Essay: Governance options in developing sustainable management plan for the Loitokitok area, Kenya

I. Stakeholders
There are several stakeholders that we have identified in a case study ‘Multiple methods in the study of driving forces of land use and land cover change’ which influence Farming/Cropping sector. They are the a government in a sphere of establishing policies at local and national levels, Maasai (locals), wild-life managers, migrants, land speculators and enterprises which operates in tourism and agriculture.
Table 1. Main stakeholders
After Kenya gained their independence land policy have an intention to provide regional development policy, which focused on the economic diversification of Loitokitok’s area, which includes farming, herding and wildlife tourism (Campbell et al., 2005).
As the main implemented activity in the herding sector, it can be considered the reform of division of land to individual and group ranches in the beginning of 1950s (Campbell, 1999). The general idea of this policy was to distribute lands with rights and responsibilities attached to them between group ranch members and individual farmers .The implementation of Group Ranches started in 1968 as the part of Kenya Livestock Development Program. According to Kamau Kimani and John Pickari (1998, p. 204) this policy mainly aimed to enlarge the agricultural fields, which would cause the decreasing of land degradation in the pastoral areas. More than that, there was the intention to commercialize livestock production, which also benefits in improving herders’ earning power and increasing the Maasai’s contribution to the economy of the country. Moreover, the expansion of irrigated and rain fed agriculture into rangelands in Loitokitok’s area were supported by government because they saw the opportunity of increasing agricultural production on these slopes.
As for the wildlife management, the tourism has become one of the most important activities for the country’s economy and considered as one of the main earners of foreign exchange in Kenya. Such governmental bodies as the Kenya Wildlife Service and the Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife where established to the develop tourist sector as well as protect the wildlife in national parks (Campbell, 1999).
The main problem of governmental initiatives was the poor management of them. J. C. Ng’ethe (1993) stressed that “Government influence and control in the group ranches was mainly through funding various facilities and in the repayment of loans…The problems of group ranches were further compounded by ineffective ranch committees which failed to properly manage and maintain dips, water pumps and engines”. So the lack of controlling and mentoring of the subdivision resulted in failure to meet policy’s objectives.
Massai presents one of the main habitats in the total population of the Southern Kajiado District. Historically they were the pastoralists (Campbell, 2005). The change in land distribution policy and the expansion of rainfed agriculture led Maasai to become engaged in farming. This helps him to diversified their economy and avoid drought risks. According to Cambell (2005, p. 776), “Herding was being replaced by mixed livestock-cropping enterprises, and the better-watered margins of the rangelands was extensively cultivated.
The main aim of Maasai’s people was to get well-watered land on the group ranches which were used herding and then agricultural activities: “The major incentive for acceptance of the concept of group ranches was that the Maasai saw in the legal title a means of maintaining their rights granted” (Campbell, 1986, p.47).
However, the opportunity to get land in this area adapted to agriculture led to the increase in the number of immigrants. The population’s growth resulted in the problem of water and soil resource availability. Also the problem of land degradation has arisen. According to Kimani and Pickari (1998) the majority of farmers couldn’t afford fertilizes to improve the situation. “Soil fertility decline, increased soil erosion, and deforestation were widely reported in 1996” (Campbell, 1999, p.394). In the Loitokitok area farming began in the 1930s with the establishment of a District Office. The administration employed staff who came from farming areas elsewhere in Kenya, and who began to cultivate. In the Loitokitok area it reflects natural increase as well as migration of large numbers from the congested central highlands of Kenya to farm the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro and other hills.
As for wildlife managers, among their main aims Campbell (2000) states nature diversity conservation – improving disrupted wildlife movements, access to water in riparian zones, and altered livestock grazing patterns. Another aspect, connected also with wildlife tourism enterprises, might be improving tourism facilities. Moreover, for a better management of various land use stakeholders of the region, there is an aim of wildlife managers to develop and implement strategies that might encourage people living near wildlife parks to accept the costs, and benefits, coming from the parks and the wildlife (Campbell, 2005).
