Stephen Moiko

ILRI and McGill University,

Conservation and Land Grabbing: Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution?

26 – 27th March 2013 The Mappin Pavillion, London Zoo

International Institute for Environment and Development, International Land Coalition, Maliasili Initiatives and Zoological Society of London

Kenya’s Rangelands: Some Highlights

MAJOR ECOSYSTEM TYPES

Forest

Bush- and woodland

Cropland

Savanna and grassland

Bare areas

Urban areas

Water bodiesI LR I

• Kenya drylands make up

84 percent of the country’s total land surface.

• The drylands support the livelihoods of about 9.9 million people, or approximately 34 percent of the country’s population.

WILKENYA LAND COVER

ILRI

WILDLIFE DENSITY

(tropical livestock unit per sq. km)

> 100

20 - 100

0 - 20

No observation of animals

Non-rangeland areas or no data

OTHER FEATURES

District boundaries

Major national parks and reserves (over 5,000 ha)

Water bodies

WILWILDLIFE DENSITIES IN RANGELANDS • The drylands boast of about 75% of the country’s wildlife population and account for about 80% of tourism revenue.

• Around 8% of Kenya’s surface area is at present listed as protected conservation estate, (excluding marine parks and reserves.)

• It is further estimated that 92%

of these protected parks and reserves, and 50% of gazzetted forests are found in the drylands zones.

Wildlife Density in 1990s Poverty Rate in 1999

Source: WRI, ILRI, DRSRS, CBS 2007

WILDLIFE DENSITY

(tropical livestock unit per sq. km)

> 125

45 - 125

15 - 45

0 - 15

No observation of wildlife

No data

OTHER FEATURES

District boundaries

National parks and reserves

Water bodies

POVERTY RATE

(percent of the population below the poverty line)

> 65

55 - 65

45 - 55

35 - 45

<= 35

No data

Data calculated by Constituency

OTHER FEATURES

District boundaries

Constituency boundaries

Selected national parks and reserves

Water bodies

• High levels of poverty exist among populations inhabiting the wildlife-rich drylands

• There exist opportunities for Conservation to help alleviate poverty in drylands

Overview On Kenya Land Tenure • There were extensive land losses in the colonial period---land for colonial settlers;

Independence fought for on the basis of the land question. • Intense competition for access and control of the land resource in Kenya- especially in

the arable regions (20%). Land issues often lead to episodes of ethnic conflict. • Extensive land reforms were adopted after independence to address the land problem

• The reforms largely adopted a capitalistic model of property rights—Privatization and individuation, except in Rangelands where individuation was not feasible.

• The reforms never completely addressed the problem of inequity in land access; political and economic elite benefitted.

• There exists a significant landless population.

Kenya Land Tenure: The Legal Framework a) Old Constitution 1963 Freehold holdings

• Makes up about 20% of the country’s land and is held either individually or collectively. Collective freeholds include community Group Ranches.

Government land. • Approximately 10% of Kenya’s land is under government ownership (gazzetted

forests, protected areas and reserves, rivers, and any land occupied by government. Trust lands. • The balance of land holdings (70%) is trust land. • All native reserves ; held by county councils for the benefit of resident

communities—mainly in Rangelands.

b) New Constitution (2010) and New Land Laws • The New Constitution vests ownership of land to the people: “all land in Kenya

belongs to the people collectively as a nation, communities and individuals.” • Foreigners can not own land, but they can obtain leases not exceeding 99 years.

Categories of Land under new Constitution 1. Public land • All land unalienated by the Government, used or occupied by State organs, land

which no individual or community ownership can be established, land with minerals and oils, and all gazzetted protected areas.

• Public land will be held in trust for the people by government and administered on their behalf by the National Land Commission.

2. Community land • Community land will be held by communities on the basis of ethnicity, culture or

similar interest. Community land comprises land registered in the name of group representatives (Group Ranches) , transferred to a specific community, and land held, managed or used by communities as community forests, grazing areas or shrines. Also ancestral lands and lands traditionally occupied by hunter – gatherer communities.

3. Private land • Private Land in Kenya consists of land held by a legal person under freehold tenure

and leasehold tenure.

Conservation, Land Acquisitions and Land Tenure in Drylands

• Beginning from the onset of British colonial rule and progressing after independence, conservation objectives instigated a series of State land seizures, largely in drylands, for the creation of protected wildlife areas.

• In recent years, private enterprises and conservation agencies have emerged as principal drivers of conservation related land acquisitions in the drylands. • Eland Dawns-Laikipia National Park (2011)-AWF and TNC.

• In response to the loss of biodiversity and increased poverty, some pastoral

communities have since 1990s initiated schemes to supply wildlife habitat services.

