Integrated and collaborative approach in management of savannah rangelands with high livestock (Tanzania, United Republic of)

Ushirikiano wa jamii na wadau mbalimbali wa maendeleo katika kuendeleza nyanda za malisho za uoto asilia wa savannah wenye ng’ombe wengi (Swahili).

Description

Using integrated and collaborative approach in managing land degradation and conflicts in Savannah range land with high livestock.

Aims / objectives: a) Conservation of Savannah range land guaranteed through improved rainwater harvesting, improved pasture management and improved livestock genetic potential
b) Frequent range land use conflicts are resolved and halted
c) Resource conserving and environmental sound livestock husbandry practice adopted and widely used.

Methods: Community working by various stakeholders (land users, various level extension workers, employed and elected representatives, project staffs and administrators at the local and central government) and supported by the North South Trans border project (NSTP) uncovered their setbacks through participatory dialogues events. Participatory/multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events enabled identification of a combination of technologies needed to solve the existing problems as construction of rain water harvesting structure, pasture management (introduction of nutritious and palatable pastures) and livestock improvement through introduction of improved bulls. Joint planning events eventually resulted to development of Bubale community SLM action plan indicating activities, resources and roles. Each stakeholder absorbed the uncovered messages and integrated the ideas into responsive and complementary SLM plans. SLM plans were used to mobilize, negotiate and search for both internal and NSTP supportive resources and thus land users acquisition of the necessary technological input, equipment and financial resources. Knowledge acquisition & skill development was achieved through extension advisory services and on the job and action based training. Technology adaption and innovation was stimulated through; 1) pasture demo plots 2) incentive system 3) quick win interventions 4) and through reinforcement of rules and regulation guiding and protecting the use of the technologies.

Stages of implementation: Situational analysis; community awareness and sensitization events. Problem identifications, analysis and research: defining the root cause of land problems and appropriate technological solution using participatory dialogues. Development of the Bubale community SLM action plan: through collaborative & integrative events. Development of stakeholder plans complementary & responsive to the Bubale community SLM plans. Resource mobilization: using Bubale SLM plan and other stakeholder’s complementary plans. Implementation: collaborations between the community and other stakeholders. Supervision, operation and maintenance of completed technologies: democratic devolution of completed projects to beneficiary groups selected by empowered land users using their own forums and democratic process and subsequent training in operation and maintenance.

Role of stakeholders: Field level (sub village, village & ward): Daily supervision. Planning, review and decision making through obligatory meetings. Setting & reinforcing bylaws guiding the use and protection of technologies. Intermediate level (district level): extension services, technical expertise, and supervision and monitoring. Assist the community in interpreting the relevant policies, rules and laws guiding and protecting the use of various SLM technologies. Reporting implementation progress to the regional level & other stakeholders. Control of support funds, procurement procedures and make payments subject to approval by the community project committee. Regional level: Supervision monitoring and reporting implementation progress to the national level and were the subject matter consultants providing services upon request by the district. Policy makers (Councillors and Member of Parliament): supervision, monitoring, policies interpretation & reinforcement of rules and bylaws protecting the technologies. Central government: resolving and managing land conflicts & observing peace and tranquility.

Location

Location: Missenyi, Kakunyu, Bubale village, Tanzania/Kagera region, Tanzania, United Republic of

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • n.a.

Initiation date: 2012

Year of termination: n.a.

Type of Approach

Approach aims and enabling environment

Main aims / objectives of the approach
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Pasture establishment & improvement of genetic potential )

a) Stop uncontrolled exploitation and degradation of range land through correct stocking, improved pasture management and controlled fire burning.
b) Resolve and halt conflict over the use of range land among livestock keepers and between crop and livestock keepers
c) Improve livestock production and productivity through the use of animals with high genetic potentials.
d) Ensure availability of financial resources to invest in sustainable range land management


