This is an outdated, inactive version of this case. Go to the current version.
Approaches
Inactive

Empowering Dedha institutions in governing the natural resources of Isiolo rangelands [Kenya]

Jars Dedha

approaches_3345 - Kenya

Completeness: 100%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
land user:

Boru Edin

+254 715 627 545

Kinna Dedha Elders

Kinna town, Kinna Ward, Isiolo County.

Kenya

Non-State Actor:

Jama Abdiaziz

+254 707 720 577

aziz2012ke@gmail.com

Pastoralist Capacity Development Programme (PACDEP)

Isiolo Town, Kenya

Kenya

land user:

Diba Rukia

+254 728 643 044

Ward Adaptation Planning Committee

Kinna, Isiolo County

Kenya

SLM specialist:
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)
Strengthening Adaptation and Resilience to Climate Change in Kenya Plus (StARCK+) {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6142, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Resource Advocacy Programme (RAP) - Kenya', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2. Description of the SLM Approach

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

Comments, short description:

The video clearly defines the technology and the approach

Date:

20/02/2015

Location:

Garbatulla Area

Name of videographer:

Hilda Kathure

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

Country:

Kenya

Region/ State/ Province:

Isiolo

Further specification of location:

Pastoral areas of Isiolo

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

Indicate year of initiation:

2012

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date when the Approach was initiated:

less than 10 years ago (recently)

Comments:

The project started 2012 and ended 2016 but the approach is still continuing

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

social/ cultural/ religious norms and values
  • enabling

The approach was traditional and embedded in the culture of boran pastoralists and therefore easy to implement.

  • hindering

The commercialization of livestock and its production like milk has made it difficult for elders to implement the approach.

availability/ access to financial resources and services
  • enabling

Communities make their own contributions to support implementation of the approach.

  • hindering

No specific budget assigned by government authority for this approach: some funds from projects and county government and contributions from the pastoralists themselves.

institutional setting
  • enabling

Well elaborated organizational design at all levels of institutional scale.

  • hindering

Collision between the mandates of traditional structure and formal structure. This was addressed through accepting Chiefs as ex-official members in the Dedha council of elders.

collaboration/ coordination of actors
  • enabling

Many NGOs and local organization support the implementation of the approach through providing means for surveillance such as vehicles or motorbikes. NGOs frequently also support Dedha assemblies that involve meetings of people from far away.

  • hindering

Government and some NGOs sometimes establish parallel grazing committees.

legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights)
  • enabling

Traditional tenure system.

  • hindering

No legal papers for the ownership.

policies
  • enabling

Traditional provisions and rules known by all community members.

  • hindering

Traditional rules not known to everyone.

land governance (decision-making, implementation and enforcement)
  • enabling

Elders make key decisions on governance of land.

  • hindering

Women and youth not well involved in decision making although changes are happening nowadays to include them.

knowledge about SLM, access to technical support
  • enabling

Traditional skills much used.

  • hindering

Little technical support.

markets (to purchase inputs, sell products) and prices
  • enabling

Ensures security and market thrives.

  • hindering

The approach is more social and not market oriented.

workload, availability of manpower
  • enabling

Youth provide man power Voluntarily.

  • hindering

Volunteers sometimes don’t come out for work.

3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

  • local land users/ local communities

Boran Community members, Dedha elders.

Agree on the pasture and water management approach and implement .

  • community-based organizations

Ward Adaptation Planning Committees.

Implement community plans and fundraise for it.

  • NGO

Resource Advocacy Programme (RAP), Merti Integrated Development Programme (MIDP), Pastoralist A Capacity Development E Programme (PACDEP), International Institute for Environment Development and Adaptation Consortium (ADA)

Support communities in implementing the approach.
Ward Adaptation Planning Committees; Implement community plans and fundraise for it.

If several stakeholders were involved, indicate lead agency:

WAPC , ADA and IIED

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)

Description:

The Dedha traditional system of managing resources has internal hierarchy at different levels i.e. Olla (homestead), Artha (locality) and Dedha (a large area). Although planning and minor decisions are made at local levels, major and binding decisions are agreed at Dedha level on grazing and management of pasture. Many NGOs and government actors engage the management system at Dedha level.

