In most parts of sub Saharan Africa different complex and interlinked factors have contributed to massive land degradation which in turn has affected soil fertility and agricultural productivity leading to food insecurity. Land degradation is one of the major issues being addressed by the African Highlands Initiative (AHI); through collective action and linked technologies in the Landcare approach. Landcare is a community based approach that develops and applies innovative solutions to natural resource management (NRM) challenges while encouraging broader partnerships for natural resource management. It is flexible, strategic, and can use a set or sets of appropriate land management practices. The study was carried out in Tanzania, Uganda and Ethiopia to assess impact of linked technologies and collective action on livelihoods and the natural resources; to establish their role in the rapid upscaling of sustainable land management (SLM) technologies. The study utilised interviews and focus group discussions to assess these impacts where 210 farmer participants in the three countries were interviewed. Results indicate that 77% of the farmers in Tanzania, 54% in Uganda and 61% in Ethiopia were willing to be involved and experiment in SLM after realising multiple benefits from linked technologies. 75% of participants were able to better manage their land and increase incomes. This paper illustrates how collective action and linked technologies can contribute to rapid up scaling of sustainable land management technologies in Eastern Africa
Tag: collective behaviour
How can collective action and customary laws help to manage conflicts over natural resource commons in rural communities? Case study of Zambia
This paper has been prepared for presentation at the CAPRi Workshop on Collective Action, Property Rights, and Conflict in Natural Resources Management. The present version has not undergone review. 1 Ambiguity in property rights underlies some customary practices such as bush fires and browsing by livestock which create conflicts in managing natural resource commons (natural fodder and bush animal meats) in eastern Zambia. To minimize risks of potentially explosive conflicts, among different socio-economic groups in the communities embarked on collective dialogues leading to the formulation of by-laws to guide privileges and responsibilities regarding the management of the above natural resources. In this paper, we (i) described the background of the problem and social conflicts associated with natural resource commons in Zambia; (ii) chronicled the process leading to the formulation, implementation and effectiveness of by-laws to manage the conflicts; (iii) conducted a sample survey of 196 households to assess the impacts of the by-laws on households and the different socio-economic groups in the communities. The study showed that collective dialogues and collaboration with traditional leaders can provide important entry points for interventions to minimize natural resources conflicts. Survey results of the impact of the by-laws revealed a remarkable reduction in the incidence of bush fire outbreaks (from 46% to 16%) and grazing that have led to conflicts in managing natural resources in the communities. It also showed that households who practice agroforestry and those headed by women were pleased with the by-laws; but livestock owners, boys and households who do not practice agroforestry perceive that they were disadvantaged by the by-laws. The following lessons were drawn from the study: (i) the distribution of the benefits (or costs) associated with a given natural resource among different interest groups influences the effectiveness of interventions to collectively manage the resource in rural communities; (ii) the possibility of inadvertent privatization of seasonal natural commons should be critically assessed as part of the efforts to minimize resource conflicts; (iii) the effectiveness of collective action on natural resources is closely linked to consensus-building among different stakeholders and willingness to review actions when and where necessary; (iv) an understanding of the dynamics of power structure among different interest groups in rural communities is critical to collectively manage natural resources and minimize conflicts.
Enabling negotiation and conflict resolution for area wide planning: the case of collective action for watershed management
An increasing population, land fragmentation and soil erosion have put a very big strain on land productivity in the African highlands. An eroding cultural fabric has had the negative effect of removing cultural safeguards on land that dictated sustainable utilization of natural resources. The land market has equally contributed in further degradation through action of absentee landlords, while the leasing of land is a disincentive to investments in Land management. Successful natural resource management at watershed level calls for an area wide approach to conservation planning and this is also stringent upon an active collective action process. The paper highlights conservation efforts in East Africa and more specifically in Uganda where Landcare is practiced, where evolving land tenure arrangements, unclear property rights regimes and differences amongst farming community members have created barriers resulting to natural resource management based conflicts. It illustrates the role of collective action in developing bye laws for negotiating a local level conservation agenda and for the legitimization of the conservation process. The paper discuses the application of Participatory Action Research (PAR) in creating understanding amongst community members and other stakeholders, developing a clear agenda for negotiation and conflict resolution with the good health of the Land as a bottom line. It enumerates PAR’s various advantages in bye-law development, and the scaling-up of good practices. Further, it describes the development of lessons and scenarios for application at higher levels i.e. the district and regional levels.
The challenges of inclusive cross-scale collective action in watersheds
Increasing attention to watershed management is part of an international policy trend toward integrated water resource management. Integration is multidimensional—across sectors, administrative regions, ministerial portfolios and levels of hydrologic structure and socioeconomic organization. Collective action is key. Individuals need to work effectively together to share common water points; upstream land users and downstream water consumers need to manage and resolve potential conflicts over water quantity and quality, while all the industries, farming communities, urban residents and public agencies that have interests in resource use and environmental quality need to agree on development and conservation objectives and approaches at the basin level. Initiatives that seek to foster collective action in watersheds need to account for the very different interests in water and watershed management. While there may be relatively straightforward ways to foster collective action at a local scale, some forms of collective action may, in fact, be detrimental to other stakeholders. In the developing world in particular, there are often geographic pockets and social groups that are chronically disadvantaged in collective and public processes. Water-users’ associations and basin authorities may exacerbate these disparities and further marginalize already poor people. New statutory institutions may intentionally or inadvertently disempower effective customary local institutions. To enable project and program designers to address these challenges better, this paper lays out a framework for assessing the potential for, and implications of, individual and collective decisions in a watershed context. The framework integrates concepts drawn from the biophysical and social sciences, including new perspectives on watershed components, poverty, and collective action. Collective action is seen as a fractal process: collective action for water management at one level of social-spatial organization can have spillover effects at lower and higher levels of social-spatial resolution. To be pro-poor, watershed-management institutions must be genuinely inclusive, deliberately recognizing the interests, perspectives and knowledge of groups that may be systematically excluded from other political and social processes. Researchers, evaluators, watershed-management practitioners and others who apply the framework should be better placed to lay the foundations for that illusive goal: pro-poor, inclusive and resource-conserving development.
Blessing or misfortune?: locals, transmigrants and collective action
Beyond coping mechanisms: adaptation of communities to climate change through landcare in East Africa
Africa particularly the SubSaharan region is among the most vulnerable groups to impacts of climate variability and change. Current debates have shifted emphasis from mitigating climate induced risks to preparing and adapting to the expected adverse effects. Adaptation is often thought of as coping mechanisms that poor communities use to deal with climate change. Despite low adaptive capacity, some communities have developed adaptation strategies to cope with climate variability and extreme events. Recent studies indicate that adaptation can and must go further. Results from Landcare experiences illustrate that communities have the capacity to not only cope with climate change events, but also adapt to the changing weather patterns by taking control of their resources. The Landcare approach enabled communities to address natural resource problems through collective action, partnership and sustainable management of natural resources to address issues of climate change. With access to information, technology options, capacity building, and institutional partnership, communities were able to better manage their resources.