Basically, therefore among their activities we can mention returning some of the revenues from wildlife-viewing activities to the adjacent landowners as compensation for the losses they incurred due to wildlife grazing and damage to crops during their wet season dispersal (Emerton, 1999; Lusigi, 1981; Norton-Griffiths, 1996; Norton- Griffiths and Southey, 1995; Western, 1976, 1982, 1994)).
As for the problems, Campbell (2005) defines such problems as crop damage and predation by wildlife, implications for the expansion of cultivation for habitat fragmentation, competition and disputes over access to reliable water with livestock herders, and farmers, threat of reduction of herd productivity and increase the drought risk.
Since Independence in 1963, national policy has contributed to the diversification of the area’s economy to include farming and wildlife-based tourism alongside herding. Land adjudication in Maasai areas ostensibly designed to reduce land degradation has been an important policy instrument. High potential land on the mountain slopes was allocated to prominent individuals as Individual Ranches, and most were quickly subdivided and sold to immigrant farmers. While the ranches have met peoples’ needs in years of good rainfall, in bad years movement beyond the ranch boundaries remains necessary (Campbell, 1999a).
Of non-Maasai farmers interviewed, 68% in 1977, and 60% in 1996 reported moving to the study area because of land shortage in the place of origin. The next most frequent cause of migration, drought, was indicated by 7% in 1977 and 38% in 1996 (Campbell, 2005). Some farmers were Maasai who, as in other areas, married women from farming groups. Additional migrants were relatives invited by these wives. Once the land market developed many migrated from areas of Kenya where land was in short supply (Campbell, 2005).
These migrants are overwhelmingly farmers and grow crops. Their main goal is economic development in the key to high crop yields and political independence of residence status. One of the main problems of migrants is the insecurity of their residence status, lack of their own land, from which there are conflicts with local residents – Maasai.
The primary change in land use and land cover was the expansion of irrigated and rain fed agriculture into rangelands comprised of Acacia woodland near the mountain and grassland savanna at lower elevations. Land adjacent to permanent water sources, e.g., along rivers at Kimana and Rombo, and around the swamps at Namalok and Isinet, had been cleared for cultivation. This expansion of agriculture was supported in government plans, and as opportunities expanded for grain production on the mountain slopes and vegetable production for export around swamps, agriculture attracted the attention of land speculators and business people (Campbell, 2005).
Political alliances have emerged among land speculators to gain or maintain control of critical land and water resources, and to influence policy on agriculture, wildlife and tourism, and land tenure. Such exercise of power is a critical issue and demands attention by those who devise policy and legal instruments that affect resource management and influence conflict over resources (Juma and Ojwang, 1996).
Finally, enterprises in Loitokitok area of Kenya are mostly divided into two large groups: agriculture and wildlife-based tourism. First group consist of livestock related enterprises (e.g., eggs and chickens), tree related enterprises (e.g., fruits and poles) and horticultural enterprises (vegetables) (Frank Place et al., 2008).
As for the aims of the agriculture enterprises, it is important to mention, that opportunities for commercial horticulture according to Campbell (2005) arise from market liberalization, abandonment of controls on currency exchange, and improved transportation linkages, including those to European markets using commercial aircraft, therefore these enterprises seek for continuation and strengthening of these policies.
Among the main problems of enterprises we can mention access to land and water resources (conflicts with herders and farmers), which is connected with political regulations on the land division (Campbell, 2005).
II. Sustainability of the actions and influences cased by activities
Land use patterns interconnected with social processes and the natural resources of the area and highly influenced by a number of initiatives, such as international initiatives (for example, biodiversity conservation and structural adjustment programmes (SAPs)); national policy (the ASAL development programme (Kenya, 1979; Campbell and Migot-Adholla, 1981; Bernard, 1985)) and wildlife management (Western, 1982, 1989, 1994); also there are local processes, such as immigration of farmers, institutional and economic change among herders, economic opportunities in horticulture and tourism, population growth and revision of land tenure rules. These interact in complex ways with each other and with the resources of the region.
As the main implemented activity in the herding sector one can consider the reform of division of land to individual and group ranches in the beginning of 1950s (Campbell, 1999). The general idea of this policy was to distribute lands with rights and responsibilities attached to them between group ranch members and individual farmers.