Author:

Ibrahim Jarso

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. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

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?

Yes

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?

Yes

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?

Yes

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

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. Financing and external material support

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?

No

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?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

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

Yes

If yes, specify:

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

6. Impact analysis and concluding statements

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

Did the Approach empower local land users, improve stakeholder participation?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Strengthens community rights and ownership of their land.

Did the Approach enable evidence-based decision-making?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The Approach convened the community and identified the community challenges and worked on it with the support of Dedha elders.

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

Supported the essential activities of the traditional system and made it easy to implement.

Did the Approach improve coordination and cost-effective implementation of SLM?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Improved coordination among the partners and made implementation easy.

Beside getting support from County climate adaptation program through the Ward Adaptation Planning Committee, the approach also got support from Water Sector Trust Fund.

Did the Approach improve knowledge and capacities of land users to implement SLM?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The knowledge is culturally passed to generations

Did the Approach improve knowledge and capacities of other stakeholders?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, other stakeholders’ knowledge on the system was also improved.

Did the Approach build/ strengthen institutions, collaboration between stakeholders?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, the Approach made local indigenous institution stronger and enhanced their collaboration.

Did the Approach mitigate conflicts?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

It provided platform for resource based conflict discussions and also settled many of local and trans-boundary conflicts through the empowered Dedha elders

Did the Approach empower socially and economically disadvantaged groups?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, the approached saved livestock from death in times of drought and built pastoral communities economically.

Did the Approach improve gender equality and empower women and girls?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The aAproach engaged the Dedha elders to accept women in their traditional institutions and entrenched gender in establishment of WAPCs

Did the Approach encourage young people/ the next generation of land users to engage in SLM?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Many youth were involved in implementing the Traditional systems of governance as a result of the approach

Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, the Approach led to formulation of customary natural resource management bill meant to enhance land rights.

Did the Approach lead to improved food security/ improved nutrition?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, through ensuring retention of livestock asset.

Did the Approach improve access to markets?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

The Approach through improvement of range management institution of Dedha, has helped to ensure there is food for pastoral herds and livestock with good body conditions were sold in local markets in good prices

Did the Approach lead to improved access to water and sanitation?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, through the approach many water facilities were better managed.

Did the Approach improve the capacity of the land users to adapt to climate changes/ extremes and mitigate climate related disasters?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, the Approach empowered the community to arrange their pattern of grazing to wet, dry season and grazing reserves to cope with climate extremes and disasters.

Did the Approach lead to employment, income opportunities?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Yes, many job opportunities were created for locals and also private businesses.

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

  • increased production

The livestock was calving and reproducing very fast leading to increased production as a result of good management of land.

  • increased profit(ability), improved cost-benefit-ratio

With minimal and voluntary inputs the pastoralists keep livestock in the range and make a lot of profit when they sell.

  • reduced land degradation

The controlled grazing pattern led to regeneration of degraded rangelands and improved its ecosystem services.

  • reduced risk of disasters

With strengthened dedha elders the community were able to prepare very well to drought and other disasters.

  • reduced workload

Available pasture when needed reduced the challenges of mobility to far areas and excess workload.

  • prestige, social pressure/ social cohesion

The approach enhances local prestige and also reduces the incidences of conflict in tough times enhancing social cohesion.

  • environmental consciousness

The approach allows regeneration of natural vegetation as pastoralists preserve pasture in one grazing area as they grazing in the other.

  • customs and beliefs, morals

The approach uses traditional etiquettes which enhances customs and beliefs.

  • enhanced SLM knowledge and skills

The approach allows young people to learn and attain new knowledge on proper governance of natural resources as well the elders attain new contemporary skills to manage land.

  • aesthetic improvement

The preserved grazing areas allows pasture to blossom and very beautiful to the eye as ecosystems regenerates and gets in to new life.

  • conflict mitigation

The approach reduces incidences of conflict as the use and stewardship of pasture and water is clearly defined.

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. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

2 visits

  • interviews with land users

6 interviews

  • compilation from reports and other existing documentation

2

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/

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules