Ethiopia: Economic and policy issues
Conceptual issues and hypotheses
Institutional structure, resource use, and property regimes
Changes in property rights and land use
Determinants of property-rights and land-use change
The importance of livestock for the subsistence and economic development of Sub-Saharan countries has long been recognized (Jahnke 1982; Winrock International 1992; McIntire, Bourzat, and Pingali 1992; Birner 1996). Agriculture, which dominates most of the economies in the region, relies heavily on the livestock subsector for its contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP), estimated at 32 percent in the last decades for the region as a whole (Winrock International 1992). The region’s growing population relies heavily on livestock products for their daily dietary requirement. The provision of draught power and manure also contributes a great deal toward improving the stability and sustainability of cultivation in agropastoral systems. Because discussions on the multifarious role of livestock in the region is already abundant in the literature (Jahnke 1982; McIntire, Bourzat, and Pingali 1992; Birner 1996; Ellis 1991; Winrock International 1992), this topic is not be emphasized in this chapter.
Livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa is dominated by pastoralism and agropastoralism. These are traditional systems that evolved in response to the region’s diverse agricultural environment—arid, semi-arid, subhumid, and highland zones with varying temperatures, altitudes, soil types, and natural vegetation (Jahnke 1982). These diverse agroclimates—coupled with disease constraints, divergence in cultural preferences and economic incentives—influence the distribution of animals throughout Sub-Saharan Africa. Pastoralism is practiced in areas not suitable for cultivation; and agropastoralism, in areas where the agroclimatic conditions favor crop production. Pastoralism in the region, in general, is characterized by the daily, seasonal, or yearly movement of animals—in response to the region’s fluctuating weather conditions—to reduce risks associated with the use of variable rangelands. An estimated 25 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa derive their livelihood directly from pastoralism, while the number of agropastoralists is estimated at 240 million (Swallow 1994).
Pastoralism has survived through many centuries as a production system in Sub-Saharan Africa. In recent decades, however, it has been observed that pastoralism is in continuous decline because of threats posed by human population growth, by increasing crop cultivation, and by other human activities that shift extensive livestock-production to areas of primary productivity that are increasingly marginal. Government policies—especially land-use policies—over the past decades have hardly been in favor of pastoralists.
Land-tenure policies in most parts of Africa were designed to support sedentarization; indeed privatization, which by implication was supportive of crop production, limits pastoralism to marginalized areas (Ault and Rutman 1979; Kirk 1996). Pastoralism was to be “modernized” through the introduction of state ranches, fattening centers, and forced organization of pastoralists into strictly supervised pastoral associations. Most of these policies and interventions have, over the decades, only proved to be inappropriate,1 as they underestimated the production potential of traditional systems and misconstrued the production rationale of the traditional pastoralists. Relics of such interventions in the form of defunct ranches, among others, are still evident in Tanzania and southern Ethiopia today.
1 For further reading, see for example Ellis 1991; Winrock International 1992.
As a consequence, pastoralism, which was once capable of maintaining the sensitive balance between grazing land, water, livestock numbers, and the environment, is gradually breaking down in most parts of the region. This has created a need for reorientation in planning and implementing development projects and research priorities for pastoral systems. Realization is growing that pastoralists are also experts, at least in their own way, in living and surviving in their marginal and risky environments; and that priority should first be given to understanding pastoral systems from the perspective of management institutions and property rights under which resources are managed (Hogg 1997; Kituyi and Kipuri 1991; Helland 1997).
AGRICULTURE, LIVESTOCK, AND THE ECONOMY. Ethiopia is situated in northeastern Africa and has an area of 1,223 million square kilometers and a population of about 60 million people, with an estimated mean density of 49 people per square kilometer. It is the second most populous country in Sub-Saharan Africa, with a population growth rate of more than 3 percent per year, which is higher than the growth rate in the agricultural sector. It is estimated that the population will have exceeded 67 million by the turn of the century (FAO 1996).
More than 80 percent of the population live in rural areas and derive their livelihood directly or indirectly from agriculture. Ethiopia’s economy is agrarian, with agriculture’s accounting for 85 percent of total employment and 75 percent of exports. In 1996, agriculture alone accounted for about 40 percent of the GDP. The main cash crops include coffee, oilseeds, sisal, tobacco, fruits, pepper, and sugarcane. In general, crops account for about 80 percent of the output value of the agricultural sector, while livestock and livestock products account for the rest (FAO 1996). Despite its relatively low contribution to the agricultural sector, livestock production plays a paramount role in generating rural employment: less than 10 percent of the total land area of Ethiopia is actually under crops, and extensive land use in the form of pastoral and agropastoral production dominates the agricultural production systems. The country is the first in Africa and tenth in the world in terms of livestock resources. These amount to about 70 million head of cattle, sheep, and goats, and about 8 million equines and camels (FAO 1996).
Ethiopia has a diverse agricultural environment: the central massive highlands rise up to an altitude of 4,000 meters, while the lowland altitudes may be as low as 1,000 meters. The delineation of highlands and lowlands here is based on the crude threshold elevation of 1,500 meters or more of above sea level for the highlands (Jahnke 1982). The highlands compose about 40 percent of the entire land area and support about 90 percent of the rural population, forming the main seat of Ethiopia’s agricultural activities. Smallholder agropastoral farmers, whose production is largely subsistence, dominate agricultural production in the highlands. Although currently experiencing a declining per capita output because of decreasing soil fertility, the highlands are ecologically more suited to crop production: rainfall, temperatures, and soil types are more favorable to crop production than in the lowlands.
Unlike the highlands, the lowlands are characterized by relatively low human population densities and highly variable and uncertain rainfall. The semi-arid nature of the lowlands makes pastoralism the most well-adapted production practice in the area. To a lesser extent, agropastoralism is also well adapted: cultivation is practiced in areas around villages where population densities are relatively high, and areas around valleys where the agroecological conditions permit this activity. Crop production is generally favored by the central administration, so that the adoption of crops cannot only be attributed to high population densities and suitable microclimates, but is also a response to policy incentives.
