Planning Workshop for the Links Research Activity on Animal Genetic Resources: Revision of Research Proposal and Planning First Round of Fieldwork

Arusha on 8-12 September 2003

LINKS PROJECT gender, biodiversity and local knowledge systems for food security

Biodiversity• Gender• Knowledge

February 2004

Report n° 19

1. WELCOMING AND INTRODUCTION ...........................................................1

2. INTRODUCTION TO LOGICAL FRAMEWORK............................................2 2.1. 2.1 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK...........................................................................3 2.2. 2.2 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE LINKS LIVESTOCK RESEARCH ACTIVITY ....4

3. CONCEPT DEFINITION IN RELATION TO THE LINKS LIVESTOCK RESEARCH ACTIVITY ........................................................................................6

4. REVISION OF THE DRAFT RESEARCH PROPOSAL.................................9 4.1. SUGGESTION 1: BREEDING AND SELECTION CRITERIA (PHASE 1) ..................17 4.2. SUGGESTION 2: LOCAL KNOWLEDGE AND ACQUIRING NEW KNOWLEDGE (PHASE 2 AND 3)............................................................................................................18

5. OPERATIONALIZING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..............................21 5.1. OPERATIONALIZING THE QUESTIONS FOR THE PHASE 1................................22

5.1.1. Day one in the field..........................................................................22 5.1.2. Day two in the field ..........................................................................23 5.1.3. Day three in the field .......................................................................25

6. FIELD GUIDE...............................................................................................26

7. DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS.......................................................31

8. WAY FORWARD .........................................................................................32

ANNEX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS.................................................................33

1

1. WELCOMING AND INTRODUCTION Jenna Kettunen from LinKS Tanzania opened the workshop by welcoming briefly everyone and explaining some logistic issues. After the welcoming the international consultant Marie-Louise Beerling introduced herself by giving some details on her experience with livestock research, gender issues and participatory research methods and tools. She said that possibly for these reasons, as well as for her experience in structuring research and giving analytical comments, she was considered to fit in nicely to this LinKS research activity. Her introduction was followed by short introductions of the research team members. Dr. Das: Long experience in animal breeding and now he is working on national breeding policy. Dr. Minja: Specialized in ethnoveterinary, done a lot of fieldwork in this area with Maasais Mwaigomole: Works at the Ministry of Water and Livestock Development, specialized in conflict management, sociologist Dr. Comoro: Work at the University of Dar es Salaam as a senior lecturer, specialized in sociology and anthropology (Prof.) Mbaga: Works at Sokoine University of Agriculture as a lecturer, specialized in animal breeding and genetics, personal interest in local breeds. For the record: Mbaga was promoted during the workshop as associate professor. Msechu: Works at the Ministry of Water and Livestock Development as an animal scientist, experienced in using gender sensitive participatory tools and methods in the field Dr. Msechu gave a brief introduction of Laswai and Nalitolela who were absent: Laswai: Animal scientist who is experienced in gender analysis and participatory approaches, works at the Sokoine University of Agriculture in the Department of Animal Science as an associate professor Nalitolela: Veterinary and works as an extension staff in Simanjiro After the introductions Marie-Louise Beerling wanted to know what the research team members expect to gain from this research activity - why they are interested in it as individuals. It is a rather short-term research activity and it is for all the team members a part time activity and addition to the normal duties. The given answers reflected the motivation of learning more of the local livestock management and gain more knowledge on local animal breeds. Mbaga commented that for him it was still unclear what the farmers will gain from this research activity. He mentioned that one reason for being in

2

the workshop is to answer this question and make the research activity more participatory. Marie-Louise Beerling brought up the question of justifying the research for farmers when the initiative for the research activity wasn’t motivated by the need or problem of the farmers but the problem and need were defined by the LinKS project. Farmers may gain in the process but they weren’t the ones who defined the problem. After the short discussion Dr. Das, Dr. Msechu, Jenna Kettunen and Marie-Louise Beerling worked on the programme of the workshop as well as planned the logistics for the fieldwork. Meanwhile the rest of the team had a discussion session on the Marie-Louise Beerling’s comments on the draft research proposal. The following preliminary programme was agreed upon:

PROGRAMME

DAY 1 Introduction to Logical Framework: using log frame format for refocusing and planning a research activity

Discuss key issues and concepts DAY 2 Revision of the research proposal and research methods DAY 3 Revision of the research proposal and research methods DAY 4 Finalize field guide Plan fieldwork Plan data processing and analysis Planning up to December 2004 DAY 5 Logistics for the fieldwork DAY 6 To Simanjiro district for fieldwork

2. INTRODUCTION TO LOGICAL FRAMEWORK Marie-Louise Beerling was volunteered to facilitate the session on the logical framework. She mentioned that usually the first step in the process of using logical framework is to consult stakeholders - work with them on the problem (problem tree). But in this case this phase has to be skipped and we have to start straight with the framework.

3

2.1. 2.1 Logical framework Statements:

• Having inputs guarantees being able to implement activities • Implementing activities guarantees some outputs • Having successful outputs means that the specific objective(s) will be met • Specific objectives met means that the activity in question will contribute

something to the overall goal • Conditions can be internal or external The link between activities and outputs is the most important for the research team to think about: do the planned activities lead to expected outputs? And what are the conditions on the way to fulfill the expected outputs? What are the logics of the team to achieve expected objective and outputs?

OVERALL GOAL

SPECIFIC OR EXPECTED OBJECTIVES

OUTPUTS OR RESULTS

ACTIVITIES

INPUTS

CONDITIONS Depends on our logics on the problem

CONDITIONS

CONDITIONS logistics

4

2.2. 2.2 Logical Framework for the LinKS livestock research activity A. OVERALL GOAL The LinKS project objectives were seen as the overall goal of the research activity. The research has its own objectives but at the same time it is one component of the LinKS project and should contribute something to the specific objectives and overall goal of the LinKS project. Expected objectives of the LinKS project (overall goals of the research activity) in the light of this research activity:

• Enhanced capacities of institutions to work efficiently at village level • Institutions in extension, research and policy level understand what is going on at

village level (local knowledge, gender, agro-biodiversity) LinKS project activities should equip institutions to facilitate farmers to find best options to their own needs. One condition for having successful outputs is understanding the local rationale and way of life by stakeholders, accompanied with attitude change, political will and human and financial resources. The overall goal of all the above mentioned specific objectives is enhanced food security. Climate and market conditions were mentioned as conditions in this step. The LinKS project has following activities:

• Advocacy • Creating commitment by engaging stakeholders to project activities • Training on tools and approaches • Subsidize research (hands-on experience and case studies) • To strengthen research-extension-farmer liaison

Conclusions from the discussion:

• Sharing knowledge increases understanding between stakeholders • Strengthening linkages between institutions and stakeholders is crucial element

in the project in order to change attitudes • Feedback in the research activity is important in order to share knowledge and

not just to extract it B. SPECIFIC/EXPECTED OBJECTIVE The specific or expected objective in the logical framework is the separate objective of the livestock research. The session was started by discussing on the subject: Everyone agreed that the politics have not been in favor of the livestock keepers and the following issues were brought up:

• How to prevent the undermining of livestock keepers in national policies in the future?

• What are the options in the face of restrictions (population stress, transport regulations, land shortage for livestock)?

• Policies were made for the benefit of the whole country but whole country is usually considered us agriculturalists

5

• Pastoralism is an important factor for food security for livestock keepers and they depend on the agriculturalists for the exchange of food and the other way around

• Turn the top-down approach is needed After the lunch brake the discussion continued within the framework: Expected effects: EXPECTED/SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE Livestock team

• Dialogue between the stakeholders - conciliation • Understanding the evolution of pastoralism • Better policies for the future • Arguments for more farmer oriented approach in institutions • Improve performance of district services

CONDITIONS Political will

To be guaranteed by the research team: OUTPUTS (results)

• Increase knowledge (men and women’s knowledge) • Men and women farmers views • Better understanding of what is happening at the village level • Experiences for informal/formal dissemination • Increased interaction between various stakeholders – increased dialogue • Eye opener for the pastoralists to analyze their own situation: self-confidence,

recognition • Presentation workshop – lobbying by the LinKS project • Political presentation

CONDITIONS • Farmers cooperate (research

fatigue) → Need for feedback (give something in return) → Use participatory tools in interesting way for the participants: new tools (they learn and enjoy) • Way of entering and ranking

interviewees is very important in case of Maasais

ACTIVITIES

• Field research: can include sub-activities

CONDITIONS Logistics

6

INPUTS

• Human and financial resources • Equipments

It was agreed that the team will keep in mind that the impact of the research activity on national policies is limited. Consequently, one possibility is to move the item under overall goal of the research in stead of keeping it as an expected objective.

3. CONCEPT DEFINITION IN RELATION TO THE LinKS LIVESTOCK RESEARCH ACTIVITY The vivid discussion was led by Marie-Louise Beerling. MAASAI Moving towards agro-pastoralism and partial (in terms of family members) settlement – seasonal movements INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE Gender related knowledge, link with decision making, link with local production systems and relation to responsibilities Discussion on local/indigenous knowledge: Why struggle to conserve an animal species that give only 2 liters milk per day?

• Scientific ↔ local criteria (priorities, strategies, rationale) • We don’t want to loose the germ plasma that could help us in the future, they

would be lost forever → not so much about documenting local knowledge (systems) but creating germ bank

• Selecting animals for breeding leads loosing germ plasma → important is the selection criteria (size, drought resistance, disease tolerance, marketable, ECF resistant, milk yield, colors, easy of giving birth especially while moving, horns, diversity in the herd, explorer and guard animals in the herd, walkers)

• It was agreed that there is no need to define the difference between local and indigenous knowledge for this research activity as long as the concepts are defined in the research reports.

GENDER – GENDER ROLES What men and women do, responsibilities and activities PASTORALISM Large part of living (mindset, money spent and earned, time, food) depends on livestock COMMUNITY A lot of discussion what is community and what community means for Maasais: pastoralist community (way of life), community by tribe or by clan? We couldn’t agree on the issue.

7

VILLAGE Large scattered habitat, consists of hamlets which consist of clusters of bomas (consists of few families) The second day of the workshop was opened by Jenna Kettunen who gave a short summary of the discussions and conclusions of the first day of the workshop. The discussion on the remaining concepts initiated the programme of the second day. AGRO-BIODIVERSITY Discussion:

• Agro-biodiversity is a source of development, e.g. more than 95% of the breeds used in Tanzania are local. It contributes to the sustainability of the actions as well as the sustainable management of the natural resources.

• If something is lost maybe there is a reason behind why it was let to be lost. • Maybe this current “useless” element, e.g. germ plasma, could be useful in the

future • Researchers don’t know the diversity of breeds and there is need to study and

learn from it for the benefit of all • Local criteria for breeding and selection should be known by the researchers,

policy makers, extensionists etc. • Increased knowledge on local production system and germ plasma adds value to

them, increase the respect to the local knowledge and local knowledge systems Are local livestock keepers experts of biodiversity? Do they think that the concept itself is important?

• There is a difference between diversity in herd and diversity in species • Farmers are looking for biodiversity, they are conscious of it, we just have to find

out whys and hows • Disagreeing comments were given: the livestock keepers don’t look for the

biodiversity per se, maybe they just adapt to the divert circumstances and environments

FOOD SECURITY Is it relevant to see the food security at household level? An argument in favor of using household as a unit of analysis was that there is a need to know which households are food secure and which are food insecure and reasons for the food security status of households in order to analyze the problems around food security. Marie-Louise Beerling challenged this statement: Actions and decisions, e.g. of breeding and selection criteria, are done in herd level in pastoral communities. After the discussion it was agreed that the unit of the analysis should be herd/boma/kraal because it is a decision making unit. Consequently, decisions affecting the link between herd survival and food security are made within bomas. This doesn’t exclude using the household as a unit in the research when it is considered relevant.

8

It was stated that maybe one year is not relevant period for looking at herd survival. There could be other cycles, e.g. cycle of rains and droughts and cycle of diseases. PRODUCTIVITY What is the unit of analysis?

• Herd • Animal

It was agreed that the unit will be herd. What is productivity? Discussion points:

• In the draft proposal: milk, blood and meat • Agro-pastoralists still consume blood, their habits haven’t change • In Simanjiro the Maasais are not very much market oriented according to

Nalitolela – the Maasais in Simanjiro sell only live animals and hides • Hides are also used for bedding • Milk is the main product for consumption • Small animals are slaughtered for consumption more often than cattle • Calving rate is between 1 and 2 years

Which element of productivity is more important for Maasais – marketing or reproduction? It was agreed that probably reproduction prevails due to the assumed link between herd size/survival and food security. The link and the system ensuring the food security is local knowledge gained by experience: X number of cattle is enough for survival because X number of cattle will die/be sold/be exchanged for various reasons, e.g. drought, diseases, dowry etc. Social and economic relationships are expressed by exchanging cattle. Conclusion of the discussion was that productivity is linked with subsistence/consumption, reproduction and marketing. MIGRATION SUSTAINABLE LAND USE – DETERIORATION STAKEHOLDERS HOUSEHOLD FARMER SMALLHOLDER Due to the time limitation it was agreed that we won’t discuss on the rest of the concepts.

9

4. REVISION OF THE DRAFT RESEARCH PROPOSAL After the tea/coffee break the workshop participants started to discuss on a specific theme for the research as an entry point to the revision of the research proposal. Marie-Louise Beerling led the discussion and started it by showing the logical framework for the research made the day before by the research team. She reminded that the logical framework doesn’t provide specific research questions but it can serve as a helpful tool to focus the objectives to fit in the scale of the activity. In the draft proposal there is no central theme for the research which could guide the research team in planning focused fieldwork and proper analysis of research findings. The confusion between the objectives of the LinKS project and the objectives of the research activity, which is one activity in the project, maybe was a reason for having multiple themes in the research proposal. It was agreed that the specific objectives put in the logical framework the day before are still too ambitious for the resources available (time and money) for the LinKs research activity. Everyone was given an opportunity to give a suggestion for the theme of the research, and the following themes were suggested:

1) Getting information on local knowledge used for animal breeding activities 2) Pastoralism and sustainable land use 3) Local knowledge and sustainability of biodiversity 4) Migration and local knowledge 5) Local knowledge and how the suitability of breeds to the purposes of livestock

keepers 6) Local knowledge, productivity and food security 7) Dynamics of local knowledge as a livelihood system 8) Changing environments

The result of the discussion was the following cluster formulated by Marie-Louise Beerling: UNSUITABLE LAND USE Deterioration Land tenure issues

MIGRATION CHANGING LOCAL KNWLEDGE Adapting

10

FOOD SECURITY HERD SURVIVAL

BREEDING AND SELECTION CRITERIA

LOCAL KNOWLEDGE

It was noticed that the cluster had two different and independent clusters in the following way: Cluster 1 UNSUITABLE LAND USE Deterioration Land tenure issues

MIGRATION CHANGING LOCAL KNWLEDGE Adapting FOOD SECURITY

11

Cluster 2

FOOD SECURITY HERD SURVIVAL

BREEDING AND SELECTION CRITERIA

LOCAL KNOWLEDGE

Aspects of local knowledge in the cluster 1 are various, e.g. range lands, medicinal herbs, breeding and selection criteria etc. but in the cluster 2 the local knowledge is narrowed down to breeding and selection criteria. Marie-Louise Beerling suggested that the last option could be a good theme for the research because it would be focused and there are breeders in the research team who could use their expertise for the benefit of the research. The research team still wanted to expand their expertise and be open for learning and not to scale down that much their initial idea for the research. Mbaga shared with us his thoughts in the form of cause and effect scheme: CAUSE EFFECT Land use Biodiversity enhancement ↑ Food security Local knowledge on both Herd survival ↓ Migration Breeding His conclusion was that the main theme of the research activity should be the local knowledge as such, focus on local knowledge on livestock, and the effects could be the sub-themes of the research. This scheme also raised hesitation on the basis of the following arguments:

• How to phrase research questions for this activity in such a way that it is possible to cover them in short fieldwork?

• How to manage with the time limitations the proper analysis of such amount of data even if the team could gather it?