• The lands and institutions that deliver such services are commonly referred to as “Conservancies”. A Conservancy involves the allocation of communal or individual owned land for wildlife conservation and wildlife tourism to generate financial and non-financial benefits directly or indirectly to landowners. These benefits can be provided by commercial tourist companies, conservation NGOs, and the wildlife and protected area agencies

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Numbers Cumulative

0

1

2

3

4

5

19

92

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

99

20

01

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Num

ber

of

conserv

ancie

s Samburu

Narok

Marsabit

Laikipia

Kwale

Kajiado

Garissa

Baringo

Marsabit,

Samburu, 8.5

Baringo,

Laikipia, 17.1

Garissa

Tana River

Narok

Kajiado, 2.7

Taita Taveta, Kwale,

Lodwar

Marsabit

Garissa

Mombasa

NAIROBI

Nanyuki

Isiolo

Lodwar

Narok

100 0 100 200 Kilometers

I (humid)

II (sub-humid)III (semi-humid)

IV (semi-humid to semi-arid)

V (semi-arid)

VI (arid)

VII (very arid)

1990s

2000s

No data

N

ConservanciesEstablished

Ratio between conservancies and PA

Evolution of conservancies in the Kenya Rangelands

• Located within the Maasai District of Kajiado, in the South Rift of Kenya.

• The Group Ranch was legally created in 1978, along many others, as a part of Land Reforms in Rangelands.

• The GR hosts more than 5,000 Pastoral Maasai families, jointly owning as registered members the 22,000 acres Group Ranch. Population is about 20,000 people.

• Olkiramatian is among the only 5 remaining intact Group Ranches in Kajiado District, all others (about 55) having disintegrated and undergone subdivision.

Case Study: Olkiramatian Group Ranch

Institutional Resource Governance and Land Zoning in Olkiramatian GR

• Secure communal-private rights to community land (Group Ranch) have allowed for the emergence of a local level institutional framework and a resource governance system that has allowed the pastoral community to diversify into cultivation and provision of wildlife habitats (conservancy).

• The community has zoned the Group Ranch into three land use zones and created local institutional structures (committees) to govern them. • Livestock Zone • Cultivation Zone • Conservation Zone

1) Livestock zone • The zone comprises of largely open pasture plains, and makes up over 75% of

the Group ranch’s land. • Livestock grazing within the zone is regulated by the Grazing committee,

which sets migration dates in and out of the Zone. It uses cultural norms and sanctions to ensure conformity.

• While land in the Zone is communally owned, individual families can appropriate small pieces of land for use for special personal livestock needs.

• Most of the community’s settlement are located within this Zone where livestock reside during the wet season.

2) The Conservation Zone (The Conservancy) • Densely vegetated and harbors an extensive range of wildlife species. • Recognizing its potential for community tourism, the group ranch set aside the

zone for conservation and tourism. • It has since managed to construct a community lodge, The Sampu lodge. • The conservation zone doubles up as the traditional dry season pasture area for

livestock. • No permanent human settlement are allowed in this zone, but temporary

settlements are setup in the dry season when livestock migrate. • The setting aside of a huge chunk of land for conservation definitely has enormous

opportunity costs to the community. • The herders seem to tolerate the wildlife well, so long as they can access the area or

dry season pasture.

3) Cultivation Zone • Has permanent river water supply and can guarantee year round crop

production. • Cultivation plots are Individually held and cultivated, but farmers lack

individual rights to sell or dispose them. • The irrigation committee oversees and makes decisions regarding water

distribution and the maintenance of irrigation canals. • The agricultural zone is also an important source of dry season pasture;

herders drive in their livestock to feed on crop stubbles during droughts.

Olkiramatian Land-Use Zones

Conclusion • The conservation enterprise in Olkiramatian provides a potential model for

rangelands management. It shows that strengthened community land rights can form a secure foundation for sustainable management of rangelands resources including the conservation of wildlife.

Realized Benefits include : • Improved biodiversity conservation outcomes (increased wildlife numbers and

vegetation (trees, shrubs and grass, reduced soil erosion-livestock grazing)). • Creation of community tourism camp (the Sambu camp); a potential rich source of

much needed revenue to the community for School bursaries, employment opportunities, etc.

• Improved livelihood resilience because of enhanced livestock grazing management-the conservation zone as a dry season pasture bank.

• Increased community awareness of its land and resources and individual rights on them, hence improved security and vigilance of land rights.

• Exhibited in the high level of competition for leadership positions with management committees and for employment opportunities created by communal resources.

Challenges (Noted) • Despite high potential for conservation revenues, expected income benefits have

not yet fully realized. The Sambu Lodge is yet to fully take off. • Human-wildlife conflict (cultivated fields, livestock losses, human injury) • Difficulties in making collective decisions---whole community must be involved.

THANK YOU !!