orities for tree genetic resources and thereby increase the likelihood of successful community in situ conservation responses (FAO, 2007a). Although in some countries and some cultures social norms protect common resources—for example sacred groves are often respected by local communities and not used for extractive purposes—typically enforcement activities are required, whether undertaken by villagers or the government.

At the individual farm level, governments can help to develop institutions and policies that create incentives for local in situ conservation of agricultural diversity. This will be particularly important if farmers increasingly purchase limited varieties rather than using retained seeds. Specific options include the development and promotion of markets including specialty markets that attract premium prices.

The conditions for ex situ collections can be improved through better funding, investigation into new storage technologies, and prioritization. The current understanding of the costs of maintaining ex situ collections and the use of materials from these collections is limited. Key actions that are required therefore include exploring new technologies to improve the possibilities for ex situ conservation policy and methods. Because of the high cost of ex situ conservation, priority setting and sub-regional collaboration to pool resources and expertise and avoid duplication is seen as essential (Biodiversity International, 2007).

The System-wide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP) of the CGIAR is a new facilitation unit that aims to promote and facilitate research collaboration worldwide so that biodiversity in agriculture can play a much greater part in sustainable development. BioNET is an international notfor- profit initiative that aims to promote taxonomy, particularly in biodiversity rich but economically poor countries, working with local partnerships. Other coordinating mechanisms, like Tree of Life, coordinate research, without the
strong emphasis on local capacity development.

Livestock diversity is a particularly important aspect of agricultural biodiversity in SSA. Conserving livestock biodiversity is costly and complicated, and hence priority setting is critical in an environment of limited funding. Ex situ conservation is not practical for conserving animal genetic resources, hence the focus must be on in situ, with a priority being to conserve diversity across species and breeds or strains given that as yet there are no validated breed definitions across species and insufficient application of standardized evaluation protocols for genetic or phenotypic studies in Africa (Wollny, 2003). Measures of breed genetic distances and conservation costs are lacking for many species/breeds (Drucker et al., 2005), and there is little information on the population sizes of existing indigenous animal genetic resources and the changes in the sizes of pure breeding herds/ flocks over time in most SSA countries.

Characterizing livestock diversity will offer insights into genetic relationships that help ensure that conservation maintains the greatest amount of diversity. Because livestock diversity is being lost relatively rapidly, both short-term and long-term strategies are required. In the short term, rapid surveys and the estimate of population sizes by species and breed, with the identification of distribution patterns within agroecological zones can provide initial information for policy makers to obtain an overview of the national live

herd and formulate initial plans to conserve the existing farm animal populations in their habitat (Wollny, 2003). Inadequate valuation of livestock genetic resources may be contributing to genetic erosion, suggesting the need, therefore, for national policies that promote and enable the valuation of genetic resources in order to provide appropriate incentives, and to support efficient allocation of funds for in situ conservation (Wollny, 2003).

In the long run, breed genetic distances and conservation costs and phenotypic data are required, including biological, performance, and economic data and molecular information. Molecular genetic technology and GIS are techniques that can provide information on unique traits and population dynamics.

The development of policy decision-support tools has been proposed as part of wider genetic resource conservation and sustainable use projects in Africa and Asia that are being funded or considered for funding by German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). However, such tools have not yet been implemented and so their effectiveness is not known.

Sub-Saharan African livestock breeds will most likely only be conserved as a result of their adaptation and commercialization. This commercialization can be in terms of the end product—meat and livestock products—or in terms of the livestock genes. Once biotechnology has derived identifiable products from indigenous farm animal resources, commercialization of genes will become a possibility and the discussion of intellectual property rights and hence the potential for revenue generation will be made possible (Wollny, 2003). The different possible interventions need to be prioritized, taking into account the cost-effectiveness of each intervention, and market possibilities, thereby enabling a framework to be developed for the marketing of indigenous livestock and products. It is also important for systems to be developed that monitor and control the importation of animal germplasm, given the possible negative impact on diversity of cross-breeding.

Community and village breeding schemes have not been well documented, resulting in insufficient information on how farmers make livestock selections and the cost of community-based solutions to genetic erosion. Site-specific approaches taking into account the specific resources and constraints are most likely the only sustainable solutions (Wollny, 2003). Prioritization can only occur if there is adequate monitoring of changes in genetic diversity. Biodiversity International (formerly IPGRI) is increasingly working with local communities to encourage in situ conservation.

5.6.2 Managing agricultural and wildlife diversity
The conservation of wild biodiversity in SSA is threatened by the negative interaction between wildlife and agriculture. Farmers typically bear the costs of damage from wildlife, such as the destruction of field crops by elephants, without gaining any of the benefits from the wildlife. Farmers attempt to reduce the cost that wildlife imposes on their livelihoods by killing animals that cause damage. There are a number of options that can reduce conflict between agriculture and wildlife and therefore minimize loss of wildlife and wildlife biodiversity. These options include keeping livestock