IK Monitor Articles (9-3)

Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, November 2001

Contents IK Monitor (9-3) | IKDM Homepage | Suggestions to: ikdm@nuffic.nl | © copyright Nuffic-CIRAN and contributors 2001.

Sabine Homann and Barbara Rischkowsky

Integration of indigenous knowledge into land-use planning for the communal rangelands of Namibia

Despite the growing recognition of the value of indigenous knowledge for sustainable development, it has not yet been widely integrated into the research and development process. The present article provides an example of how this can be achieved.

In the last two decades research and development experts have promoted indigenous knowledge as a key to sustainable development (Brokensha et al. 1980; Chambers et al. 1989; Warren et al. 1989). Since then a wealth of information on indigenous knowledge pertaining to soils, plants and animals has been compiled (e.g. Walker et al. 1999; Bizimana 1994). Nevertheless, examples of the integration of indigenous knowledge into the research process and its application within the development context remain scarce.

One reason for this may be the geographical and economic dominance of scientific knowledge (Antweiler 1995), making it difficult for Western scientists and development experts to deal with a different knowledge system. A fundamental difference between indigenous and scientific knowledge is that science is searching for information of universal significance, which is not context-related ('immutable mobiles'). Indigenous knowledge, by contrast, is a social product which is closely linked or even restricted to a cultural and environmental context ('mutable immobiles') (Antweiler 1995). This means that it is dynamic, developing as the collective experience of specific social groups in interaction with their environment. (Kievelitz 1995).

Indigenous environmental knowledge
Interestingly, the validation of indigenous environmental and organizational knowledge can lead to new scientific insights. In dry areas with highly erratic rainfall, an ecological disequilibrium exists, which is due more to rainfall than to the impact of livestock (Ellis & Swift 1988; Westoby et al. 1989). In the 'New Range Ecology', it is recognized that the opportunistic range land management practised by pastoral livestock farmers is the appropriate response to these natural conditions (Behnke et al. 1993; Scoones 1995). Their management strategies are based on a knowledge of the spatial and temporal availability of natural resources, and include mobile resource exploitation, flexible stocking rates, and herd diversification, sustained by a system of communal resource tenure (Sandford 1983).

In many African countries, however, livestock farmers are faced with challenges to the application of pastoral land-use strategies. Population growth is at the root of this problem, as witness the deprivation of local user rights (Müller 1992:20; Oba 1998:89). This situation calls for the appropriate regulation of land use in communal areas (Lane & Moorehead 1995). By definition land-use planning is a 'systematic and iterative procedure carried out in order to create an enabling environment for sustainable development of land resources which meets people's needs and demands. It assesses the physical, socioeconomic, institutional and legal potentials and constraints with respect to an optimal and sustainable use of land resources, and empowers people to make decisions about how to allocate those resources' (UNEP/FAO 1999:14). Such a process involves the activation of local communities, so that their knowledge can be used to develop adequate solutions.

The authors suggest that the debate can be facilitated by focusing on the regulation of access to key resource areas. These key resources redress the critical constraints for livestock production within a particular range type (Scoones 1991; Behnke & Scoones 1993:27). They are the most reliable but also the most contested resources, and their management is closely linked to the surrounding rangeland (Niamir-Fuller 1994:21). Concretely, the authors studied the possibility of basing land-use planning on the indigenous knowledge present within a Namibian livestock farming system.

Land-use planning in Namibia
Namibia is the driest country South of the Sahara, with annual rainfall ranging from 20 mm in the South to 600 mm in the Northeast. Following the independence of Namibia in 1990, the rural areas were subdivided into privately owned commercial land and communal land, which belongs to the State and is farmed by the indigenous population. Communal land makes up 48% of the total area, but provides a livelihood for 90% of the rural population, most of whom are dependent on livestock (Kruger & Woehl 1996:17).

The overexploitation of natural resources and the impoverishment of the indigenous population has forced the Namibian government to search for more appropriate land-use distribution. The Namibian government held a National conference on land reform (1991) and a Consultative conference on communal land administration (1996). The Agricultural Land Reform Act (1995) is only valid for commercial land, and there is as yet no clear policy or administrative structure for the allocation of communal lands.

In 1990, the government and several NGOs set up the Sustainable Animal and Range Resource Development Programme (SARDEP) in the communal areas of Namibia. The aim of the programme, which took the form of an agreement between the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), was to initiate and support a participatory planning process within and between rural communities. The field work was part of SARDEP and the findings were directly fed back into the ongoing planning process.

Research process
Field research was conducted from March to August 1996 in two villages inhabited by one group within the indigenous population, the Herero. The selected cattle-raising Herero communities are located in the eastern part of Namibia, within the SARDEP target area. The conditions for livestock farming were more favourable in Omatupa (village 1), which is located in the interior of the region, with settlements concentrated along the main road and open grazing land in a southerly direction. The grazing area in Omupanda (village 2) is more restricted, due to an urban centre, commercial farms and other villages.