From the Independence (1963), government approached the diversification of Kajiado District’s economy to involve to it farming alongside herding and wildlife-based tourism (Campbell, 2005). Another important aspect of land adjudication was reduction of land degradation, therefore there was implementation of ranchos, which started in 1968 as the part of Kenya Livestock Development Program high potential ranches were given to affluent individuals as Individual Ranches and later were sold to immigrants after its subdivision. For others, which was the majority of Maasai, Group Ranches in savanna lowlands were created (Campbell, 2005).
According to Kamau Kimani and John Pickari (1998, p. 204) this policy mainly aimed to enlarge the agricultural fields, which would cause the decreasing of land degradation in the pastoral areas. More than that, there was the intention to commercialize livestock production which also benefits in improving herders’ earning power and increasing the Maasai’s contribution to the economy of the country and improving their overall sustainability.
Also it is necessary to mention political alliances, which emerged among land managers for getting a control of important land and water resources, and also to influence policy on agriculture, wildlife and tourism, and land tenure (Campbell, 2000).
Let us consider different aspects of their influence on each other.
Regarding farming, the impact of governmental bodies is controversial. On the one hand, the intention of new land policy distribution was aiming to create positive impact: assign land to specific groups or individuals and give them an opportunity to use it for agricultural or mixed cropping-herding activities. So they could provide to themselves sustainable living. On the other hand, the poor management and gaps of land use policies were the reason of conflicts of land distribution between Maasai, wildlife managers, and immigrants.
Concerning the sustainability of Maasais, it can be pointed out the change of their social role: from herders to mixed livestock-cropping activities. Secondly, with the process of intensification of agriculture, they enhanced their food-security status and implemented new income generator because they started to focus not only on the livestock but also on agricultural production. Farming and cropping activity allows Maasai to contribute to the national economy by production for markets which increased the access of habitats of this area to value chain. As the negative impact of farming activity, it can be mentioned the exploitative usage of soil which leads to land degradation. So, the interest of wildlife management who eager to provide nature conversation is offended.
The majority of the Maasai remained in the savanna lowlands where Group Ranches (GRs) were created that were based on traditional grazing areas and boundaries drawn to enclose sufficient wet and dry season water and grazing resources. While the ranches have met peoples’ needs in years of good rainfall, in bad years movement beyond the ranch boundaries remains necessary (Campbell, 1999a). The Maasai accepted the concept of group ranches not to improve resource management and economic conditions, but because they viewed legal title to the land as a means of securing their land from encroachment by immigrant farmers (Campbell, 2005). Thus, Maasai fears that immigrants will be harassed in the sowing area, which will reduce the amount of crops and the final amount of food.
As for wildlife managers and enterprises, that the actions were supportive for their sustainability and further development. The tourist industry is one of the most important for the national economic. Tsavo and Amboseli parks are among the most popular in Kenya. Furthermore, opportunities for income from tourism are being promoted by the government and are sought by local entrepreneurs.
The subdivision, and the altered authority structure, created some opportunities for the powerful group of Maasai, and other outside actors of the area. And wild-life management has got some benefits through politicians, who sought rights to land with a potential for revenue from tourism. Basically it was in exchange for their political support, and Kenyan Wildlife Service (KWS) has preferred working with younger people because they were considered as having greater support for its wildlife management policies comparing older people.
As for enterprises, Campbell (2005) states, that the main activity is on the land tenure transformation from communal to individual or group ownership through subdivision of group ranches. This has started in the 1960s policy of land adjudication when group ranches were implemented, and it was aimed at improving land management in rangelands. However, membership rights were given to male elders, and excluded women and younger people.
Another expected outcome for enterprises from subdivision aspect is resulting it to the land sales as well as emerge of a land market, what is based on the existing informal land claims, and the history of the land market quick emergence on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro after adjudication in the 1960s (Campbell, 2000).
Overall, Campbell (2000) claims that there would be winners and losers of this action, and enterprises are expected to be winners, as they they would be those who have already had claims on land and would benefit of opportunities from irrigated agriculture and wildlife-based tourism activity, what mostly refers to enterprises.