12

To highlight her point Marie-Louise Beerling wanted the research team members to share their Masters degree or PhD research topics with her and the following conclusions came out of the discussion:

• It is possible to analyze broader issues on the basis of the fieldwork done on specific issue

• The idea of any study is to contribute some arguments to the academic/policy dialogue and not to give answers to every point that is related to the subject or problem in question

While discussing it was realized that the overall cluster actually contains still one cluster:

MIGRATION CHANGING LOCAL KNWLEDGE Adapting FOOD SECURITY After some discussion on the three clusters it was decided that after the lunch the participants will concentrate in the cluster 2 and 1 in more detail just to see what we can do with them – use the clusters as a basis for brainstorming. During the lunch break Marie-Louise Beerling presented a draft scheme based on the cluster 2 that was complemented by comments of everyone and the final result was the following: Suggestion 1:

MAASAI GOALS/RATIONALE

LOCAL KNOWLEDGE DISEASES AND M/F TREATMENTS

13

BREEDING AND SELECTION CRITERIA Dynamic, adaptation M/F?, decision making HERD SURVIVAL SUITABILITY TO THEIR PURPOSE Dynamic, utility, productivity M/F FOOD SECURITY FAMILY SURVIVAL Household? Boma? Comments on the diagram:

• Dr. Minja’s report on diseases and treatments with Maasais in Simanjiro could be an input to this research, we have to avoid repetition

• There is a need to deal separately with breeding and selection criteria and suitability to their purpose – the approach can give some additional insights

• Are women involved in breeding? • If women are not involved in breeding they still have their preferences and

purposes for the use of the animals, e.g. milk versus meat → What is the role of women in breeding and selection and how they interpret their own purposes/preferences if they are not involved in the decision making and the activity?

• Women in Maasai community don’t own cattle but they take care of and temporarily use it for their children

• Women can have influence on selling (selection) even if they don’t have influence in breeding, they can be source of information in decision making

Dr. Das named the cluster and at the same time came up with the draft title for the research/fieldwork: ‘Use of local knowledge for breeding and selection of livestock to optimize food security in Maasai community’ In his first suggestion disease control was included to the research but it was decided that it is maybe too ambitious to try to cover it within this research activity. Breeding (genes) and selection (castrating, selling, slaughtering etc.) could be useful theme for the research, according to Marie-Louise Beerling, because it is simple to focus on.

14

Dr. Das was suggesting that the research should include at least some elements of herd management but Marie-Louise Beerling thought that it is problematic due to the fact that the herd management includes various subjects worth of studying separately. It was decided that the participants move on to work on the cluster 1 and see where it leads us. First the team listed some concepts related to the question a) What happens/changes when Maasais move?

• Pasture use rights • Land use rights • Social network • Water resources • New diseases • Knowledge on resources • Survival mechanisms

b) How does migration take place?

• Long-term strategy and usually not spontaneous (premeditated) • There is done some scouting • Maasais move on to some posts where they know people or have relatives

c) Labor migration, temporarily leaving the system

• Usually young men • Work to earn money to buy cattle • Some wives leave with their husband to towns

d) Maasais are polygamous and usually have many wives because they need children to take care of their herds. Maasais have low fertility rate due to the herbs they use. Girls are sent to school more often than boys who stay behind proudly taking care of the herd. The discussion topics above show how many aspects or separate themes this approach can give to a research. After the tea/coffee break Marie-Louise Beerling presented her suggestion to deal with the issue of migration: Suggestion 2: PROCESS OF ADATING LOCAL KNOWLEDGE UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND USE CONSTRAINTS DISEQUILIBRIUM CONSTRAINTS Land use and environmental OTHER SURVIVAL STRATEGIES M/F NEED FOR MIGRATION

15

MIGRATION Acquire new knowledge M/F Resources KNOWLEDGE ON Social networks ALTERNATIVE SITUATION Constraints User rights FOOD SECURITY

NEW EQUILIBRIOUM The team still wanted to expand their idea of migration and Dr. Das presented his diagram for the second and third round of research: Suggestion 3: INFLUENCE OF MIGRATION ON ACQUISITION OF LOCAL KNWLEDGE FOR BREEDING AND SELECTION CRITERIA OF LIVESTOCK IN MAASAI COMMUNITY IN CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN TANZANIA

ENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND ISSUES

MIGRATION CHANGING LK SOCIAL NETWORKS BREEDING INFRASTRUCTURAL SELECTION CHANGES MANAGEMENT SUITABLE BREEDS AGRO-PASTORALISM

FOOD SECURITY This diagram suggests studying three huge changes:

• Social networks • Infrastructural changes • Changes in production system

→ What would be the theme or focus of the research? What questions could be asked? How many variables would be involved in the research?

16

Marie-Louise Beerling asked the research team why they stick to the idea of having the fieldwork rounds in different areas if there seems to be problems in narrowing down the research around migration to feasible focus. Jenna Kettunen summarized the situation by oppositing two different views:

a) The study will be done only on breeding and selection criteria when there is no need to conduct the fieldwork rounds in three different places

b) The team could still narrow down the theme of the research within the migration theme: concentrate on one relevant and workable aspect in the setting of the migration of Maasais.

After a discussion the research team members agreed that the focus of the research should be how to acquire new knowledge in migration setting. The study would only pick up the breeding and selection criteria as a theme to analyze the knowledge acquirement process. Marie-Louise Beerling wanted everyone to brainstorm what challenges/changes livestock keepers probably have to face when they come to new place and the following order was agreed:

1. feed resources 2. health challenge – new diseases 3. changing the herd composition 4. different breeding criteria

The team should take into account carefully time (how long ago the boma migrated) in the research because the breeding criteria is the forth and not first in the list changes and challenges. It was decided that we will start the third day of the workshop with the following exercise: The research team members and Jenna Kettunen were divided in two groups. One group works on the suggestion 1 (topic breeding and selection criteria) while the other group bases their work on the suggestions 2 and 3 (topic local knowledge and acquiring new knowledge). The task is to come up with

1. problem statement 2. research questions 3. variables 4. hypothesis how variables relate to each other

17

4.1. Suggestion 1: breeding and selection criteria (Phase 1) In the morning of the third day of the workshop the two groups worked up to lunch time on their assignment. The agreed result of the first group is presented in this chapter. PROBLEM STATEMENT To explore how Maasai breeding and selection criteria are related to the goals of herd survival and food security. BREEDING AND SELECTION PURPOSEFUL Criteria Preferences (purpose) →Perception/analysis of problems (M/F)

