1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Strengthening Adaptation and Resilience to Climate Change in Kenya Plus (StARCK+)

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Book project: Guidelines to Rangeland Management in Sub-Saharan Africa (Rangeland Management)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Resource Advocacy Programme (RAP) - Kenya

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

03/11/2017

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Approach

This approach – driven by communities and supported by various agencies - aims to revive and strengthen the traditional natural resource management institutions of Boran pastoralists in Northern Kenya. The traditional system, which was devised by the Boran pastoral community and honed over centuries to suit the challenges of the rangelands, has been steadily eroded by external factors and formalised systems after the emergence of the nation-state.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Pastoral Community Members together with the Jarsa Dedha (the council of elders who control the use of grazing land and its resources) are at the forefront of reinvigorating traditions of rangeland management. To achieve this, they have been supported by organizations including the Ward Adaptation Planning Committees (WAPC), the Resource Advocacy Programme (RAP) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). There has been a focus on reviving traditional institutions and systems of managing of natural resources to help communities adapt to climate change.
One specific project that has assisted the re-empowerment of the Dedha institutions was StARCK+ (funded by DfID). StARCK+ was founded on an understanding and an appreciation of the traditional natural resource governance of the Boran pastoral community. Responding to participatory demand it undertook to help strengthen this customary natural resource management system. Various agencies have also conducted research on the traditional institution and investigated how it could be improved. These include IIED, (UK), the University of Nairobi, (Kenya) and the University of Sussex (UK).
The Jarsa Dedha is an indigenous institution, through which customary laws and provisions guide the management of natural resources. The Boran of Isiolo County, Kenya, like their kin in southern Ethiopia, derive their customary laws from an overall supreme general assembly called the Gadha. The Gadha governing council preserves traditional laws and codes of conduct, as well as issuing amendments and additions based on the evolving environmental, social and cultural context. The Gadha system has a set of laws and provisions (seere), customs and culture (aada), and norms and values that govern society.

The recognition and observance of seere and aada are still considered vital for the wellbeing of the community, and the Gadha Council remains a legitimate institution in the eyes of Borana society. However, adherence to these laws is declining and the power of Borana customary institutions to enforce regulations is being undermined in a number of ways.
The reasons for weakening traditional institutions are basically poor recognition by the county and national government, and non-compliance with the rules due to changing socio-cultural norms. The council of elders that govern grazing resources, the Jarsa Dedha, which is the custodian of these unwritten rules and regulations locally, no longer has sufficient capacity or authority to enforce them as it had done prior to colonial rule. With climate change, pasture and water supplies are becoming scarcer and there is no other better way to govern land than the traditional system: that is why reviving, strengthening and improving the system was much welcomed through the advent of the StARCK+ project and the initiatives and support that have followed.
Looking towards the future, the rules of governing natural resources have been collected and formed into a draft county customary natural resource governance bill. This, if passed by the County Assembly, would represent a very significant step, by legitimising the traditional system of rangeland management through the Jarsa Dedha.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.4 Videos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• traditional/ indigenous

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach is aimed at strenghthening and re-empowering the traditional institutions that govern rangeland management in the rangelands of Isiolo, in order to improve utilisation of natural resources and build community resilience to droughts and future environmental changes.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	interactive	Pastoral Community Members, Dedha elders and supporting organizations like WAPC, RAP, IIED and DfID supported the process of reviving the traditional system of management of natural resources to help communities adapt to climate change.
planning	interactive	Pastoral Community Members and Dedha Elders to improve their systems of management of land and land-based resources.
implementation	interactive	Dedha elders as they are tasked with ensuring that the natural resource governance system is successful.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Pastoralists and elders to keep those tasked are properly undertaking the responsibilities.

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach

Explain:

The Participatory process is very essential in making the governance system work for pastoralists.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:

• land users

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

Largely elders but women and youth are also represented in the training.

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Constitutional clauses supporting management of land through traditional institutions.
Need to legislate the local traditional rules to county laws. Participatory mapping of Natural Resources in the grazing areas to improve planning.

Comments:

Community members really participated in the processes and trainings and understood the contemporary issues.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

The pastoralist extension training sessions take place in Agricultural Training Centre in Isiolo Town. They are normally conducted once or twice a year because of financial constraints.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The Dedha institution has been strengthened as they were enabled to undertake their responsibilities better.

Specify type of support:

• equipment

• Their meetings were supported and made frequent and increased reach.

Give further details:

Provided with materials like motorbikes.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Ja

Comments:

This is a traditional approach and it is effectively self-monitored for learning and improvement.

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

Ja

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

Specify topics:

• sociology
• economics / marketing
• ecology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Various institutions have conducted research on the traditional institution and investigated how it could be improved through strengthening and reviving it with new initiatives for improved governance of natural resources. The institutions are the International Institute for Environment and Development, (UK), the University of Nairobi, (Kenya) and the University of Sussex (UK).

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

The traditional system is self sustaining and thrives through local contributions but no specific budget lines.

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Nee

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• none

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

Comments:

The land users are pastoralists and surveillance of grazing reserves were undertaken to protect their pastures from irregular access. Dedha elders oversee the surveillance and health of rangelands.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Nee

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Ja

If yes, specify:

The rules of governing natural resources were collected and documented into a county customary natural resource governance bill.

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

The traditional system of managing natural resources for pastoralists has been in place for time immemorial and it supports their way of life and even if there is minimal support from outside, such as the empowering approach, the SLM will still continue as it was developed by Boran pastoralists – who feel it is the most legitimate and appropriate system of governing rangelands in the region. This has been confirmed by many analytical studies of the system.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
It is inherent approach that will pass to the next generation of pastoralists with the new innovations that are incorporated over the years.
It is the cheapest and easiest way of managing the rangelands for posterity.
It is a very flexible approach that's accepting new changes so that the technology is conversant at all times.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
It is a legitimate system recognized by all pastoralist for management of their rangeland resources.
It is conservative and less costly to implement in the vast rangelands with little incentives.

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
There is no law protecting it.	The government need to establish a law that recognizes and protects the approach.
The changing social norms with globalization and diversification of livelihood is pausing a challenge like Commercial Pastoralism	Government need to establish policies and plans as well as legislations that recognizes the traditional systems and institution for the approach to be successful for long

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
There are many competing claims over rangeland resources and government supports some.	Create awareness of local leaders about the competing claims and lobby them to protect rangeland resources.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Evolving pastoralists institutions by patison and tari

Available from where? Costs?

IIED Website

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Evolving customary institutions by patison and tari

URL:

pubs.iied.org/pdfs/10076IIED.pdf

Title/ description:

Strengthening Customary institutions the case of Isiolo County Northern Kenya by Caroline, Tari and Jarso

URL:

www.celep.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Strengthening-local-institutions.pdf

Title/ description:

Investing in institutional ‘software’ to build climate resilience

URL:

https://anglejournal.com/article/2015-06-investing-in-institutional-software-to-build-climate-resilience/

Title/ description:

Inclusive green growth in Kenya: Opportunities in the dryland water and rangeland sectors

URL:

http://pubs.iied.org/10137IIED/

Title/ description:

Vegetation resources and their economic importance in Isiolo County, Kenya

URL:

http://pubs.iied.org/10141IIED/