In general, development policies in the country are currently based on a five-year, agriculture-based development plan that is intended to create self-sufficiency in food throughout the country. This plan is, however, highly concentrated in the agricultural and agropastoral highlands. Except for programs and projects implemented through the activities of the rangelands development units, pastoral areas have little to expect from such development plans; they form only a small proportion of the country’s population and fall into the category of “neglected areas,” which, despite decentralization efforts, continue to be marginalized (Hogg 1997).
LAND USE POLICY. Ethiopia has never really had any comprehensive national land-use policy that clearly spells out different legislation regarding different aspects of land-use and resource-management practices. Frequently, separate legislation governing minor aspects of land use are issued and implemented as deemed necessary. Over the past decades, land administration was mainly in the hands of authorized sectoral ministries, often with different interests, so that the legislation of one sectoral ministry conflicted with that of the other. This lack of a consistent and comprehensive land policy has been noted as a setback in Ethiopia’s land-tenure history. The trend is said to have continued unabated throughout the transitional periods (Zegeye Asfaw 1995).
Several changes in land-use policy have been recorded in Ethiopia over the past decades (Teka 1983; Ghose 1985; Zegeye Asfaw 1995). These changes are believed to have had different impacts in diverse parts of the country, based on the prevailing type of production systems. The changes are attributed to the divergence of policy priorities by the different regimes that prevailed—namely, the monarchy before 1974 (pre-Derg), the Ethiopian Socialist Government (Derg), and the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (post-Derg). Each of these regimes introduced and implemented different land policies that have very important implications for different production systems in the country.
Before the fall of the Monarchy, land tenure in Ethiopia was characterized by an intricate and hierarchical system that varied greatly across different parts of the country (Teka 1983; Ghose 1985; Bruce, Hoben, and Rahmato 1994; Zegeye Asfaw 1995). In the northern region, access to land was based on hereditary rights and community membership—with the imposition of tithe, tributes, and other services imposed on the peasants. In the south, much of the land was held in large estates by landlords and farmed by tenants who were often the original inhabitants of the area. Rents and other services were imposed, or sharecropping arrangements were made. Tenure insecurity was high and eviction was easy, since most of the agreements were merely verbal. Land holdings of peasant households hardly were larger than 5 hectares, and this often consisted of parcels in more than one community. The area was thus characterized by an unequal distribution of land and tenure insecurity. By the 1960s it had become obvious that land tenure was a major constraint to development in the country (Bruce, Hoben, and Rahmato 1994). Pastoral areas were considered “marginal” and therefore experienced little, if any, of the impacts of land-policy changes at that time.
The emergence of the Derg regime in 1974 was greeted by a series of land-reform programs (Zegeye Asfaw 1995). The regime was quick to recognize the need for land reform and on March 5, 1974, it nationalized all rural land and declared it “the collective property of the Ethiopian people.” The program was implemented almost everywhere; land was expropriated from the landlords, state farms were established, wage labor was abolished, and villagization programs were immediately initiated. All other existing land rights were extinguished, and all land became public property with the aim of “liberating the masses from oppression and exploitation” by the land-owning classes.
The implementation of this land-redistribution program began with the formation of peasant associations (Kebelles), whose primary responsibility was the allocation of land to peasant households. The redistribution was based on a set of criteria that differed from one region to another—family size, availability of land, and productive potential of the land—and guaranteed a maximum of 10 hectares per household held under usufructuary rights. Households could make claims only at residential Kebelles. Under this system, all individual transfer of land, regardless of the method involved, was prohibited. Before its eventual fall in 1991, the Derg regime had already relaxed some of its rigid policies—lifting the ban on hired labor and slowing down the resettlement program.
The post-Derg regime has not reformed land-tenure policy very drastically. Despite its declaration that land continues to be nationally owned, certain inheritance rights were once again ensured and the resettlement programs stopped. This was followed by a call for the establishment of commercial farms by private individuals, with reassuring statements of guaranteeing property rights, credit facilities, construction of feeder roads, and tax concession to facilitate marketing activities (Bruce, Hoben, and Rahmato 1994). Since the fall of the Derg, a general improvement in marketing conditions—both in terms of better selling opportunities and in terms of more consumer goods’ becoming available in local markets—have been observed in the country.
Although the target groups for most of the changes in land-use policies were sedentarized crop producers and agropastoralists, the pastoralists also experienced indirect impacts from these changes. Before these policy changes, pastoral-land ownership and administration rested in the hands of the pastoralists, whose enterprise was entirely based on mobility and communal-resource use that was managed traditionally. In other words, the management of all grazing resources was entirely in the hands of community. Communities that once independently and commonly managed their pastures started to become accountable to the central administration through the chairmen of the peasant associations, whose duties and responsibilities sometimes conflicted with those of the traditional elders in these pastoral settings. This situation, coupled with the sedentarization programs, constrained the mobility on which traditional pastoralism greatly depends, creating a negative impact on pastoral development.
LIVESTOCK-PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND PASTORALISM. Livestock are produced in Ethiopia in an extensive system that is largely agropastoral in the highlands, and pastoral in the lowlands. The natural and agroecological conditions in the highlands are suited to the integration of crops and livestock in a single production system (Jahnke 1982). In the highlands, livestock husbandry is combined with crop production in a sedentarized system with open grazing and relatively high cropping intensities and livestock densities. About 60 percent of the total livestock in Ethiopia is produced in the highlands, the most predominant one being cattle. With this increasing intensification, human population in the highlands is high and was estimated in the 1980s to have an average density of 72 people per square kilometer—almost nine times that of the lowlands (Coppock 1994). The use of draught power and animal manure on crop fields is widespread and is equally as important as postharvest grazing. This mutual contribution of crops and livestock to the farming system, coupled with a relative reliability of rainfall, makes production in the highlands more stable compared with the lowlands. Although production is to a large extent subsistence, market orientation is gradually gaining ground: live animals and dairy products from pastoral areas are penetrating the urban markets, while grains are traded with pastoralists in the lowlands.
