP/GEF Lake
Tanganyika Biodiversity project was to formulate a Strategic
Action Program (SAP) that established clear priorities
endorsed at the highest levels of the partner governments.
The SAP should identify priority transboundary concerns,
as well as sectoral interventions needed to resolve thetransboundary problems, as well as institutional mechanisms
for implementing the SAP.
Thus, a Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis was one major
step needed to facilitating the formulation of the SAP. The
ﬁrst phase of the process was a Project Inception Workshop
in 1996, wherein the country representatives identiﬁed themain threats to Lake Tanganyika’s biodiversity. The country
representatives ranked their perceived threats in order ofExperience and Lessons Learned Brief371

pelagic zone; excessive or uncontrolled extraction ofornamental ﬁsh;national importance. The summation of these discussions
provided the initial prioritization of threats for the region.
From this ﬁrst priority issues meeting, the project teamprepared a consultation document for a Preliminary Strategic
Action Program in 1997. The Regional Steering Committee(RSC) committed to formulating this regional SAP through aprocess of consultation from the national level by National
Working Groups, to the regional level by the Technical Advisory
Committee. After a planning meeting in each country, thenational consultation process consisted of two workshops. The
ﬁrst was a National Sectoral Problem Review, and the second
a National Environmental Priorities and Strategic Review. With
the completion of these two workshops, each national working
group came to a national understanding regarding the priority
biodiversity and management concerns and priorities forintervention.
Consultations at regional level were conducted throughan expanded Planning Group, whereby each country was
represented by a team of members with a range of skills andknowledge of the lake management problems, led by the
National Coordinators. This consultation developed a draft
preliminary TDA in November 1998, which was subsequently
endorsed by the Project Steering Committee in May 1999.
The same Planning Group met to discuss and adopt the draftof the ﬁrst Strategic Action Program (SAP) in January 2000.
In March 2000, the Group issued the ﬁnal TDA, incorporating
the conclusions of the special studies programs relevant tomanagement needs of Lake Tanganyika and that was proposed
to be included in the ﬁnal SAP. The Strategic Action Program(SAP) was adopted by the Project Steering Committee in July
2000 at the closure of the Project.

•

Control of sedimentation: Erosion from inappropriate
farming practices and deforestation;•

Control of Pollution: Urban and industrial pollution;
harbor pollution; pollution from future mining or oil
exploitation; risk of major marine accidents; and,•

Habitat conservation: Threats to resources in National
Parks; degradation of key habitats.

The Strategic Action Program (SAP) is a document that
identiﬁes the National Actions and key institutions planned tocounteract each of the priority problems identiﬁed in the TDA.
These actions were deﬁned during the same process that led
to the TDA.

The purpose of the TDA was to deﬁne immediate management
objectives within the overall management goal of conserving
the biodiversity of Lake Tanganyika. After analysis of the mainthreats and the speciﬁc problems involved in managing thelake, it established priorities for possible interventions andultimately proposed a sequence of management interventions
to counteract each speciﬁc identiﬁed problem.

The Convention for the Sustainable Management of Lake
Tanganyika. The Convention is a legal agreement, identifying
the rights and duties of the four states concerning Lake
Tanganyika. It establishes institutional structures for cooperative management, management principles and related
matters. Like the SAP, the Convention was developed through aseries of regional workshops, bringing together senior lawyers
and policymakers from each of the four riparian countries.
The ﬁrst of these workshops (February 1998) issued a set ofrecommendations that included detailed instructions, so thata nominated drafting team could produce the ﬁrst draft of theConvention. This ﬁrst draft was discussed at three subsequent
workshops. The ﬁrst two brought together participants thatshared a common language; namely, an Anglophone workshop(August 1999) and a Francophone workshop (September 1999).
The third meeting brought together the participants of the four
countries, resulting in a version of the draft being agreed uponregionally (November 1999). This latter draft was adopted
by the Steering Committee (July 2000) at the completion the
UNDP/GEF Lake Tanganyika Biodiversity Project (LTBP), andforwarded to each riparian government for further negotiation
and agreement.

The main threats to biodiversity and sustainable use of Lake
Tanganyika and its resources that were identiﬁed include:
unsustainable ﬁsheries; excessive sedimentation; increasing
pollution; and habitat destruction. The general actions to be
used to combat these threats include: reduction of ﬁshingpressures; control of sedimentation; control of pollution; andhabitat conservation.