Oppositely, wild-life managers supposedly have number of concerns about the outcomes of the subdivision as habitat fragmentation and disturbance of migration patterns, as well as water access and pollution and fencing, that will negatively affect wildlife and related tourism” (Campbell, 2000). Therefore they are promoting incentives to increase economic returns from wildlife to reduce these trends.
National level policy on land adjudication and ownership reinforced sustained immigration that contributed to rapid population growth (Campbell, 2005). Although immigrant farmers have contributed to agricultural development, the extensive fences of coastal lands along rivers and around swamps has had a negative impact on wildlife’s access to water, causing changes in their distribution and movement.
In 1977, one community denied permission of NGO to survey because a previous research group had failed to report back to the community the results of their study. Local communities had begun to use strategies of seeking accountability on the part of government and NGOs. In their relationships with researchers, many communities have insisted on forms of participation from the research community. By the end of the 1990s, participation in forums, at which local people could hear, discuss, and scrutinize the results of research was regularly demanded of researchers throughout Kenya. These community workshops have proven to be a significant method for comparing and contrasting the perspectives and understanding of issues held by local people and the research team. They permit the results of the research and the interpretation of the external research team to be shared, their validity assessed, and their implications discussed (Smucker et al., 2004).
III. Conflicts and trade-offs
There are a number of problems, which arose among the stakeholders as the consequence of the actions. In 1977 about 30% of herders stated having conflicts with the wildlife. The main problems were competition between livestock and buffalo, elephant and other range species for water and grazing, and predation by lion and leopard. As for the farmers, their lands had good access to wildlife and 61% cited such problems with them, as were crop damage and fear of wildlife, the most significant being buffalo, antelope, elephant, and monkey. (Campbell, 2000)
In 1996 among basically same issues, were others as access to water and grazing, and the spread of disease.
Concerning he conflict about the water, it was claimed to be destroyed by herds looking for water, as well as using up water by farmers and overall nature conservation. (Campbell, 1999)
Other issues concern livestock disease and conflicts between wildlife, livestock, and humans, and this issue assumedly wasn’t addressed by any action.
As for conflicts of migrants, with the rapid population growth caused by immigration from other parts of Kenya, these rich areas have become populated, and today agriculture is spreading down the wetter edges of grazing land, along rivers and around wetlands. This has reduced the area available for livestock grazing and facilitated access to water for both livestock and wildlife. Changed resource use is the basis for land use conflicts. By 1996, the situation was more complicated. There were more non-Masai farmers, and many former Maasai herders were engaged in farming. The circumcised area expanded beyond the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro. These land-use changes have modified the choice of shepherds for water and livestock grazing and led to conflicts between immigrant farmers and shepherds, former farmers, Masai (Campbell, 2000). While ranchers have a reasonable expectation that they will acquire part of the land under the unit, the result is unclear to non-members. Many immigrants have been farming on group ranches as part of informal agreements for more than a decade. Separation and division of land among ranchers can result in them losing access to land. This raises the tense political question of whether these farmers should have claims to land (Campbell, 2005).
In 1996, however, many of the immigrant farmers sought redress from civil authorities. For example, farmers in conflict with herders reported resort to chiefs (20%), the courts (15%) and the police (9%) – and to violence (19%) (Campbell, 2000).
To sum up, it can be identified the problem in resource distribution among the interested groups: “Comparison of the survey results from 1977 and 1996 indicate that conflict over access to resources has increased, and that violence between and among groups is more common” (Campbell, 1999). The cultivation of mountains slops and expansion of agricultural activity reduces the access of wildlife to water resources and appearing the problem of soil erosion. Also, the observation area for tourists coming to Kenya also reduced, which doesn’t benefit the tourism sector of economy.
One of the trade-off between wildlife management, government and farmers could be considered attempts of wildlife managers from 1970 to develop and implement strategies that encourage people living near wildlife parks to embrace the costs and benefits associated with them. The main strategy was to ensure that neighboring landowners received part of the income from tourism activities, as compensation for losses to agricultural fields incurred due to grazing wild animals. However, this measure did not succeed, because it did not reduce the complaints of farmers as well as did not have a positive effect on the policy of conservation of wild-nature (Campbell, 2005).