→Roles and responsibilities (M/F) →Power/decision making (M/F)

Breeding and selection preferences will be influenced by gender HYPOTHESES Main hypothesis: Breeding and selection criteria differ among men and women depending on roles, responsibilities and powers Sub-hypothesis: Since men have overall responsibility for economic survival, their breeding and selection criteria will be inspired by market prices Sub-hypothesis: Since women have no formal ownership of cattle, they have no preferences for breeding and selection Sub-hypothesis: Perception of food security and herd survival will determine breeding and selection criteria After agreeing on the hypotheses the participants looked if the proposed research questions are necessary or sufficient to give answers to the assumptions in the hypotheses, and the following questions were agreed upon: RESEARCH QUESTIONS What purpose do Maasai want to achieve through breeding and selection? What are their breeding and selection criteria (by gender and other groups)?

18

How are these criteria implemented (by gender and other groups)? What are male and female roles and responsibilities in animal/herd management, family management and food security (other groups)? What are the criteria for food security at boma level (period)? What are the strategies to achieve food security at boma level (by gender and other groups)? It was agreed that the link between roles, responsibilities, breeding and selection criteria and local men and women’s purpose/preferences are the essence of local knowledge – one uses the means she/he has to achieve his/her suitable purpose. Important assumption in the research is that herd survival and food security are two meaningful purposes for breeding and selection criteria. The fact that purposes/preferences are included in the problem statement and hypotheses brings in dynamic nature of local knowledge because the purposes change over time.

4.2. Suggestion 2: local knowledge and acquiring new knowledge (phase 2 and 3)

The second team had to combine in their work two clusters and they started to reflect on the problem by drawing one combined cluster.

CONSTRAINTS → MIGRATION → ADAPTATION * *

Perception of Which adoptions? * How?

Constraints Why this choice? * process (analysis) (decision making) Influenced by other factors Influenced by the need to maintain the pastoral status (to remain livestock keepers) = adapting local knowledge = acquisition of new knowledge

* How? Acquisition process:

• Sources of information

19

• Interaction with others • Who is learning? • Hierarchy (what is learnt first?)

Knowledge:

• Vegetation and nutrition • Diseases and treatments • Breeding and selection • Husbandry practices • Market situation

Interview population: people who have moved in the past 10-30 years (M/F) The brainstorming on the new cluster elaborated the following proposal: PROBLEM STATEMENT Pastoral migration, inspired by environmental and land use constraints, requires adaptation. Some adaptations are exposed by external factors while others originate from within. Given to the desire to maintain pastoral life style/production mode changes in local knowledge are likely to occur. These processes of adaptation local knowledge to the new situation are not known to us. This study will focus on processes of acquiring new (local) knowledge by migrating Maasai community. HYPOTHESES

Knowledge is related to goals 1. Goals are related to responsibilities and responsibilities are gender and age

dependent 2. There is hierarchy in acquiring local knowledge which is dependent on goals

related by age and gender RESEARCH QUESTIONS/ISSUES

Process of adaptation influenced by internal forces - How? • Acquisition process • Sources of information • Who is learning? • Hierarchy (what is learnt first?)

Brainstorming on the draft suggestion:

MIGRATION = CHANGE

20

HOW? Need to adapt Knowledge

=

Learning process occurs in phases: local knowledge one of the tools

=

What you learn first is what you need most, Determined by and what you need most is dependant on priorities roles and responsibilities ↓ Who is learning what and in what order of priority?

= Hierarchy During the discussion it was realized that this scheme is very complicated to study because it concentrates on the whole process of migration. In addition, it is rather difficult to link it with the first phase (breeding and selection criteria). Therefore, it was decided that the second round of the research in Central Tanzania will focus on the possible changes in the breeding and selection criteria due to the change of physical, biological and social environment. During the second phase it might be interesting to invite one person or small group of people from Simanjiro to Central Tanzania to share experiences. This could serve as an eye-opener to the livestock keepers. This idea was also included in the specific objectives of the research activity in the logical framework. Third phase can be conducted in central Tanzania or in southern Tanzania, and should focus on investigating the knowledge acquisition process more thoroughly. One option/possibility is to go back to Simanjiro with analyzed data from central Tanzania. It was agreed that the research questions in the second round of fieldwork in Central Tanzania should be in line of the questions in the first phase.

21

5. OPERATIONALIZING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS The fourth day of the workshop was opened by discussing what kind of perceptions Maasais have about people who come from crop growing areas. Dr. Minja enlightened the participants that Maasais are very friendly and hospitable if one respects their way of life. They are also very curious about guests. But if one touches issues which are very close to them, e.g. land issues, they get careful, of course. The discussion continued on important aspects of fieldwork: 1. How do the team introduce themselves in the village? It was agreed that the team try to make the introduction in the first day as simple as possible, for example the team tell the Maasai that they are in the village because they know that Maasais are good cattle keepers. And for this reason the team left their offices and came to the village to learn. Later, maybe in the second day, when the Maasais are exposed to the questions they will enquire more information and the team can tell them about the LinKS project and its objectives. 2. Crucial role of interpreters Interpreters will be from CBOs and some of them are women. The interpreters need to be briefed on:

• Concepts • Translate why we want to ask the questions • Explain that we are not interested in consensus answers but the process:

discussion, consideration, REASONING (not that the final result is a cake but everyone’s recommendations how it should be prepared)

• Feedback from the interpreter 3. Strategies to avoid domination of group process by opinion leaders

• Use PRA methods • Small groups (5-8 people • Shift to another topic • Isolate, split into 2 groups

4. Accommodation and what the team needs to carry to the field

• The team will stay in the village if possible and convenient for the Maasais • Water • Shared lunches and soda • Stationary • Writing pads (small) and pen • The team goes without questionnaires (and no guns)

22

5.1. Operationalizing the questions for the Phase 1 In every question all the team members made their suggestion for the questions. The suggestions were discussed and improved to the final questions.