The Convention was signed by the four riparian states on 12
June 2003, a result of the GEF PDF-B grant, Lake Tanganyika
Management Planning Project (LTMPP). It is now in the processof ratiﬁcation by the different parliaments. Once it enters
into force (after its ratiﬁcation by at least two countries), theConvention will provide the legal authority for implementing
the SAP and revising it on a regular basis.

Of the many identiﬁed speciﬁc problems making up eachof these major threats, those ranked as the priority forinterventions in the four action areas, based on considering
the score of each for such criteria as severity, feasibility, andadditional beneﬁts, are:

The Convention deﬁnes the management principles, as well as
the obligations and speciﬁc procedures. It particularly deﬁnes
a Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA), whose function is to coordinate the implementation of the Convention itself, as wellas the priority actions planned in the SAP. The LTA organs are:

•

•

372

Reduction of ﬁshing pressure: Excessive ﬁshing efforts
in the littoral zone; excessive ﬁshing efforts in theLake Tanganyika

The Conference of Ministers, the supreme body of theauthority;

•

The Management Committee, made up of 3 members
appointed by each contracting State; and,•The Secretariat, under the direction of an Executive
Director assisted by a Deputy Executive Director.

It is planned that the Management Committee will be assisted
in the performance of its functions by:•

A Socio-economic Technical Committee;•

A Fisheries Management Technical Committee;•

A Biological Diversity Technical Committee; and,•A Water Quality/Pollution Control Technical Committee.

The ﬁnancial resources of the Authority will come fromcontributions of the contracting states in equal proportions.
The Authority also will seek funds for its operations andprojects from donors and other sources.
The TDA and SAP documents, as well as the Convention,
produced through an in-depth consultation process,probably contain some of the elements proposed by the LTBP
Coordination staff in the draft SAP of 1997. The main differenceis that their ownership is now accepted nationally andregionally. This is one of the lessons learned from the Project;
namely, the participation of all the partners in all the phasesof the Project, from conception to implementation of agreed
actions, is essential to facilitate its success.

4.2.3 Towards Implementation of Conventions andPrograms
The implementation of the LTBP’s SAP, which will begin with the
ratiﬁcation of the Convention and the effective establishmentof the Lake Management Authority, will be something very
important for the region, and a great hope for the future of
Lake Tanganyika and a better sharing of its resources. Althoughthese regional mechanisms have not yet been implemented,
donors such as UNDP/GEF, African Development Bank (AFDB),
FAO, IUCN and other partners are interested in being part of a
Lake Tanganyika Integrated Regional Program (LTIP). A numberof projects directed to meeting the priority actions proposedby the UNDP/GEF Project SAP and the FAO/FINNIDA Project
FFMP are planned. AFDB and GEF, for example, have agreed
to work together and harmonize their initiatives under theLake Management Authority, including being willing to fundsome of the projects proposed in the areas of pollution control,
catchment management, and monitoring programs in Lake
Tanganyika riparian countries.
A meeting of the Lake Tanganyika Partners (UNDP/GEF, African
development Bank, FAO and IUCN) was held in June 2003.
The following projects are components of an Integrated Lake
Tanganyika Regional Program (LTIRP) agreed upon during thismeeting:•

An Interim Lake Tanganyika Management Authority(ILTMA), which has the same institutional organs as the
Authorities, except the Council of Ministers;•

A Lake Monitoring Program;•

Lake Pollution Control in Bujumbura, Burundi;•

Lake Catchment Management in Uvira Region, DR
Congo;•A Lake Catchment Management project in the Kigoma
and Kasulu regions, and a Lake Pollution Control projectin the cities of Kigoma and Ujiji, Tanzania; and,•A Lake Catchment Management project in the Mpulungu
Region, Zambia.

5.