The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: a) Overuse and degradation of range land resources through overstocking, poor pasture management and uncontrolled fire burning.
b) Conflict over the use of range land among livestock keepers and between crop and livestock keepers.
c) Low livestock production and productivity due to poor livestock practices (use of animals with low genetic potentials).
d) Lack of financial resources to invest in sustainable range land management
Conditions enabling the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
Conditions hindering the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
  • Social/ cultural/ religious norms and values: Poor cultural traditions: keeping large stock of low genetic potential as prestige going together with overgrazing Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training in the use of improved animal husbandry practices, recommended stocking and introduction of improved bulls.
  • Availability/ access to financial resources and services: Reluctance to invest in SLM and improved husbandry practices Treatment through the SLM Approach: Awareness creation through demonstrations, incentive system and various training (seminars, workshop and meetings)
  • Institutional setting: low performance of grassroots institutions (community project committee) Treatment through the SLM Approach: Improving performance of community project committee through training in supervision and monitoring
  • Legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights): Land user ignorance in laws, rules and regulations guiding SLM Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training and awareness creation of land users to various laws, rules and regulations guiding and protecting SLM technologies. The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately hindered the approach implementation The range land is largely communally owned and this to some extent is hindrance to improved pasture management.
  • Knowledge about SLM, access to technical support: Poor access to various expertise needed for smooth implementation of SLM technologies (e.g. charco dam construction experts) Treatment through the SLM Approach: Access improved through project support
  • Workload, availability of manpower: Failure to implement some of SLM technologies due to high workload demand Treatment through the SLM Approach: The project enabled land users to gain access to the work simplifying equipment and machinery.

Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
What stakeholders / implementing bodies were involved in the Approach? Specify stakeholders Describe roles of stakeholders
local land users/ local communities local community & land users in Bubale village. Community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level male & female livestock keepers but almost 70% of livestock keepers are men. Mobilization and emphases was given to involvement/participation of widows, land users living with HIV/AIDS and handicapped/disabled almost in each every SLM process phases and steps,
SLM specialists/ agricultural advisers The district level provided the various subject matter specialists (SMSs) who played the role of delivering extension services, necessary technical expertise, supervision and monitoring SMSs and NSTP project officers.
local government Missenyi District council, Kakunyu ward and Bubale village
national government (planners, decision-makers) central government (Missenyi division secetary & district commisioners office) councillors and member of parliament were part of the policy makers
international organization North South Transboundary Project
administrators at the local and central government
Lead agency
All approach design process phases and steps were gender sensitive
Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
none
passive
external support
interactive
self-mobilization
initiation/ motivation
community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level. were involved in problem identification and situational analysis.
planning
community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level Collaborative planning events of which eventually resulted to development of Bubale responsive comprehensive community SLM action plan indicating activities, resources and roles to be played by various stakeholders.
implementation
community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level Daily supervision of construction work, contributed in terms of indigenous knowhow, cheap labour, material in kind and security and setting and reinforcing bylaws guiding implementation of technologies.
monitoring/ evaluation
community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level participated in collaborative and client interactive monitoring
Research
community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level participated in multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events (special meetings, workshops and seminars)
Flow chart

Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology

Decisions were taken by

  • land users alone (self-initiative)
  • mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists
  • all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
  • SLM specialists alone
  • politicians/ leaders

Decisions were made based on

  • evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
  • research findings
  • personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

The following activities or services have been part of the approach
Capacity building/ training
Training was provided to the following stakeholders
  • land users
  • field staff/ advisers
  • politicians, employed and elected leders, admintrators and other stakeholders
Form of training
  • on-the-job
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
  • courses
  • special meetings, workshops and seminars
Subjects covered

In-house training, action based training and learning by doing on the job these include: pasture management, hay making, use and management of improved bulls and charco dam construction and management, environmental impact assessment, law and guiding and protecting the use of particular SLM and further operation and management.

Advisory service
Advisory service was provided
  • on land users' fields
  • at permanent centres
Name of method used for advisory service: community participatory dialogues and analytical process ; Key elements: builds trust and understanding with land users, ensures that the viewpoint and realities of land users are accurately reflected, empower participation of the disadvantaged and promote ownership of the analytical process ; so the process was largely people centered

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The fifth phase ruling government elected in October 2015 is committed to support land conservation. To a large extent the commonest electoral manifesto of the ruling party emphasis on the importance of land/environmental protection.
Institution strengthening
Institutions have been strengthened / established
  • no
  • yes, a little
  • yes, moderately
  • yes, greatly
at the following level
  • local
  • regional
  • national
Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.
Type of support
  • financial
  • capacity building/ training
  • equipment
Further details
the community project committee was supported in terms of training in supervision and client interactive monitoring. beneficiary groups were trained on project operations and maintenance.
Monitoring and evaluation
economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Increased animal production and productivity bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Annual livestock water accessibility (No. of months) bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government through measurements; indicators: Annual livestock water accessibility (No. of months) technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: No of livestock keepers using recommended animal husbandry practises technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: No of livestock keepers using recommended animal husbandry practises socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Readiness to use improved bulls and correct stocking, % reduction of uncontrolled fire burning socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Readiness to use improved bulls and correct stocking, % reduction of uncontrolled fire burning economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Increased animal production and productivit area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Hectare of range land well conserved area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Hectare of range land well conserved no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: No. of livestock keepers adopting improved pasture managment and use of improved bulls, % reduction of land conflicts no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: No. of livestock keepers adopting improved pasture managment and use of improved bulls, % reduction of land conflicts management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: The level of community involvement and ownership of the approach management of Approach aspects were monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: The level of community involvement and ownership of the approach There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Monitoring and evaluation revealed the need to devolve supervision and management of completed project (charco dam, pasture demo and improved bulls) to beneficiary groups. There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation
Research
Research treated the following topics
  • sociology
  • economics / marketing
  • ecology
  • technology
  • problem analysis and identification