The main pastoral areas are the vast stretch of lowlands to the south, southeast, and northeast of the country, surrounding the central massive highlands and constituting more than 50 percent of the total land area. The area is home to a diverse array of pastoral groups, the most important being the Afar in the northeast, the Somali in the southeast, and the Boran in the south. Although the lowlands have much lower livestock densities than the highlands, they play an important role in meeting the livestock demand in both the domestic and international markets. Lowland breeds are robust and generally regarded as superior to indigenous highland breeds, not only in terms of size, endurance, and productivity but also in terms of performance in cross-breeding programs and in satisfying consumer preferences in the international market. It is also estimated that about 20 percent of the draught animals used in the highlands come from the lowlands (Coppock 1994).
Development efforts targeted at improving pastoral livestock-production date far back to the inception of the first and second livestock-development programs in the late 1950s and early 1960s (Coppock 1994). The objective of these programs was to facilitate the integration of lowland and highland production-systems by establishing a commercial link between the former and the latter. The outcome of this initiative was for a long time minimal and only became significant after the launching of the third livestock-development program in the mid-1970s, which later became the dominant force in the development of the pastoral subsector. The program’s pastoral development efforts were concentrated on infrastructural improvements, such as the construction and maintenance of roads, creation of market facilities, water management, and animal-health improvement through the provision of veterinary services. These projects were operational in all the pastoral areas in the country—the northeastern, southeastern, and southern rangelands. With the advent of the regionalization program, the projects were later handed over to the respective regional governments and eventually transformed into rangeland-development units within the federal ministry of agriculture, with a great reduction in the former staff. This move is presumed to be attributed to budget constraints on the central government (Hogg 1997).
The rangeland-development units include the Southern Rangelands Development Unit (SORDU), with headquarters in Yabello; the North-East Rangeland Development Unit (NERDU), with headquarters in Wedia; and Jijiga Rangeland Development Unit (JIRDU) in the east, with headquarters in Jijiga. These targeted areas exhibited good linkages to marketing centers: the NERDU area has good proximity to the Assab port; the JIRDU area has a good rail link to Djibouti; and the SORDU area is bisected by a tarmac road that links the area to Addis and Nairobi, forming part of the African transcontinental highway system (Coppock 1994).
The rangeland-development units are assigned with the execution of a vast array of development activities for facilitating trade linkages and market off-take in the respective regions. On the southern rangelands, for example, the activities of SORDU are largely concentrated on the Borana Plateau, a portion of the southern rangelands that is largely occupied by the Boran pastoral ethnic group. The activities of SORDU include improvement of access to pasture and water (digging and maintenance of ponds, and renovation of traditional deep wells), construction, and maintenance of access roads to health and marketing centers and to animal-health services. SORDU also manages the few state ranches in the Borana Plateau, which now face pressure for privatization. The field sites of this study are selected from pastoral communities on the Borana Plateau that consist mainly of Boran pastoralists.
The study is intended to provide information that will help to smooth the development process of the livestock subsector in semi-arid areas of Sub-Saharan Africa, using the Borana Plateau in the southern rangelands of Ethiopia as a case study. The plateau has received considerable research and development attention over the past decades. While most of these studies acknowledge the enormous work done in the areas of rangeland improvement, animal health, livestock productivity, and marketing, there is a general consensus that the outcomes of these research and development efforts remain far below expectation (Coppock 1994; Cousins and Upton 1988; Hogg 1980; Helland 1982; Kerven and Cox 1996). The International Livestock Centre for Africa’s 11-year system study (from 1980 to 1991), summarized in Coppock (1994), concludes that the Borana Plateau, once frequently cited as a model of pastoralism in Africa, is currently in a deteriorating situation that needs attention. This failure is occurring for two main reasons.
First, Coppock attributes this failure to assumptions by planners that were erroneously based on western values and commercialization, largely ignoring the traditional social and economic values of the Boran people. Market off-take of immature cattle, for example, to supply smallholder fattening schemes in the highlands and to generate cash income for the Boran pastoralists, were the expected outcomes. These outcomes could not be realized partly because the Boran people traditionally regard “cattle as wealth” rather than as a source of cash income.
Second, population has been reported to be growing at a rate that is putting significant pressure on a finite resource base, while market opportunities have been increasing since the fall of the Derg. Coppock (1994) concedes that, despite the bulk of research done on the Borana Plateau, little is known about human population dynamics, including changes in social values and how the traditional management institution is able to cope with these changes. He refers to the gada system as the traditional institution for managing rangeland resources in the Borana Plateau and cites cultivation as an observable change in property rights. Hogg (1997), using privatization of rangelands on the Borana Plateau as an example, points out that privatization of rangelands upsets the longstanding common-property relationships that are based on the exigencies of pastoralism or common livestock interests, and emphasizes the need for examining the causes and consequences of these changes.
In their reconnaissance survey in 1996, Kerven and Cox hypothesized changes in land use and property rights on the Borana Plateau to be the outcome of political upheavals, new economic policies, and long-term demographic shifts. The study recommends testing these hypotheses, focusing on various factors underlying shifts in common-property management. It is against this background that the Borana Plateau is believed to offer a good opportunity for a case study on property rights, risk, and livestock development. The natural and agroecological characteristics of the area, which give an idea of the riskiness of production activities in the area, are examined in the next section.