5.1.1. Day one in the field Question number 2: What are the breeding and selection criteria (by gender and other groups)? Question 1: What purpose do Maasai want to achieve through breeding and selection? Three ways to approach (topics for discussion to cover one or some questions):

a) If possible go to a kraal/herd with a group of Maasais or one Maasai and ask for the preferred (favored) cow and discuss why. The aim is to enter into discussion or conversation with the people and exchange ideas.

b) If it is not possible to see the animals, the second method is to ask a small group to give the characteristics of “the ideal Maasai cow” and discuss why If there are other breeds ask why? It is important to remind an interpreter that the team is interested in the discussion/process.

c) The third method is used after the first two. In a group do a ranking exercise with symbolic drawings of preferred animal characteristics. Drawings should be made together with the locals: what for that group in that particular moment is agreed to represent e.g. color red. Ask for example from a woman that “you are a woman with 6 children what characteristics you prefer and why? Imagine that you are an older man what characteristics would you prefer?” The aim is to launch conversation.

Discussion points:

• Verify age set of interviewers. Age is related with the phase in life • Important characteristic in a person is what is his/her responsibility or role

in the family/boma • Let the discussion flow • The discussions/conversations can be repeated with different people or

group compositions • The team is not interested in individual family wealth status but breeding

and selection criteria and the concept of food security → Sampling: Which discussion with what kind of people, and how many times repetition? Team: 6 members, 3 groups of 2 Individuals:

• The sub-teams can use different individuals for different methods (triangulation) Groups:

• M/F • Age sets • purely livestock keepers

23

• grow some crops Herds/kraal:

• Multiple ownership: e.g. milking cows assigned to wives → women milking their cows in the morning indicate the number of owners

• Multiple ownership affects suitable purposes/preferences (how the preferences are implemented in the breeding and selection criteria)

• The sub-teams will use the same herds/kraals for every questions, unless it is difficult to organize (6-9 kraals x 2 villages = 12-18 kraals) → triangulation

Animal species:

• Separate discussion on sheep, cattle and goats? • Discussion on all three in the same time and place?

Timing: • Herd presence 7:00 a.m. • Women between 10 – 14:00. Women go to market if held in their own village. • Elder men free all day (expect when going to market or animals are going far

away). No market this week. • Young men away with animals

SCHEDULE

• Method a): 3 teams x 2 herds/kraal = 6 herds/kraals • Method b): 3 teams x 2 interviewing groups = 6 discussions/conversations • Method c): 3 teams x 2 interviewing groups = 6 discussions/conversations

In the evening a consolidation and planning meeting.

5.1.2. Day two in the field Question 5: What are the criteria for food security at boma level? Question 6: What are the strategies to achieve food security at boma level (to live comfortably, to live quietly, sleep peacefully)? General comment: Guide discussions in a way that they don’t just turn into discussions on the food but also other aspects of food security are included. Separate elder/young men/women Boma: administrative center, composition of various families, it is fenced, one boma shares one herd Hamlet: Composition of several bomas, each hamlet has a traditional leader Village: Cluster of hamlets is village Working questions: a) How does your expertise/knowledge/experience in breeding and selection help you look after your family and your herd?

24

b) How can one see whether boma is well off/very well off/badly off? Examples of indicators for being food secure (food for thought):

• Amble of marriages – amble of food • Composition of herd in animal species • The size of yard in a house, the amount of milk etc. • Better off can give out food within the village/boma (exchange mechanisms) • For Maasai to be able to farm you have to be better off – sign of wealth ← green vegetables mainly for sale • People who have to eat vegetables or chicken are considered poor • Off-farm (herd) activities are important indicator for food security as well • Safeguard mechanisms

Another way of approaching: What is a good – bad herd for food security?

• Number • Composition • Health

Is the boma the unit of the analysis?

• Redistribution mechanisms in the community: how the food resources are shared in the boma among households?

c) Compare a bad year and a good year: in real terms not hypothetically, in other

words refer to real years (this year as a bad year) Question 3: How are these criteria implemented? Operationalizing the question: a) Technical implementation How to achieve?

• Long horns • Color • Drought resistance

Refer to the characteristics mentioned in question 1 and 2 b) Implementation of a “breeding strategy” at herd level Who knows what?

• Who is sent to buy cattle? • Who makes the “order” for buying? • Breeding experts?

Who has the power to implement their preferences according to their knowledge?

25

Senior elder - Elder **********

- Young elder - Senior moran ********* - Young moran **** - Child ** - Baby Knowledge Power This tool will be used with three different groups by three sub research teams:

• Women • Elder men • Young men

Comment: decision making is a process and very difficult to investigate. It will be difficult to study e.g. influencing strategies of women to get their criteria for breeding and selection implemented.

5.1.3. Day three in the field Question 4: What are men and female roles and responsibilities in

• animal/herd management • family and food security management?

Discussion: Who is doing what, when and how long (roles)? → gender role, age roles, “class” roles Who makes decisions on what (responsibilities)?

• Short-term decisions, e.g. where to take herd today, how much milk we need etc. • Long-term decision, e.g. migration, moving to other pasture etc. These decisions

are made after a process which includes lot of people. Circumstances affect the decision and one grows to it in time

• Decision making is related to the relationships The interest of the research is to study also the responsibilities because the assumption is that there is a link between responsibilities, breeding and selection criteria and preferences.