IV. Possible policy implications or approaches to solution
In Kajiado, reform seemed to be inevitable, but it is clear that more information was needed on the likely ecological and household impacts that could result, so that if there were deleterious effects, these could be ameliorated through appropriate action. Such action could take the form of encouraging group ranch members to form grazing associations, or promoting the development of other economic activity that can provide other options for agro-pastoralist households that are faced with declining livestock numbers and productivity. Model results have highlighted the fact that the impacts of subdivision are not the same in all circumstances, but differ in relation to particular household and ecological characteristics. This shows clearly that the process of subdivision needs to be flexible and adapted to local conditions (Thornton, 2005).
Political initiatives are mediated by these complex interactions, and therefore it is difficult to predict the results of land use and they are not uniform from a spatial or social point of view. An analytical framework that clearly addresses such complex issues as political ecology can serve as an informational basis for political discussions. Initiatives that recognize uncertainty and promote the flexibility of future outcomes may be more effective in promoting sustainable land use (Thornton, 2005).
Policies and actions that could help sustain pastoral communities as well as the wildlife they live with include (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2009):
Changing policies so that communities can manage and benefit from their own resources, including wildlife;
Permitting and encouraging communities to earn high returns and be paid directly from sustainable businesses on their land;
Other means of payment for ecosystem services, such as easements and leasing for conservation;
Education and support for improving rangeland;
Recognition that pastoralists need extensive area to move – and pastoralism is often the most sustainable livelihood in semi-arid lands;
Support for livestock corridors as well as wildlife corridors.
REFERENCES
Ayantunde A.A., Leeuw J., Turner M.D., Said M. (2011). Challenges of assessing the sustainability of (agro)-pastoral systems. Livestock Science, 139 (2011), pp. 30-43;
Boone R.B., Shauna B. BurnSilver S.B., Thornton P.K., Worden J.S., Galvin K.A. (2005). Quantifying Declines in Livestock Due to Land Subdivision Rangeland Ecology & Management, 58(5), pp. 523-532;
Campbell, D. (1986). The Prospect for Desertification in Kajiado District, Kenya. The Geographical Journal, 152(1), pp. 44-55. doi:10.2307/632937;
Campbell, D. (1999). Response to Drought among Farmers and Herders in Southern Kajiado District, Kenya: A Comparison of 1972-1976 and 1994-1995. Human Ecology, 27(3), pp. 377-416;
Campbell D.J., Gichohi H., Mwangi A., Chege L. (2000). Land use conflict in Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Policy, 7 (2000), pp. 337-348;
Campbell D.J., Lusch D.P., Smucker T.A., Wangui E.E. (2005). Multiple methods in the study of driving forces of land use and land cover change: a case study of SE Kajiado district, Kenya. Human Ecology, 33(6), pp. 763-794;
Galvin K.A., Beeton T.A., Boone R.B., BurnSilver S.B. (2015). Nutritional Status of Maasai Pastoralists under Change. Human Ecology, (2015), pp. 411–424;
Eriksen S., Lind J. (2008). Adaptation as a Political Process: Adjusting to Drought and Conflict in Kenya’s Drylands. Environmental Management, (2009). pp. 817–835;
Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations. (2009). Land-use planning: an introduction to policy maker. Retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/tempref/docrep/fao/011/i0821e/i0821e01.pdf;
Kimani, K., & Pickard, J. (1998). Recent Trends and Implications of Group Ranch Sub-Division and Fragmentation in Kajiado District, Kenya. The Geographical Journal, 164(2), 202-213. doi:10.2307/3060370;
Ng’ethe J.C. Group ranch concept and practice in Kenya with special emphasis on Kajiado District. Retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/Wairdocs/ILRI/x5485E/x5485e0t.html;
Thornton P.K., BurnSilver S.B., Boone R.B., Galvin K.A. (2006). Modelling the impacts of group ranch subdivision on agro-pastoral households in Kajiado, Kenya. Retrieved from: http://www.nrel.colostate.edu/assets/nrel_files/labs/coughenour-lab/pubs/Publications/thornton_et_al_Kajiado_PHEWS_06.pdf.