The objectives of the study were to
Meeting these objectives will provide a basis for the recommendation of policy and other interventions that can assist the Boran community to achieve pathways to intensification that are socially preferred, efficient, equitable, and environmentally sustainable. The study is intended not only to improve understanding of the natural and socioeconomic factors influencing land-use and institutional change, but also seeks in particular to identify ways in which government policies affect community resource-management decisions and their outcomes.
Two models (the demand led and the supply led) have been put forward to explain changes in property rights, land use, and institutional change (Demsetz 1967; Posner 1977; Anderson and Hill 1975). The demand-led model is consistent with the postulates of the theories of agricultural intensification, and emphasizes that the redefinition of property rights by communities follows a need to internalize externalities that are inevitable concomitants of population growth and increased market opportunities, and thus property rights will evolve if the benefits for establishing and maintaining private rights exceed the costs (Platteau 1995). Although sometimes criticized, the demand-led model is largely accepted on the grounds that factor scarcities and market opportunities do change people’s preferences for different property rights. Many authors have expanded differently upon this model by incorporating the following concepts:
North (1995) focuses on the path dependency of institutional change, citing the importance of individual and shared “mental models.”
While the above models lay the basic foundations for this empirical work, the conceptual framework is specifically based on the theories of agricultural intensification, induced innovation, investment in agriculture, property rights, collective action, and institutional change (Boserup 1981; Ruttenberg 1980; Ostrom 1990; Binswanger and McIntire 1987). Boserup (1965, 1981) and Binswanger and McIntire (1987) postulate in their theories of intensification and induced innovation that factors such as population, market, and technology will induce changes in resource management at the local level as a result of changing factor scarcities and prices. Lele and Stone (1989), among others, expanded upon these theories by incorporating the important role played by government policies in depicting the nature and impact of agricultural change, particularly on natural-resource management and institutions.
The impact of these changes in particular sets of communities will depend on the available institutions facilitating or endorsing the change, and on community characteristics, such as natural-resource endowments (land quality, natural vegetation, topography, climate, and water resources), human capital, and social capital—as captured by the presence of local institutions, rules, and regulations for resource use and of enforcement agents. Pender and Scherr (1996) referred to these characteristics as “conditioning factors” that constrain resource-use decisions at both the household and community levels, leading to different incentives that give rise to divergent preferences for property regimes. Different pathways to intensification may result. The outcomes accompanying these pathways are measurable in terms of changes in productivity, in human welfare, and in the condition of natural resources. It is important to note that policies and decisions that may improve on one of these variables may or may not improve the others. Figure 15.1 summarizes the conceptual framework.
FIGURE 15.1 Conceptual framework
Against this background, the study is designed to test the following hypotheses:
LOCATION, CLIMATE, AND AGROECOLOGICAL CONDITION. The Borana Plateau is in the southern-most part of the Ethiopian lowlands and occupies a total land area of about 95,000 square kilometers. It is located between latitudes 4 and 6 degrees north and longitudes 36 and 42 degrees east, sloping gently from 1,600 meters in the northeast to about 1,000 meters in the extreme south, bordering northern Kenya. The area is still predominantly in pastures consisting of flat plains forming the main parts of the range. There is an occasional occurrence of mountains of granitic formation and massive valleys and depressions. Cultivation is mostly done in the valleys and depressions, where good soils occur, and where the average annual rainfall permits the activity. Soils vary widely across the plateau—from the very rocky terrain of lithosols around Yabello, colluvial red soils around Mega, yellowish red soils around Medacho, to loose sandy soils around Dillo. The differences in characteristics and fertility of these soils and the average annual rainfall are, among other factors, major determinants of the level of cultivation observed in the different communities during the 1998 field surveys and by other researchers (Assefa, Bille, and Corra 1986).
The Borana Plateau exhibits a bimodal pattern of precipitation, with the long rains falling between March and May; and the short rains, between September and November. Spatial and temporal variability in both the quantity and distribution of rainfall renders the plateau as semi-arid, with an average annual rainfall varying from 300 millimeters to 900 millimeters per year (based on unpublished SORDU rainfall data from 1986–97). The long rainy season is usually followed by an extended dry period that offers little opportunity for the growth of annual herbaceous species (Assefa 1990).
The Joint Ethiopian Pastoral Systems Study divided the plateau into four ecological zones based on soil types, natural vegetation, primary productivity, and duration of growing seasons (Cousins and Upton 1988; Assefa, Bille, and Corra 1986). These divisions include the savanna in the north, which has a high potential for carrying high numbers of livestock or being agriculturally productive; the bush land with high shrub cover in the central zone; the medium-potential grassland in the east; and the volcanic areas in the west. Primary productivity varies greatly from year to year and across zones, the highest being 2.7 tons per hectare per year in the savanna grasslands and the lowest being 1.5 tons per hectare per year in the volcanic areas. The west-central part of the plateau is considered to be the heartland of the Borana pastoral system, where the population density in 1982 was estimated to be 7.3 persons per square kilometer (Coppock 1994). The dominant ethnic group, particularly in the west-central part of the plateau, is the Boran, with smaller numbers of Burji, Amhara, Somali, Konso, and Oromo living around towns and in the eastern part of the region.
The social organization of the Borana pastoral system is generally based on the gada2 system, which is a complex organizational framework based on a grade system that divides the Borana community into a number of general classes created each eight years. This grade system is important for the distribution of duties, responsibilities, social rights, and the regulation of the human population growth. Each gada (eight-year period) is administered by an aba gada or father of the gada, who is traditionally elected to preside, together with his council of ministers, over all issues affecting pastoral life in Borana. A consensus on important community issues—such as redefinition and enforcement of rules, regulations, and norms—is reached through open, participatory assemblies (although for men only). An assembly of all Borana people and/or their representatives (gumi gayu) is held every eight years to discuss issues such as resource conflicts and cardinal rules, including those that have been violated because of declining adherence to traditions and culture intertribal issues, and to divine the future of the Borana society (Coppock 1994). The system is believed to have evolved in the 1600s.