Technologies needed for solving the existing land problems and improvement of the situation were identified through project supported participatory and multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events

Financing and external material support

Annual budget in USD for the SLM component
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.a.
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government (North South Trans border Project (NSTP) ): 50.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Missenyi District Council ): 30.0%; local community / land user(s) (Bubale Community ): 20.0%
The following services or incentives have been provided to land users
  • Financial/ material support provided to land users
  • Subsidies for specific inputs
  • Credit
  • Other incentives or instruments
Financial/ material support provided to land users
partly financed
fully financed
dam excavation equipment

agricultural: seeds

pasture seed

stone, wood and bank stabilization materials

Labour by land users was

Impact analysis and concluding statements

Impacts of the Approach
No
Yes, little
Yes, moderately
Yes, greatly
Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?

Land conflicts and incidences of uncontrolled fire burning are currently minimal compared to the time before and livestock keepers are currently enjoying year-round availability of water for animal watering.

Did the Approach empower socially and economically disadvantaged groups?

This is in terms of easy access to water for both domestic use and animal drinking and improved bulls and acquisition of new skills

Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?

The approach give emphasis to tackling land issues through association life i.e. through group organization and management.

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

15 livestock keepers in Bubale village have adopted improved pasture management (in terms of establishment of improved pasture and fencing) and 5 of them have procured improved bulls.

Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
  • increased production
  • increased profit(ability), improved cost-benefit-ratio
  • reduced land degradation
  • reduced risk of disasters
  • reduced workload
  • payments/ subsidies
  • rules and regulations (fines)/ enforcement
  • prestige, social pressure/ social cohesion
  • affiliation to movement/ project/ group/ networks
  • environmental consciousness
  • customs and beliefs, morals
  • enhanced SLM knowledge and skills
  • aesthetic improvement
  • conflict mitigation
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement
Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what hat been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • no
  • yes
  • uncertain

After the kick start support by the project then operation and supervision of the charco dam, pasture demo plot & improved bulls are devolved to the group of gender balanced beneficiaries who are selected through community priority and selection. Payments of user fee and penalties for those who violate set rules and regulations enable the community to manage operational, maintenance and other costs.

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • 1. Easy to access necessary external supportive resources
    2. Foster complementary and collaborative working relationship with multi-stakeholders
    3. Reduce land conflicts
    4. Open opportunity to shift from tradition to commercial livestock keeping (e.g. through acquisition of improved bulls)
    5.
    (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Scale up use of the approach
    Maintain complementary and collaborative working relationship
    Maintain the use of technology
    Scale up use of the approach
    )
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • 1. Is collaborative and integrative
    2. Highly rely on the use of existing local institutions and forums
    3. Quick win results and incentive system (e.g. pasture seeds) speed up adaption and innovation
    4. Multilevel participation and collaboration
    5.
    (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Strengthen and maintain collaboration and integration
    Continue strengthening use and operationization of existing institutions and forums
    Maintain quick win interventions and incentive system
    Maintain multilevel participation and collaboration

    )
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • 1. Destruction of established structures (e.g. fencing materials) by dishonest land users. Strengthen security (e.g. community police) and law enforcement
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • 1. High initial investment cost e.g. in charco dam construction/ improved bulls.
    2. Difficulties in the use and management of collective pasture demo plots
    Introduce user fee and strengthen group associations and rural credit facilities & financial institutions (e.g. SACCOS)
    Devolve management of demo plots to beneficiary groups & provide training in supervision, operation and management of pasture demo plots.

References

Compiler
  • ALLAN BUBELWA
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
Date of documentation: Jan. 3, 2016
Last update: Julie 6, 2017
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International