Lessons Learned

Management of Lake Tanganyika and its drainage basin is
the responsibility of the “owners” of the resource; namely,
the governments and people of Burundi, DR Congo, Tanzania
and Zambia. These riparian countries alone could nothave established coordinated sustainable management
mechanisms for this shared resource. Important inputs to thisgoal have come through regional projects outputs, the mostimportant being: (a) FAO projects working at national levels
and coordinated by the FAO Committee for Inland Fisheries
for Africa (CIFA); (b) FAO/FINNIDA Lake Tanganyika Research
Project (LTR); and (c) UNDP/GEF Lake Tanganyika Biodiversity
Project (LTBP). FAO projects focused on ﬁsheries management,
while LTBP focused mainly on biological diversity conservation,water quality and pollution control, and habitat protection.
The main lessons learned from the involvement of each of theriparian countries and their institutions is that:•

There is a need for a national institution (body) thatshould coordinate all activities related to the lake andmanagement of its drainage basin; within each country,
responsibilities for lake resources management, water
quality protection, land management and soil protectionin the watershed, and tourism organizations currently
are fragmented in independent sectoral institutions;•

The sectoral institutions must establish clear programs
incorporating better management of the lake’s resources
and its watershed;•

These institutions require more ﬁnancial and humanresources; and,•

There is a need for more regional cooperation among
the riparian states.

The main lessons learned from the regional initiatives can besummarized as follows.
Experience and Lessons Learned Brief

373

From an early stage, clear common goals and objectives,
planning of activities, and good communication andtransparency between the primary implementing agencies, thepartner countries and the executing agencies, are essential in
multi-country projects. An initial phase (pre-project phase) toundertake these preparatory activities also is needed.
Ownership of the Convention for the Sustainable Managementof Lake Tanganyika, which resulted from the LTBP, is highly
accepted nationally and regionally because the Convention
was produced through an in-depth consultation process,mainly between technical experts of the four riparian States.
A good indication for this conclusion is that the Ministers inall the riparian countries have readily signed the document.
The experts in the different countries have been effective
in informing the decision-makers (politicians). The general
lessons learned from these experiences are that:••

The process is time- and budget-consuming for meetingat the national and regional levels; and the project
design must be prepared for many, sometimes lengthy,
consultations; andThe human dimension is very important for the successof such long-term programs. When experts meet anddiscuss important issues on multiple occasions, they
are better prepared to work effectively on the programs
they have jointly developed; a limitation in the region isthat personnel in key positions (technical and political)
in most of the countries often do not occupy theirpositions long. Thus, it is important that such programs
be implemented as quickly as possible, while the“designers” are still there, and local populations shouldbe empowered for action in the ﬁeld. Because the latterdo not change, they often are the only groups available
to better ensure the long-term viability of proposed
actions.

Participation and commitment of political authorities at
the highest level is extremely important for multinational
environmental management projects. Thus, it is recommended
that awareness-raising at the highest political level beundertaken. In this context, a formal assessment ofinstitutional mandates and capacities should be conducted
before implementation of projects, and be sanctioned by thehighest levels of government. Because poverty reduction has ahigh political priority, it is important that the linkages between
sustainable lake management and poverty reduction be madevery clear at an early stage, to ensure (political) engagement of
all stakeholders.
In implementing multi-country projects, it is tempting
to treat all the countries equally. Multi-country projects,
however, should recognize very early the differences between
the countries, and tailor work plans to capitalize on theopportunities rooted in the speciﬁc conditions in each country,
as well as compensating for constraints.

374

Lake Tanganyika

Long-term planning, although indispensable, mustnevertheless incorporate ﬂexibility, in order to allow
consideration of unexpected situations in the ﬁeld, on theregional (or international) scene, or in funding realities. Thus,
the best ways to adjust to new situations must be agreedto regularly between the local and regional (international)
partners.
In the Lake Tanganyika region, the security situation candeteriorate suddenly, as well as rapidly improve thereafter.
Thus, the creation of security plans is recommended,in coordination with local and international security
organizations. Projects should be ﬂexible enough to adjustprograms to take account of such unexpected situations in theﬁeld. Past projects involving Lake Tanganyika have shown thatnational staff (scientiﬁc, technical, local teams in villages, etc.)
may accomplish valuable goals in places where international
staff are not ofﬁcially allowed to work, or when there aresensitivities to the interest of the project by countries and theircommunities.
Because the ultimate success of an action plan is strongly
dependent on the participation of the entire population, it isimportant to strengthen local citizen’s participation in lake
management projects. This requires regular public hearings
about lake management, whereby the citizens are informed
about the progress of the project and have occasion to give
advice and direction on the best ways to proceed.
Inadequate communication is a major hindrance to effective
lake management. Thus, appropriate facilities (transport,
communication links, etc.) and budgets should be provided forany institutions, projects, or program with a regional scope.
For lakes shared by riparian countries in which two ofﬁcial
languages are used, budget time and translation mustbe allocated to address this issue. In such situations, it isgenerally proposed that the key personnel in the projects
be bilingual, although this condition is often difﬁcult tomeet. A good alternative solution is that, within the project,
an equivalent number of the key personnel should use thetwo languages to ensure that the needs of the participating
countries are equitably met.