2 For a more comprehensive review of the gada system, refer to Legesse 1973, and Coppock 1994.
The Borana communal-grazing system allows access to pasture and water to every member of the Borana society, contingent upon compliance with the prevailing rules and regulations, and the performance of duties and responsibilities. The gada system is primarily concerned with regulating the use of the Borana resource base, maintaining peace among the multitudes of users, and protecting them and their cattle from external invasion. Cattle dominate the Borana pastoral systems and are the focal point of the Borana way of life. The organization of land use, settlement, and traditional administrative systems (which are examined in the next section) has frequently been cited as a model of pastoralism in Africa (Coppock 1994; Hogg 1997; Helland 1997; Swallow 1994).
institutional structure. The entire Borana Plateau is divided into traditional administrative units called maddas. The geographical configuration of a madda is constructed around a permanent water source (traditional deep well or permanent pond), administered by a “father of the well.” The wells are of vital importance in Borana social life and all economic and religious life is centered around them. Nine groups of such wells are concentrated in 35 locations on the central part of the plateau (Helland 1982). The father of a well regulates its use, organizes its maintenance, and coordinates with madda elders for the implementation of rules, regulations, and sanctions regarding the water source. Each madda is subdivided into ardas that can best be described as a collection of encampments (ollas). Each arda has jurisdiction over some form of grazing area, cultivation land, and, to a lesser extent, water resources. The ollas comprise about 10 households and are the smallest units of communal resource-management in Borana. At each of these three levels there are officials (usually elders) who manage, in an overall way, the affairs of the community at the respective levels.
PROPERTY RIGHTS OVER GRAZING RESOURCES. Transhumant pastoralism is the customary form of land use in the Borana Plateau. Grazing resources in Borana (pasture and water) are to a large extent owned communally and administered by traditional elders who formulate rules about resource use, administer their enforcement, and ensure that sanctions and penalties are implemented. Pastures can either be warra, forra, or calf enclosures. Forra grazing areas are areas designated for grazing bulls and nonlactating cows (dry herds), and are customarily open to all Borana people. Transit areas around permanent water points are also forra. Permanent settlement in forra areas is prohibited by madda elders; such areas are regarded as fall-back areas for all Borana people during periods of forage scarcity. Warra areas are grazing areas for lactating cows, and for sick and weak animals that return to the encampment everyday so that they can be milked and monitored. Areas designated as warra are normally only open to members of the same arda but can be used by members of different ardas under special arrangements, usually on a reciprocal basis.
Grazing is unrestricted in terms of time, except during periods of forage scarcity, when herd-splitting3 agreements force dry herds to migrate. The most individualized pastures in the Borana Plateau are calf enclosures. Calf enclosures are thorn-fenced pastures that are reserved for use by calves and to a lesser extent by milking cows; they are not stocked at all in the rainy season and are used only in the dry season. The use of calf enclosures is restricted to members of the community that erected the fences, usually one or more ollas, although some calf enclosures are now being constructed for use by individual Borana households, as noted below. Access to an enclosure is restricted only to periods of absolute forage scarcity and for specific types of animals. The rules and regulations here are more strictly implemented; collective investment in fencing and, to a lesser extent, bush clearing, is a common practice.
3 “Herd splitting” refers to the separation of dry herds from the rest of the animals so that they can be moved over long distances in search of better forage. The duration of stay may vary from a few days to a whole season, depending on the availability of forage and water.
Crop production has recently become important in the Borana Plateau. Using aerial photographs, Assefa, Bille, and Corra (1986) estimated that 0.3 percent of the area of the west-central part of the plateau was cultivated in 1982, compared with 1.4 percent of the area in 1986. Most of the cultivation was around towns and villages (Coppock 1994). Individual households farm cropped fields, with thorn fences erected to protect the standing crops from damage by grazing livestock. Coppock (1994) associates this increase in cultivated area with the drought of 1984.
WATER MANAGEMENT. Like pastoralists elsewhere, the Borana employ a variety of strategies for survival in their marginal and risky environments. The traditional organization of the grazing system, water management, and use of different livestock species are basic elements of resource-exploitation strategies used by the Borana people. The organization of the grazing system into warra, forra, and calf enclosures has already been elucidated in the preceding section. This system has developed in response to seasonal feed shortages and nutritional stress during periods of forage scarcity, especially the dry period between the long and short rainy seasons. This period is frequently characterized by seasonal water shortages that more or less effectively determine access to pastures. The communal warra and forra grazing systems impose virtually no limits to grazing, except those imposed by labor requirements and water restrictions (Helland 1982).
Helland (1982) distinguishes three main forms of water in the Borana Plateau: occasional water, such as natural pools and puddles of rain water lasting only a few days; temporal water, such as ponds and basins that can be both natural and artificial; and the permanent, traditional deep wells that form the pivot of pastoral life in Borana. The pools and puddles are more or less regarded as pasture and are accessible to all Borana pastoralists; in any case, they occur only at the peak of the rains; hence their use need not be restricted. The ponds and wells are subject to a complex set of restrictions, rules, and regulations that are administered and enforced by special agents (ponds or well managers), under the supervision and guidance of the traditional elders. During periods of acute water shortage, the frequency of watering cattle can be reduced to three days so as to increase the number of herds that can be supported by the wells. The effects of this infrequent watering has hitherto not been made very clear, apart from minimal losses of weight and body condition. Details regarding the social organization and administration of the traditional wells, and the importance of this institution to the overall management of grazing resources in Borana, are elucidated in Helland (1982) and Coppock (1994).