26

In the basis of the knowledge acquired during the earlier days of the fieldwork the team will have an idea of productive items in the community, e.g. cows, sheep, goat, shamba etc. Wrong conclusion: Those who own something have a decision making power. There is an overall interest and someone/something has to manage that.

6. FIELD GUIDE In the morning of the fourth day of the workshop Marie-Louise Beerling gave everyone a copy of the draft Filed Guide for comments and discussion. The field guide was written on the basis of the discussion during the workshop. The agreed final field guide for the first round of the fieldwork is following: LinKS LIVESTOCK RESEARCH TEAM – FINAL FIELD GUIDE FOR THE PHASE 1 Title of the research project Local knowledge and the management of animal genetic resources among Maasai pastoralists in Tanzania: an investigation into the dynamics of local knowledge on breeding and selection under the influence of migration. Objective Pastoral migration, inspired by environmental and land constraints, requires adaptation. Some adaptations are imposed by external factors, while others originate from within the system (intrinsic). Given the desire to maintain pastoral life/production mode, changes in local knowledge are likely to occur. The process of adapting local knowledge to a new situation is not known to us. This study will focus on processes or acquiring new (local) knowledge by migrating Maasai communities. To this end we will compare local knowledge on breeding and selection in the old situation with local knowledge with the same issues in the new situation. It is hoped that the analysis of the differences in local knowledge will give us more insight in the process of acquiring new local knowledge. It is also hoped that the researchers involved in the conducting of this study will gain a better understanding of the pastoralists’ rationale and the goals they pursue. The research will be carried out in three phases:

1. Local knowledge on breeding and selection in two villages in Simanjiro district (the old environment)

2. Local knowledge on breeding and selection in Kilosa or Mbarali districts (the new environment)

3. Analysis of changes in local knowledge and the process of acquiring new local knowledge

27

Problem statement of the Phase 1 The study wants to explore Maasai breeding and selection criteria (for cattle, sheep and goats) and their relation to herd survival and food security. This will be done by way of an informal study in two villages in Simanjiro district, using participatory research instruments. Hypothesis Breeding and selection preferences will be influenced by gender and age because men and women and persons of different age have different roles, responsibilities and decision making powers. Sub-hypothesis 1: Perceptions of food security and herd survival will determine breeding and selection criteria Sub-hypothesis 2: Since men have overall responsibility for economic survival of the family, their breeding and selection criteria will dominate over those of young men and women Sub-hypothesis 3: Since women have no formal ownership of cattle they have no preferences for breeding and selection of cattle (but for small stock, they do) Research questions Question 1: What purpose do Maasai want to achieve through breeding and selection? Question number 2: What are the breeding and selection criteria (by gender and other groups)? Question 3: How are these criteria implemented? Question 4: What are men and female roles and responsibilities in

• animal/herd management • family and food security management? •

Question 5: What are the criteria for food security at boma level? Question 6: What are the strategies to achieve food security at boma level (to live comfortably, to live quietly, sleep peacefully)? Operationalization of the research questions Questions 1 and 2:

In a herd (kraal, boma), ask for the favorite/preferred cow, and discuss why Focus the discussion on “breedable” characteristics Make sure to verify age set of the interviewee, so as to have an indication

of his/her responsibilities

28

In a group (6-8 persons), as to give the characteristics of “the ideal Maasai cow”, and discuss why

If there are any other breeds present (observation), ask what is good about those and why they are in the herd

Try to link answers to phase of life Differences between men and women Summarize the discussion with sketched drawings

In a group of (6-8 persons), do ranking exercise with symbolic drawings of

animal characteristics, and discuss why Ranking can be done according to different criteria: preferred

characteristics for men, women, for a young family, for a poor family, for an agro-pastoralist family… It is important to make the drawings in the presence of the group, so as to

have consensus on what symbolizes what Question 3:

In individual or group discussion, ask how the preferred characteristics (long horns, specific colors, drought resistance, docile character etc.) can be achieved

Difference to be made between technical implementation (=skill) and implementation as part of a long term “breeding strategy” (=decision making)

Young men may have the knowledge but not the power Use a real situation e.g. recent cattle market: which animals were sold,

why? Who knows what – chronological axis (time line)

The diagram can show both the amount (level) of knowledge and the power of decision making Ask people present to give instructions to draw symbols of different age

classes Use pebbles or beans to indicate amounts/levels of knowledge and

decision making

Question 4:

Daily time calendar as a step-up for a discussion about roles and responsibilities of men and women

Roles = time allocation Responsibilities = decision making Animal and herd management has two aspects: day to day and long term Family management and food security has two aspects: day to day and

long term Link roles and responsibilities to breeding and selection

Relation ownership and decision making: needs to be investigated in an indirect

way Young men may have the knowledge but not the power Informal interview: Animals are productive and capita resources. How can

a person acquire animals? Do you have any animals yourself? What does

29

this mean for you? Does it give you some advantages? Does it give you some authority (power)? Note: While ownership is personal interest, hers management is of above

mentioned interest. Cattle ownership may not automatically translate into decision making power.

Questions 5 and 6: NB: Food security is not literally about food, but more about survival of the family (long term). It is operationalized as “to live comfortably”, “to sleep quietly”, “to have no worries”. Look for other indicators of food security, and use these where relevant, e.g. relation ample food – ample ceremonies, diversification of economic activities, diverse herd composition in terms of animal species.

In individual or group discussion, discuss how the (your) breeding and selection expertise (“that we have learnt this morning”) helps you to look after your family

The reference between this question and the questions asked under Q1 and Q2 should be utilized

In a group, ask how one can see whether a Maasai boma is well off/very well off/

badly off, and discuss the reasons This will result in three categories of “wealth” according to locally defined

criteria. It can take a form of a table or diagram with three columns Important to separate the elder and the younger, men and women Look for other indicators of wealth, e.g. crop cultivation (sign of wealth or

sign of poverty?); eating grain (sign of wealth or sign of poverty?); eating fish (sign of wealth or sign of poverty?)