The research process was organized in three phases:

Identification of farmers' priorities for resource use
The survey began with village meetings, during which farmers drew up resource-use maps showing the location of the major fodder plants. These maps were then compared with those derived from satellite images.
Evaluation of applied resource-use strategies
Data were collected through individual semi-structured interviews. Natural resources and the strategies for using them were examined, focusing on key resources.
Searching for options for improved range management
The fieldwork was concluded with another meeting of the farming communities to formulate alternative resource-use plans.

Findings

Key resources
On the basis of the farmers' knowledge of the seasonal value of natural resources, key resources were identified. The farmers had detailed knowledge of local trees, their distribution, temporal availability and nutritional value for their livestock, but knew less about grasses. Valuable fodder plants were associated with specific soils, and the actual state of a grazing area was evaluated (behaviour, appearance, and performance of cattle).

The most important criterion in ranking the value of natural resources was their availability in periods of scarcity. In village 1 the silver terminalia, called omusejasetu in the local language (Terminalia sericea) helped cattle to survive during dry periods. In village 2 this was the case for the tree known as omunguindi (Witgat, shepherd's tree Boscia albitrunca). In the rainy season cattle in both villages depended mainly on grass, which was seen as valuable but unreliable. Other key resources included natural waters in rainy seasons, of higher quality than pipeline and borehole water, the sole sources in dry periods.
Understanding and insights
It was found that locating key resources led to a better understanding of local resource-use strategies. The maps drawn by the livestock farmers showed the occurrence of key resources around the two villages, making it possible to classify the various pastures. The farmers' maps corresponded quite closely to those based on satellite images, but revealed a focus on the spatial and seasonal availability of the key resources.

In the rainy season, the livestock of both villages used to disperse on pastures around the homesteads. As the dry season progressed, grass became scarce and trees, namely silver terminalia (Terminalia sericea) in village 1 and shepherd's tree (B. albitrunca) in village 2 became more important.

The members of the community agreed that each homestead should retain access to pastures in the direction in which its cattle herd was accustomed to graze. Homesteads north of the road moved to the northern grazing areas, those south of the road the southern areas. In village 2 the distribution of B. albitrunca was more scattered, and the grazing directions were less clear-cut.
What if IK be implied
An analysis of the current regulation of access to key resources revealed patterns of resource-use which were inconsistent with strategies based on indigenous knowledge. The control of access to key resources in order to prevent overuse had become more difficult due to an increase in the number of livestock, while sociocultural restrictions and mutual agreements proved insufficient. Furthermore, the government supply of water disturbed the previous balanced use of water and pasture.

In response to outside pressures, the farmers began fencing off small grazing units. Such camps were created in both villages, but they were managed differently. In 1993-94, following intensive discussion, it was decided that every homestead in village 1 would be allowed to fence the dry-season grazing area of their cattle. Farmers with the same grazing direction co-operated in fencing off bigger grazing units. In village 2, by contrast, fencing was much more controversial and all fences were set up individually.

The new technique of fencing was integrated more successfully in village 1, where basic elements of the traditional resource-use strategies were still in place. The access to community resources by community members and by outsiders was regulated mainly at community level. Access to dry season grazing was negotiated in accordance with the availability of key resources. Single families of other communities were allowed to graze a fixed number of livestock for a specific period of time within the village area without payment. The counsellor of village 1, a traditional authority, chaired community meetings and acted as the mediator between the community and the government. However, by fencing off key resources, farmers restricted their own mobility; in addition, less privileged herd owners suffered, while pressure on the remaining communal pasture increased.

Final village debates
Building on indigenous knowledge, farmers arrived at a new allocation of natural resources. In the concluding debates the farmers drew up plans for the future which highlighted the discrepancy between the current and the desired situation: the inhabitants of village 1 indicated a preference for one grazing unit for the whole village, instead of single camps. In village 2 they wanted to fence off a unit which encompassed five adjacent villages.

These land-use scenarios corresponded to the spatial arrangement of key resources as shown in the resource-use maps and the maps derived from satellite images. The farmers were aware that preserving communal resource-use systems would help prevent the fragmentation of key resources. Thus they opted for the use of fencing to protect pastures from uncontrolled access, in preference to individual resource tenure. The current fencing of smaller camps represents a disturbance in the management of indigenous ranges. The difference in the way the new element was implemented in the two villages also reveals the diminished organizational potential in village 2, due to the lack of a cohesive user group.

Conclusion
In keeping with recent literature, undisturbed opportunistic range management would appear to be the scenario best suited to dry areas. In the present case, range management has been disturbed by various factors, including unfavourable land-use regulations. Thus more appropriate solutions for the communal lands must be found, through better land-use planning. In the present case, the indigenous knowledge of the Herero could still provide the basis for land-use scenarios and perhaps for the allocation of user rights as well. The National Land Policy White Paper of the Namibian government backs this option, when it says that the communal land will be vested in Regional Land Boards and Traditional Authorities, which will administer the land resources in trust for the benefit of the local population. Equal status will be guaranteed for various forms of resource rights, as well as for different categories of rights holders. These authorities have pledged themselves to involve all stakeholders in the decision making process (Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation 1998).

Sabine Homann
Barbara Rischkowski
Institute for Animal Breeding and Genetics & Tropical Sciences Centre
Department of Livestock Ecology
Ludwigstr. 21, D-35390 Giessen
Germany
Tel.: +49-641-99 37671
Fax: +49-641-99-37679
E-mail: sab.homann@gmx.net

References
Antweiler, C. (1995) 'Lokales Wissen: Grundlagen, Probleme, Bibliographie', pp. 19-52 in S. Honerla and P. Schröder (eds) Lokales Wissen: zur Relevanz kulturspezifischen Wissens für Entwicklungsprozesse. Saarbrücken: Verlag für Entwicklungspolitik.

Behnke, R.H. and I. Scoones (1993) 'Rethinking range ecology: Implications for rangeland management in Africa,' pp. 1-30 in R.H. Behnke, I. Scoones, C. Kerven (eds) Range Ecology at Disequilibrium. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Behnke, R.H., I. Scoones and C. Kerven (eds) Range Ecology at Disequilibrium. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Bizimana, N. (1994) Traditional Veterinary Practice in Africa. Schriftenreihe der GTZ No. 243. Eschborn: GTZ.

Brokensha, D., D.M. Warren and O. Werner (1980) Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Development. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.

Chambers, R., A. Pacey and L.A. Thrupp (eds) (1989) Farmer First: Farmer innovation and agricultural research. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Ellis, J. and D. Swift (1988) 'Stability of African pastoral systems: Alternate paradigms and implications for development', Journal of Range Management 41 (6):450-458.

Kievelitz, U. (1995) 'Erfahrungen und Vorgehensweise der GTZ bei der Einbeziehung von lokalem Wissen', pp. 33-74 in S. Honerla and P. Schröder (eds) Lokales Wissen. Zur Relevanz kulturspezifischen Wissens für Entwicklungsprozessse. Saarbrücken: Verlag für Entwicklungspolitik.

Kruger, A.S. and H. Woehl (1996) 'The challenge for Namibia's future: Sustainable land-use under arid and semiarid conditions', Entwicklung und ländlicher Raum 4:16-20.

Lane, C. and R. Moorehead (1995) 'New directions in rangeland resource tenure and policy', pp. 116-133 in I. Scoones (ed.) Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development in Africa. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation (1998) National Land Policy, White Paper. Windhoek.

Müller, J.O. (1992) Der hourum von Peul-Nomaden im Sahel des Senegal nach der Bodenrechtsreform: Wandel der Nutzrechte auf Nah- und Fernweiden. Göttingen: Institut für Rurale Entwicklung.

Niamir-Fuller, M. (1994) 'Natural resource management at local level', pp. 20-37 in Pastoral Natural Resource Management and Policy, Proceedings of the Subregional Workshop. Arusha, Tanzania: UNSO/UNDP.

Oba, G. (1998) Assessment of Indigenous Range Management Knowledge of the Boran Pastoralists of Southern Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: BPPDP/GTZ.

Sandford, S. (1983) Management of Pastoral Development in the Third World. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Scoones, I. (1991) Wetlands in Dry Lands: The Agroecology of Savanna Systems in Africa. Part 1: Overview - Ecological, Economic and Social Issues. London, IIED, Drylands Programme.

Scoones, I. (ed.) (1995) Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development in Africa. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

UNEP/FAO (United Nations Environment Programme, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) (1999) The Future of Our Land. Rome.

Walker, D.H., P.J. Throne, F.L. Sinclair, B. Thape, C.D. Wood and D.B. Subba (1999) 'A systems approach to comparing indigenous and scientific knowledge: consistency and discriminatory power of indigenous and laboratory assessment of the nutritive value of tree fodder', Agricultural Systems 62: 87-103.

Warren, D.M., L.J. Slikkerveer and S.O. Titilola (eds) (1989) 'Indigenous knowledge systems; Implications for agricultural and international development', Studies in Technology and Social Change, No 11. Ames, Iowa: Technology and Social Change Program, Iowa State University.

Warren, D.M., L.J. Slikkerveer and D. Brokensha (1995) The Cultural Dimension of Development: Indigenous Knowledge Systems. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Westoby, M., B.H. Walker and N. Meir (1989) 'Opportunistic management for rangelands at disequilibrium', Journal of Range Management 42:266-274.

Photographs and Websites that may interest readers of this article.