To test the hypotheses and address the research questions in the preceding sections, a field survey was conducted in 40 rural communities or ardas in the Borana Plateau. As stated above, the arda is the lowest level of social organization that governs resource use and allocation. Ardas were selected in all six districts in Borana: Yabello, Dirre (Mega), Arero, Negelle, Teltele, and Moyale. The selection focused on the Borana pastoral ethnic group in SORDU operational areas that had access roads or paths and some secondary information, at least on rainfall. The field activity was divided into a participatory appraisal phase and an in-depth survey phase. The field research covered an 11-month period from September 1997 through July 1998.
The communities were selected to represent different rainfall patterns (level and variation) and access to markets. Monthly rainfall data from 1986 to 1997 for 12 weather stations located across the Borana Plateau were used to classify areas around the stations into four different rainfall categories: high mean, high variation; high mean, low variation; low mean, high variation; and low mean, low variation. The weather stations varied in terms of their access to markets. Three to five ardas were randomly selected from around each of the weather stations to cover the four rainfall categories and different degrees of market access. The selection of ardas was also contingent upon physical accessibility (roads or footpaths) and the prevalence of pastoralism. Inaccessible ardas and heavily cultivated ardas (mostly around major towns) were excluded from the sampling. The focus was on pastoral communities and not on sedentarized, crop-producing communities where the privatization path is already fully established. Table 15.1 shows the distribution of communities around weather stations.
TABLE 15.1 Distribution of rainfall across sites
Station |
Characteristicsa |
Meanb |
Standard deviation |
Coefficient of variation |
Number of ardas |
Sarite Sum |
LR, LCV |
469 |
103 |
0.24 |
3 3 |
Wachile |
LR, HCV |
473 |
222 |
0.49 |
5 |
Web |
LR, HCV |
399 |
199 |
0.48 |
4 |
Dembelawachu |
LR, HCV |
353 |
130 |
0.39 |
2 |
Dillo Sum |
LR, HCV |
499 |
170 |
0.39 |
3 14 |
Yabello |
HR, HCV |
519 |
230 |
0.46 |
5 |
Arero |
HR, HCV |
873 |
374 |
0.45 |
4 |
Negelle |
HR, HCV |
739 |
241 |
0.32 |
3 |
Moyale Sum |
HR, HCV |
869 |
588 |
0.67 |
2 14 |
Hidilil |
HR, LCV |
717 |
203 |
0.28 |
4 |
Did Yabello |
HR, LCV |
496 |
141 |
0.28 |
1 |
Teltele |
HR, LCV |
634 |
135 |
135 |
4 |
Sum |
… |
… |
… |
… |
9 |
Grand total |
… |
… |
… |
… |
40 |
Note: An ellipsis (…) indicates not applicable.
a LR indicates low mean, HR indicates high mean, LCV indicates low coefficient of variation, and HCV indicates
high coefficient of variation.
b Millimeters per year.
The first phase, the community survey, employed a combination of both open- and closed-ended survey questions, and participatory appraisal methods. Social mapping was used to assess the proportion of land under different types of land use, the different types of common-property grazing-areas, transhumance routes, and private enclosures. This was followed by a wealth-ranking exercise, identification of border points, and an intensive interview to gain information on demographics, appraisal of livestock holdings, livestock diseases, marketing, and rules and regulations regarding pasture and water management. Physical measurements of land area under different land uses were not possible because of environmental and geomorphological constraints. The total land area of a community was appraised using a Global Positioning System instrument to obtain as many coordinates of community border points as possible. Using these coordinates, two geographic-information-system packages were employed as follows: the data were first entered into ArcInfo, where boundaries for each community were digitized and areas for each community calculated; ArcView was then used to prepare community maps. Market surveys were also conducted to generate cross-sectional data on prices, body condition, and other physical attributes that determine prices of livestock across the seven major markets in the plateau. These surveys are further supplemented with information generated by a rapid appraisal of the range condition of the 40 communities by a range expert.
The second phase was an in-depth survey of two pairs of ardas—a subsample of the first 40, whose selection was based on information generated by the first rounds of surveys. In each set, common range is largely maintained in one while the conversion into private land is greater in the other, despite both being exposed to similar policies, interventions, and climatic conditions. The object here is the assessment of the long-term impacts of policies and external interventions on property rights, institutional change, and the way in which different pathways are followed. This survey consisted of semistructured interviews guided by a chronological chart of events (for example, droughts and policy changes) and reference dates compiled by the researchers together with the arda elders. The in-depth survey relied very much on recall information as narrated by community elders.
COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS. Table 15.2 summarizes the characteristics of the 40 ardas covered in the study. The communities consist of a total of 200 settlements (pastoral encampments), with an average of 5 settlements per community. This constitutes a total of 3,141 households, with an average of 79 households per community and 7 people per household. The total human population of all the ardas is 21,637 people, with a mean of 541 people per community and a population density of 46 people per square kilometer. This mean density ranges between 4 and 218 people per square kilometer, excluding one community in the sedentarized areas of Moyale that has a unusually high population density of about 408 persons per square kilometer. About 26 percent of the households are headed by females. The overwhelming majority of the households are classified as poor (60 percent), 24 percent as middle class, and the remaining 17 percent as wealthy. This is based on the wealth classification criteria used by the respective communities.