6.

References

Coulter, G.W., J.J. Tiercelin, A. Mondegeur, R.E. Hecky and R.H.
Spigel. 1991. Lake Tanganyika and its Life. Oxford University
Press: London.
Coulter, G.W. and R.H. Spigel. 1991. “Hydrodynamics.” In:
Coulter, G.W. (ed.), Lake Tanganyika and its Life, Chapter 3.
Oxford University Press: London.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 1999. Lake
Tanganyika Framework Fisheries Management Plan. GCP/INT/
648/NOR. FAO: Rome.

Lewis, W.M., S. Chisholm, C. D’Elia, E.J. Fee, N. Hairston,J. Hobbie, G. Likens, S. Threlkeld and R.Wetzel. 1995.
“Challenges for limnology in North America: An assessment of
the discipline in the 1990s.” Bulletin of the American Society
for Limnology and Oceanography 4(2): 1-20.
Lindqvist Q.V., H. Mölsä, K. Salonen and J. Sarvala (eds.) 1999.
“From Limnology to Fisheries: Lake Tanganyika and other
Large Lakes.” Hydrobiologia 407: 1-218.

associated. Also, the colors, boundaries, denominations, andclassiﬁcations in this report do not imply, on the part of The
World Bank and its Board of Directors, or the countries they
represent, and the organizations, agencies or governments towhich any of the authors are associated, any judgment on thelegal or other status of any territory, or any endorsement or
acceptance of any boundary.

Mölsä, H., J.E. Reynolds, E.J. Coenen and O.V. Lindqvist. 1999.
“Fisheries research towards management on Lake Tanganyika.”
Hydrobiologia 407: 1-24.
Odada, E.O., D. Olago, K.A.A. Kulindwa, F. Bugenyi, K. West,
M.Ntiba, S. Wandiga and J. Karimumuryango. 2004. East
African Rift Valley Lakes: GIWA Regional Assessment 47.
Global International Water Assessment: Stockholm.
Plisnier P.D. 1997. Climate, limnology and ﬁsheries changes of
Lake Tanganyika. GCP/RAF/271/FIN-TD/72.
Plisnier, P.D. and E.J. Coenen. 2001. “Pulsed and dampened
annual limnological ﬂuctuations in Lake Tanganyika.” In:
Munawar, M. and R.E. Hecky (eds.), The Great Lakes of theWorld (GLOW), Food-Web, Health and Integrity. Backhuys
Publishers: Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ruﬂi, H. 2001. “Seasonal abundance of zooplankton and theplanktivorrous ﬁsh, Stolothrissa, in Tanzanian waters of Lake
Tanganyika.” In: Munawar, M. and R.E. Hecky (eds.), The Great
Lakes of the World (GLOW), Food-Web, Health and Integrity.
Backhuys Publishers: Leiden, The Netherlands.
Sarvala J., K. Salonen, M. Järvinen, E. Aro, T. Huttula, P.
Kotilainen, H. Kurki, V. Langenberg, P. Mannini, A. Peltonen,
P.D. Plisnier, I. Vuorinen, H. Mölsa and O.V. Lindqvist. 1999.
“Trophic structure of Lake Tanganyika: Carbon ﬂows in the
pelagic food web.” Hydrobiologia 407: 149-173.
Verburg, P., R.E. Hecky and H. Kling. 2003. “Ecologicalconsequences of a century of warming in Lake Tanganyika.”
Science 301: 505-507.
West, K. 2001. Lake Tanganyika: Results and Experiences of
the UNDP/GEF Conservation Initiative (RAF/92/G32) in Burundi,
Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania and Zambia. United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Global Environment
Facility (GEF) and UNOPS.

Disclaimer
The ﬁndings, interpretations and conclusions expressedin this report are the views of the authors and do notnecessarily represent the views of The World Bank and its
Board of Directors, or the countries they represent, nor dothey necessarily represent the view of the organizations,
agencies or governments to which any of the authors are
Experience and Lessons Learned Brief375