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

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

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

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

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

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

Yes

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

Comments:

The technology is a sustainable land management practice that had been used for time immemorial by Boran pastoralists to manage land and land-based resources.

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The Dedha grazing system is an ancient, traditional governance system for land and its resources practiced by Boran pastoralists. It carefully balances how pastoralists use rangeland resources. The basis of the technology is three grazing rangeland governance zones: wet season grazing, dry season grazing, and drought reserves. There is also water governance based on a traditional hierarchy of rights. Through this system, Boran pastoralists adapt to severe and recurrent droughts.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

This grazing system is applied in Isiolo County, Northern Kenya. The Waso rangelands are inhabited by Boran pastoralists with Somali, Samburu, Rendille and Turkana herders sharing cross-border resources through negotiation. The technology is based on the maintenance of a delicate balance between livestock numbers, the supply of water, and the amount/ quality of standing pasture within the vast grazing area which is water scarce and prone to extreme seasonal variations. Through its main tenet of governing grazing patterns (wet, dry season grazing area and drought reserve) planned use of pasture is decided in large pastoralists’ assemblies attended by elders from a particular “Dedha” (a grazing area, which administratively can be as big as two wards). This process is complicated by dry seasons and droughts of unknown length, with pressure from the community to open grazing reserves. Wrong decisions can spell the end of livelihoods for some families. An ability, which has been gradually eroded over time and by external factors which don’t understand its enormous benefit but there is a project which is using an integrated approach to revive and empower this system.
The Jars a Dedha use water points to manage grazing. Different types of water sources need specific forms of management. The most intensive management occurs during droughts at deep wells and boreholes which require the most labour to operate and maintain, and are the most reliable sources of water. Due to the strategic importance of these resources, management falls to the Jarsa Dedha (council of elders). The use of shallow wells is tightly controlled by both the aba ella (the person who first dug it) and aba erega (the owner of the rotter ) working together. Aba ella is assigned first rights to water. If there is spare capacity then ‘second rights’ are decided by aba erega. Second rights would typically fall to those of a different clan, while ‘third rights’ might fall to a different ethnic group. The Borana customs and culture defines both access to certain wells but also the order of priority for watering animals.
In addition, in consultation with the Dedha council of elders, aba erega manages the use of dams and access to rivers. Generally, use of flowing river water is restricted to the dry season and access is limited to designated watering points. These are located some distance downriver from settlements to minimize disruption to inhabitants and to reduce contamination. Temporary water sources during and after the rains are not subject to control except when their use conflicts with restrictions on grazing areas. After watering their livestock, pastoralists traditionally fill their troughs for wildlife at night. This is intended to prevent wildlife from falling into wells - and to seek God’s blessings.
The high variability of rainfall in pastoral areas leads to similarly variable pasture availability. Therefore, management of grazing resources needs to balance maximizing productivity while ensuring survival. Long-term viability of the system depends on the maintenance of adaptive traits within local breeds, and both maintaining and managing resources strategically. Only within these broader goals is the concept of ‘maximizing productivity’ meaningful.
Mature livestock (gues) which are not lactating are moved to remote pastures. The gues, which make up the majority of community livestock, are herded by young unmarried men. By utilizing remote pastures, grazing resources closer to permanent water sources can be preserved for the dry season and droughts. Pasture within the vicinity of homesteads (maar qaae – literally ‘near grass’) is protected from grazing by non-lactating livestock (this is similar to kalo but a kalo reserve need not be next to the homestead ). This pasture is set aside for young animals (calves, lambs, and kids). Migrating livestock have predefined routes that maintain distance from maar qaae. The Dedha council of elders, therefore, controls settlement patterns to preserve key migratory routes. Movement of livestock between different Dedhas must be prearranged with the respective Dedha council of elders who assess spare capacity in terms of water and grazing.
The floodplain grazing area (chaafa) is crucial because it acts as a refuge for livestock during extreme drought. Grazing in chaafa is strictly prohibited during the wet season and one of the critical decisions for the Jarsa Dedha is when to open chaafa after rains have failed. Due to the relatively moist conditions in chaafa, there are additional challenges to animal and human health: namely trypanosomiasis, ticks, pneumonia, and malaria. Jarsa Dedha make decisions primarily concerning seasonal movements from wet to dry season grazing and also the opening of boreholes and chaafa. The overwhelming local consensus is that efficient resource use depends on the ability ofJarsa Dedha to enforce these regulations

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Kenya

Region/ State/ Province:

Isiolo

Further specification of location:

Kinna town, Kinna Ward, isiolo County

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:

• > 10,000 km2

Comments:

Kinna Town, Kinna Ward, Garbatulla Sub County, Isiolo County
Isiolo County has area of 25,000Km2 but 80% of the area is used for Nomadic pastoralism.

Map

×

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

Comments (type of project, etc.):

It is inherited from generations before.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• reduce risk of disasters
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• mitigate climate change and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

• Nomadism
• Semi-nomadic pastoralism

Intensive grazing/ fodder production:

• Improved pastures

Animal type:

• goats
• camels
• sheep

• cattle

Species:

camels

Count:

39100

Species:

goats

Count:

399000

Species:

sheep

Count:

361900

Comments:

Number of growing seasons per year: 2
Grasses and shrubs which nourishes livestock grows during the rainy seasons
Livestock density: Isiolo county is endowed with a substantial livestock resource base that includes 198,500 cattle, 399,000 goats, 361,900 sheep and 39,100 camels

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

Comments:

The pastoralists depend on attendant pasture after the rains which are bi-modal in Isiolo County (Long and Short rains).

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

management measures

• M2: Change of management/ intensity level
• M3: Layout according to natural and human environment
• M4: Major change in timing of activities

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

biological degradation

• Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
• Bh: loss of habitats
• Bf: detrimental effects of fires
• Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline

water degradation

• Ha: aridification
• Hs: change in quantity of surface water
• Hp: decline of surface water quality
• Hw: reduction of the buffering capacity of wetland areas

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• adapt to land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The technology is implemented in a vast area of rangelands in Isiolo County which covers around 20,000 km2 inhabited by Boran pastoralists under common management of Isiolo Jars Dedha (Council of elders). The rangelands are subdivided into around 14 arthas (localities) which are separately managed by artha elders and within which there are also ollas (homesteads) which the elders oversee. The elders manage key resources that are essential for pastoral livelihood. The resources are; prime pasture/grazing areas, water points e.g. streams, rivers, springs, shallow wells and pans, wildlife, forests, minerals, sand and other valuable stones e.g. gemstones (bojimine) and quarry, Trees and their products e.g. makuti, medicinal herbs, wild, fruits, resins, gum arabic.

Author:

Ibrahim Jarso

Date:

02/05/2017

Author:

Ibrahim Jarso

Date:

06/03/2017

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

4.3 Establishment activities

Comments:

Regarding Surveillance of grazing areas, they observe pasture conditions and unwarranted access to preserved grazing areas and report on conditions. The surveillance is elevated after the rains as communities are in wet season grazing area depending on sub-surface water from the rains.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

This is a traditional technology of governing rangelands which was started and done voluntarily by the pastoralists. The costs considered are for subsistence of elders undertaking the meetings and discussions on range governance but the process still goes on even without the financial support as the actors involved do it for their own benefits.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Yes

Specify:

Many boreholes dug in the area is saline

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

The Ewaso Nyiro River floods every rainy seasons

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• communal/ village

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

Hydrological disasters

Biological disasters

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

80% of Isiolo County (Around 24,500 Households)

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 91-100%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Yes

If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:

• climatic change/ extremes

Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

The grazing patterns were made more flexible and the rules made stricter.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

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