| 2.3.1.6. DesertsDeserts are an environmental extreme characterized by low rainfall that is
  highly variable intra-annually and interannually. Desert air is very dry; incoming
  solar and outgoing terrestrial radiation are intense, with large daily temperature
  fluctuations; and potential evaporation is high. Many organisms in the deserts
  already are near their tolerance limits (IPCC, 1996). The Sahara in north Africa
  and the Namib desert in southWest Africa are classified as the hottest deserts
  in the world-with average monthly temperatures above 30°C during the warmest
  months and extremes above 50°C. The diurnal temperature range often is large;
  winter nights in the Namib Desert sometimes are as cold as 10°C (IPCC 1996,
  WG II, Section 3.3.1) or lower. Extreme desert systems already experience wide
  fluctuations in rainfall and are adapted to coping with sequences of extreme
  conditions. Initial changes associated with climate change are less likely to
  create conditions significantly outside present ranges of tolerance; desert
  biota show very specialized adaptations to aridity and heat, such as obtaining
  their moisture from fog or dew (IPCC 1996, WG II, Section 3.4.2).  2.3.1.7. Mountain RegionsMountains usually are characterized by sensitive ecosystems and regions of
  conflicting interests between economic development and environmental conservation.
  In Africa, most mid-elevation ranges, plateaus, and high-mountain slopes are
  under considerable pressure from commercial and subsistence farming activities
  (Rogers, 1993). Mountain environments are potentially vulnerable to the impacts
  of global warming. This vulnerability has important ramifications for a wide
  variety of human uses-such as nature conservation, mountain streams, water management,
  agriculture, and tourism (IPCC 1996, WG II, Section 5.2).  There is a general picture of continuing ice retreat on the mountains. On Mount
  Kenya, the Lewis and Gregory glaciers have shown recession since the late 19th
  century (IPCC 1996, WG II, Box 5-3). Changes in climate (as projected in Greco
  et al., 1994) could reduce the area and volume of seasonal snow, glacier, and
  periglacial belts-with a corresponding shift in landscape processes. The retreat
  of some glaciers on Kilimanjaro and Mt. Kenya would have significant impacts
  on downstream ecosystems, people, and their livelihoods because of moderation
  of the seasonal flow regimes of rivers upstream. Further reduction of snow cover
  and glaciers also could reduce the scenic appeal of African high mountain landscapes
  for tourists and thus have a negative impact on tourism.  Forest fires would increase in places where summers become warmer and drier.
  Prolonged periods of summer drought would transform areas already sensitive
  to fire into regions of sustained fire hazard. Mt. Kenya and mountains on the
  fringes of the Mediterranean Sea already subject to frequent fire episodes could
  be affected (IPCC 1996, WG II, Section 5.2.2.3).  2.3.1.8. Adaptation and VulnerabilityThere is potential for spontaneous and assisted adaptation in Africa. Many
  options will need to involve a combination of efforts to reduce land degradation
  and foster sustainable management of resources. This section highlights options
  for forestry and woodlands, rangelands, and wildlife.  A number of adaptive processes designed to prevent further deterioration of
  forest cover already are being implemented to some degree. Some of these measures
  involve natural responses when particular tree species develop the ability to
  make more efficient use of reduced water and nutrients under elevated CO2 levels.
  Other adaptive measures involve human-assisted action programs (such as tree
  planting) designed to minimize undesirable impacts. These strategies will include
  careful monitoring and microassessment of discreet impacts of climate change
  on particular species. Low-latitude forest adaptation options, especially in
  west Africa, must include active vegetation and soil management. For example,
  Gilbert et al. (1995) have indicated that silvicultural practices, endangered
  species habitat management, watershed manipulation, and antidesertification
  techniques could be applied given current infrastructure in Cameroon and Ghana.
  These adaptive measures will help reduce climate change impacts on forest watersheds
  and semi-arid woodlands. Smith and Lenhart (1996) have identified enhancement
  of forest seed banks as an adaptation policy option for maintaining access to
  a sufficient variety of seeds to allow the original genetic diversity of forests
  to be rebred. Genetic diversity also provides an assurance that benefits provided
  by forests are not lost forever (Smith and Lenhart, 1996) and is particularly
  relevant to the maintenance of the forests in the Sahel and other extremely
  sensitive regions of Africa where 20 years of recurrent drought have degraded
  the forests. Mwakifwamba (1997) asserts that adaptation strategies or measures
  in Tanzania should focus mainly on reducing high deforestation rates, protecting
  existing forests, and introducing new species or improving existing species.
 
 
 
    
      | Table 2-4: Hydrological characteristics
	for the Zambezi and Nile River basins (extracted from Riebsame et al.,
	1995). |  
      | 
 |  
      | Parameter | Zambezi | Nile | Blue Nile |  
      | 
 |  
      | Length (km) | 2,600 | 6,500 | 1,000 |  
      | Area (km2 x 103) | 1,330 | 2,880 | 313 |  
      | Flow (m3/sec) | 4,990 | 2,832 | 1,666 |  
      | Flow (109 m3/yr | 157 | 89 | 53 |  
      | Specific Discharge (I/sec-km2) | 3.8 | 1.0 | 5.3 |  
      | Runoff (R) (mm) | 118 | 31 | 168 |  
      | Precipitation (P) (mm) | 990 | 730 | 784 |  
      | R/P | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.21 |  
      | PET/P | 2.50 | 5.50 | 1.80 |  
      | 
 |  
      | Note: PET = Potential evapotranspiration. |  
      | 
 |     For rangelands, Milton et al. (1994) present a conceptual model of arid rangeland
  degradation that suggests that degradation proceeds in steps-increasingly difficult
  and costly to reverse-and discusses adaptation options (see Box
  2-4). Assisted management is a lot harder for wildlife in game reserves
  than for livestock. Monitoring is required to identify populations at risk (from
  deforestation), as well as reserved areas that are changing their vegetation
  types in response to climate, leaving some animals in habitat types that are
  not suitable. Massive fragmentation of previous forests and woodlands makes
  it difficult for wildlife to migrate along corridors to areas with more water
  and foliage. Close monitoring would identify groups of wildlife that are in
  danger, and steps can be taken to move them to suitable habitat.  At the institutional level, mechanisms need to be created (or improved upon)
  to facilitate the flow of scientific results into the decision-making and policy-making
  process. Joint planning of projects that would impact cross-boundary catchment
  areas will become increasingly important if the climate becomes more variable
  and water more scarce for many regions of Africa. 
 
 
 
    
      | Box 2-4. A Conceptual Model of Arid Rangeland Degradation |  
      | Overuse by a narrow suite of domesticated herbivores has led to progressive
	  loss of secondary productivity and diversity in rangelands. Degraded
	  rangelands may not return to their original state, even when they are
	  rested for decades (Westoby et al., 1989; O'Connor, 1991). Milton et
	  al. (1994) develop the idea that the probability of reversing grazing-induced
	  change may be inversely related to the amount of disturbance involved
	  in the transition. They develop a stepwise model of rangeland degradation
	  and show how the potential for recovery appears to be related to the
	  function of the affected component. Their study stresses the need to
	  recognize and treat degradation early because management inputs and
	  costs increase for every step in the degradation process. Steps and
	  management options are described below.  Similar models can be constructed for climate effects, to conceptualize
	  potential impacts and points of intervention. |  
      | 
	        
	          | 
 |  
	          | Steps and management options for arid rangeland
		  degradation. |  
	          | 
 |  
	          | Stepwise degradation of arid or semi-arid rangelands.
		Symptoms describe the state of plant and animal assemblages; management
		options refer to actions that a manager could take to improve
		the condition of the range; and management level refers to the
		system (level of the food chain) on which management should be
		focused. |  
	          | 
 |  
	          | Step 0 |  |  
	          | Description: | Biomass and composition of vegetation varies with
		climatic cycles and stochastic events (e.g., droughts, diseases,
		hail, frost, fire) |  
	          | Symptoms: | Perennial vegetation varies with weather |  
	          | Management Option: | Adaptive management, involving timely manipulations
		of livestock densities |  
	          | Management Level: | Secondary producers (i.e., grazers and herbivores) |  
	          |  |  |  
	          | Step 1 |  |  
	          | Description: | Herbivory reduces reestablishment of palatable plants,
		allowing populations of unpalatable species to grow |  
	          | Symptoms: | Demography of plant population changes (age-structural
		changes) |  
	          | Management Option: | Strict grazing controls |  
	          | Management Level: | Secondary producers |  
	          |  |  |  
	          | Step 2 |  |  
	          | Description: | Plant species that fail to establish are lost, as
		are their specialized predators and symbionts |  
	          | Symptoms: | Plant and animal losses, reduced capacity to support
		herbivores |  
	          | Management Option: | Manage vegetation (e.g., add seed, remove plants) |  
	          | Management Level: | Primary producers (i.e., vegetation) |  
	          |  |  |  
	          | Step 3 |  |  
	          | Description: | Biomass and productivity of vegetation fluctuates
		as ephemerals and weed species benefit from loss of cover from
		perennial plants |  
	          | Symptoms: | Perennial biomass reduced (short-lived plants and
		instability increase), resident birds decrease, nomadic bird species |  
	          | Management Option: | Manage soil cover (e.g., mulching, erosion barriers,
		roughen soil surface) |  
	          | Management Level: | Physical environment (soil) |  
	          |  |  |  
	          | Step 4 |  |  
	          | Description: | Denudation and desertification involve changes in
		soil function and soil microbe activity |  
	          | Symptoms: | Vegetation cover completely lost, erosion accelerated;
		soil salinization, aridification |  
	          | Management Option: | Difficult to address; costs of restoration or rehabilitation
		too high; nonpastoral use of land only economic option |  
	          | Management Level: | Difficult to identify |  
	          | 
 |  |    |