TABLE 15.2 Community characteristics
Variable |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Standard deviation |
Sum per arda |
Percent |
Settlements per ardaa |
1.00 |
21.00 |
4.97 |
4.25 |
199 |
100.00 |
Arda population: persons |
48.00 |
3,160.00 |
540.93 |
610.00 |
21,637 |
100.00 |
Population density—persons per square kilometer |
4.35 |
218.00b |
46.14 |
46.72 |
… |
… |
Number of people per household |
4.00 |
8.00 |
6.50 |
0.90 |
… |
… |
Total households in arda |
8.00 |
395.00 |
78.50 |
82.55 |
3,141 |
100.00 |
Number of female headed households |
1.00 |
85.00 |
20.68 |
19.58 |
827 |
26.32 |
Number of male headed households |
5.00 |
331.00 |
58.35 |
64.29 |
2,314 |
73.68 |
Total |
… |
… |
78.55 |
82.59 |
3,141 |
100.00 |
Number of wealthy households |
4.00 |
58.00 |
9.62 |
14.82 |
385 |
16.73 |
Number of middle class households |
6.80 |
59.60 |
16.50 |
12.75 |
660 |
23.55 |
Number of poor households |
13.00 |
90.00 |
52.45 |
21.96 |
2,096 |
59.75 |
Total |
… |
… |
78.55 |
82.59 |
3,141 |
100.00 |
Note: An ellipsis (…) indicates not applicable.
a Pastoral community consisting of two or more settlements—the unit of study.
b Excluding one community in the highly sedentarized areas of Moyale that has a population density of 407.51 persons per square kilometer.
LIVESTOCK HOLDINGS. Cattle is by far the most important livestock species kept by the Borana pastoralists. All 40 of the communities raise cattle as the dominant component of their stock. This consists of about 64,470 heads of cattle (45,130 tropical livestock units, or TLUs) that account for about 90 percent of the total livestock population of the sample communities in terms of TLUs (Tables 15.3 and 15.4). The conversion of livestock heads into TLUs follows the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ conversion factors as applied by Jahnke (1982). The minimum number of cattle per community is 66 (46 TLUs), the maximum is 13,350 (9,345 TLUs), and the mean is 1,600 (1,128 TLUs).
TABLE 15.3 Livestock holdings per community (head of livestock)
Species |
Numbera |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Meanb |
Standard deviation |
Sum |
Cattle |
40 |
66 |
13,350 |
1,612.00 |
2,972 |
64,469 |
Goats |
39 |
0(10) |
6,320 |
391.00 |
1,047 |
15,747 |
Sheep |
36 |
0(2) |
1,640 |
125.00 |
347 |
5,005 |
Horses |
5 |
0(2) |
10 |
0.57 |
2 |
23 |
Donkeys |
35 |
0(1) |
153 |
23.50 |
35 |
942 |
Camels |
36 |
0(2) |
606 |
52.60 |
99 |
2,105 |
Note: Numbers in parentheses are the minimum holdings per community besides the zeros.
a Number of communities with the species.
b Mean for the 40 communities.
TABLE 15.4 Livestock holdings per community in tropical livestock units
Species |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Meana |
Standard deviation |
Sum |
Percent |
Cattle |
46 |
9,345 |
1,128.20 |
2,080.80 |
45,128.3 |
90.34 |
Goats |
0(1) |
632 |
38.48 |
1,04.40 |
1,539.2 |
3.08 |
Sheep |
0(1) |
164 |
12.73 |
34.90 |
509.3 |
1.01 |
Horses |
0(2) |
8 |
0.46 |
1.56 |
18.4 |
0.04 |
Donkeys |
0(1) |
107 |
16.48 |
24.44 |
659.4 |
1.32 |
Camels |
0(2) |
606 |
52.62 |
98.83 |
2,105.0 |
4.21 |
Sum of TLUs |
58 |
9,780 |
1,248.69 |
2,229.80 |
4,9948.0 |
100.00 |
Note: Numbers in parentheses are the minimum holdings per community besides the zeros.
a Mean for the 40 communities.
The second-most important species, in terms of adoption, are goats, which are raised by 97 percent of the communities under investigation. This totals about 15,750 head of goats (1,540 TLUs). In terms of the total number of TLUs, camels are more important than goats and constitute about 2,105 of the total TLUs of the 40 communities under investigation. Sheep, donkeys, and, to a lesser extent, horses are also raised to some extent by the Borana pastoralists. These three together constitute only 2.4 percent of the total livestock (in terms of TLUs) of the Borana pastoralists. Sheep and donkeys are present in 90 percent of the communities under investigation, while horses are present in only 13 percent of these communities. The total number of livestock in all the 40 communities is about 50,000 TLUs, with a mean density of 107 TLUs per square kilometer.
CURRENT LAND ALLOCATION AND PROPRTY RIGHTS. Table 15.5 shows the current pattern of land allocation on the Borana Plateau. The total land area of the communities under investigation is about 46,741 hectares. Approximately 16.3 percent of this land is allocated to cropping activities (in agricultural year 1997/98), while the remaining 84 percent is used for different livestock-production activities—communal and private grazing. These include the following:
TABLE 15.5 Land use (hectares)
Use type |
Numbera |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Meanb |
Standard deviation |
Sum |
Percent |
Communal grazing: warrac |
33 |
0(84) |
1,845 |
570 |
438 |
22,767 |
48.70 |
Calf enclosuresd |
33 |
0(21) |
530 |
150 |
137 |
6,008 |
12.85 |
Communal grazing: |
1 |
0(570) |
570 |
14 |
90 |
570 |
1.22 |
Cultivation area |
33 |
0(32) |
1,050 |
191 |
230 |
7,629 |
16.32 |
Area for draught animals |
19 |
0(8) |
338 |
46 |
74 |
1,850 |
3.95 |
Othersf |
29 |
0(53) |
1,972 |
198 |
341 |
7,915 |
16.93 |
Total |
… |
249 |
3,074 |
1,168 |
639 |
46,741 |
100.00 |
Note: An ellipsis (…) indicates not applicable. Numbers in parentheses are the minimum number of hectares per community besides the zeros.
a Number of communities with the land use type.
b Mean for the 40 communities.
c Communal-grazing areas for milking cows and calves. Sick and weak animals may also graze here.
d Enclosures for calves during forage scarcity—most enclosures are communal, but some are private.
e Communal-grazing areas for dry herds (unrestricted) for all Borans; usually unsettled.
f An aggregate of settlement areas; grazing areas for small ruminants, camels, and equines; and transit areas for transhumant herders around deep wells and ponds.