Compare a bad year and a good year

Use diagrams and symbolic drawings Look for strategies for long term food security, such as migration,

spending money on veterinary drugs Methodology The unit of analysis is the boma (cluster of 3-6 households). Each boma has one herd. Several bomas make a hamlet, several hamlets constitute a village. No sampling is done but instead the team will make an effort to describe the village/hamlet/boma and the persons that were interviewed in a way that allows evaluating their representativeness. Group discussions will be held separately with male and female groups. Separate, or consecutive, discussions about cattle, sheep and goats. Use of informal interview methods and participatory tools. The team will split up in 3 sub teams of 2 persons (including the consultant).

30

At the end of every day the team will gather for exchange of information and preliminary analysis of data. Time planning Questions 1 and 2 may take one day per village, each sub team can cover 2 kraals/bomas (one in the morning and one in the evening), 2 x 2 group discussions (2 in the morning and 2 in the afternoon, total 6 sets per sub team = 18sets per village. Question 3 may take ½ day, each sub team covering 2 groups, total 6 data sets per village. If feasible, it can be integrated with Q1 and Q2. Question 4 may take ½ day, each sub team covering 2 groups, total 6 data sets per village. Questions 5 and 6 may take ½ day, each sub team covering 1-2 group(s), total 3-6 data sets per village. Three days per village = total 6 days = Sunday 14.9. through Friday 19.9. Note: a feedback session need to be planned in each village. Back in Arusha in Friday afternoon for draft report writing.

31

7. DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS Marie-Louise Beerling gave the team some tips where to start: Type of data:

• Informal

• Qualitative → Unstructured? • Descriptive • Observations

How to present these? How to process these? How to analyze? How to confirm or reject our hypotheses?

→ How to make our report? Structure is provided by the study design

• Problem statement • Research questions

Some quantification is possible by referring to number of interviews, number of people participating in group discussion, relative importance. Introduction:

• Process to problem statement and hypotheses • Which questions relate to which hypotheses

How to analyze unstructured data by Dr. Comoro and finalized after discussion: INTER-SUBJECTIVE GROUP PROCESS 1. Clusters of information by variable

• Topics • Age, gender • “disciplining” the data

2. Rank • Assign values to variable (number of times mentioned, intensity of highlighting

etc.) 3. Look at patterns

• Relation between variables 4. Try to make sense out of it → Interpretation → Analysis

• Analytical process starts in the field, with the members of the target group • Done by the team discussions, structuring to each other by discussing

32

8. WAY FORWARD The team leaves for Simanjiro early Saturday morning. In Friday afternoon the team does shopping with Jenna Kettunen to get prepared for the field. It was agreed that the input of Marie-Louise Beerling in the later stage of the research will be needed and the most relevant time for her to come back would be after the fieldwork of the second phase, to give her input for the planning of the third phase (synthesis phase). The team was reminded by Jenna Kettunen that in the LoA for the phase 1 there is a special allocation of money for the dissemination/sharing activities with stakeholders. Suggestions for action: feedback sessions together with all the stakeholders in the villages or special meeting with farmers, research team and other stakeholders on the research findings plus discussion on selected topic(s). Marie-Louise Beerling repeated her recommendation for the livestock keeper exchange between Simanjiro and Kilosa/Mbarali. These both suggestions would increase the contribution of the activity to objectives set in the first two days of the workshop. Who will be in charge of coordinating the report writing? Msechu will be a coordinating person. The team agreed that Mbaga will join dare s Salaam team members, maybe with Laswai, and they will meet in Kibaha in order to avoid interruptions in their work. Preliminary dates for the meeting are 28-30 September 2003. The responsibilities for the rewriting of the research proposal have to be dealt later, after the urgency with the fieldwork is through. Anyway, it is important to reflect the activity to proposed objectives or the other way around – preferable to make the activity to adjust to the objective of increasing the exchange of knowledge between stakeholders. This could be used as a form of giving something back to the communities as they would have a chance to share their needs, strengths, problems and solutions with other stakeholders.

33

ANNEX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Name Institution/occupation Tel/Mobile Email Dr. Cristopher J. Comoro

University of Dar es Salaam, senior lecturer in sociology and anthropology

0744-311346

topher06@uccmail.co.tz

Dr. Minja Animal Diseases Research Institute in EVK

0744-574174

mkangareminja@hotmail.com

Grace M. Mwaigomole

Ministry of water and Livestock Development

0744-069129

elineematu@yahoo.com

Marie-Louise Beerling

RDP International, Box 523, Zeist, Netherlands

+0031-30-6913202

mlb@rdpmobile.net

Steven Nalitolela District Veterinary Officer – Simanjiro

0744-267944

pristeve@yahoo.com

Said Mbaga Sokoine University of Agriculture

0744-578273 0748-521628

mbagash@suanet.ac.tz

Dr. James Msechu

Ministry of Water and Livestock development, Division of Livestock Research and Training

0741-350945 0748-611008

jmsechu@raha.com jmsechu@yahoo.co.uk

Dr. Sachin M. Das

Mpwapwa Livestock Production and Research Institute

0748-464086 0744-599717

sachin@maf.or.tz

Jenna Kettunen FAO Tanzania, LinKS project

022-2113070 0748-423454

jennaveijonen@yahoo.com

34

LinKS ProjectGender, biodiversity and local knowledge

systems for food security

LinKS project Gender, biodiversity and local knowledge systems for food security Contact details: Gender and Development Service Sustainable Development Department Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome, Italy Fax: (+39) 06 570 52004 email: links-project@fao.org website: www.fao.org/sd/links