Warra areas are present in 83 percent of the communities and constitute about 49 percent of the total land area (about 23,000 hectares). Calf enclosures are also present in about 83 percent of the communities but account only for about 13 percent of the total land area. In each of the communities, the encampments are surrounded by an area reserved for grazing by small ruminants for all members of the encampments. Grazing areas for draught animals within the enclosures surround enclosed areas for cultivation. In total area, cultivation areas account for 16 percent and the adjacent areas for draught animals account for 4 percent of the total land area.
Currently, 32 out of the 40 communities under investigation (80 percent) are cultivating. About 30 percent of the communities took up cultivation in the last 10 years; and 50 percent, in the last 20 years (Table 15.6). Thirty years ago only four communities (10 percent) were cultivating. The mean area cultivated by a single household is appraised to be 2.4 hectares. This fluctuates between a maximum of 12 hectares and a minimum of 0.4 hectares. These figures are not based on physical measurements but appraisals of proportions that were later converted into actual areas.
TABLE 15.6 Adoption of cultivation
Practice duration |
Number of communities |
Percentage |
Cultivated area |
No cultivation at all |
8 |
20.0 |
… |
1 to 10 years of cultivation |
12 |
30.0 |
… |
11 to 20 years of cultivation |
20 |
50.0 |
… |
Number of communities cultivating |
32 |
80.0 |
… |
Average per community |
… |
… |
191.0 |
Largest per household |
… |
… |
12.0 |
Least per household |
… |
… |
0(0.4) |
Average per household |
… |
… |
2.4 |
Note: An ellipsis (…) indicates not applicable. Numbers in parentheses are the least number of hectares besides the zeros.
a Average for all households or communities, whether cultivating or not. These appraisals are not based on physical measurement.
Table 15.7 shows the proportion of land area held under different regimes. Property rights are determined here not by the property institutions themselves, but rather by their realization at particular points in time as measured by the amount of land area or other resources held under different categories of property regimes. Private-property rights are thus given by the land area held under private usufruct and apply to private enclosures for calves, cultivated areas, and areas for draught animals, constituting a total of about 24 percent (11,200 hectares) of the total land area. As to the land held under private usufruct per community, the minimum is 32 hectares, the maximum is 1,050 hectares, and the mean is 280 hectares. Common property constitutes 76 percent of the total land area, and about 49 percent of this is the warra area. Common calf-enclosures account for about 9 percent and are present in 65 percent of the communities. Forra grazing areas, settlement and small-ruminant grazing areas, and transit areas around permanent water sources all constitute common property. Details of their proportional contribution to the land area under common property are shown in Table 15.7.
TABLE 15.7 Property rights (area under different regimes, hectares)
Property rights |
Numbera |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Meanb |
Standard deviation |
Sum |
Percent |
Communal grazing: warrac |
33 |
0(84) |
1,845 |
570 |
438 |
22,767 |
48.70 |
Communal calf enclosured |
26 |
0(21) |
505 |
107 |
121 |
4,288 |
9.17 |
Communal grazing: forrae |
1 |
0(570) |
570 |
14 |
90 |
570 |
1.22 |
Othersf |
29 |
0(53) |
1,972 |
198 |
341 |
7,915 |
16.93 |
Sum: common property |
… |
174 |
2,459 |
889 |
569 |
35,541 |
76.02 |
Private calf enclosure |
7 |
0(47) |
530 |
43 |
116 |
1,719 |
3.67 |
Cultivation area |
32 |
0(32) |
1,050 |
191 |
230 |
7,629 |
16.32 |
Area for draught animals |
19 |
0(8) |
338 |
46 |
74 |
1,850 |
3.95 |
Sum: private property |
… |
32 |
1,050 |
280 |
281 |
11,200 |
23.94 |
Note: An ellipsis (…) indicates not applicable. Numbers in parentheses are the minimum number of hectares per community besides the zeros.
a Number of communities with the type of land use.
b Mean for the 40 communities.
c Communal-grazing areas for milking cows and calves. Sick and weak animals may also graze here.
d Enclosures for calves during forage scarcity—most enclosures are communal, but some are private.
e Communal-grazing areas for dry herds (unrestricted) for all Borans; usually unsettled.
f An aggregate of settlement areas; grazing areas for small ruminants, camels, and equines; and transit areas for transhumant herders around deep wells and ponds.
The econometric analysis is intended to quantitatively assess the relative importance of the various factors affecting stocking rates, land use, and property rights in the Borana Plateau. Population growth, increasing market opportunities, and climatic conditions, among other factors, have been asserted by previous studies to be the main determinants of stocking-rate and land-use change in the Borana Plateau. However, specific attention has hitherto not been paid to the assessment of the relative importance of these factors to the observed changes in Borana (for example, Coppock 1994; Hogg 1997; Kerven and Cox 1996). This assessment could be of relevance to policymakers in setting policy priorities for related questions. To address these issues, two models are currently being developed: the stocking-rate model and the land-use model.
THE STOCKING RATE MODEL. This model is a single-equation model expressing stocking rates as a dependent variable expressed as a function of many explanatory variables. The model is intended to give an idea of the current stocking rates, the extent of community-level cooperation in managing stock levels, and the significant variables that explain the observed outcomes. Stocking rates are important for making decisions about which land should be put into private or common use. The reduced-form equation is as follows:
Ai = f(σ 2Ai, Pi, c, het, SC, mem, α, ß),
where the following is true:
Ai = the actual stocking rates in the ith community—the number of livestock in TLU per hectare.
σ2 = the output variance. Rainfall variability will be an indicator, and forage productivity is associated with rainfall variance, which in turn affects livestock productivity.
Pi = the output price—prices for crop and livestock products at the market centers where the transactions take place.
C = costs. Input used on crops are still relatively low, and those used on livestock are obtained almost free from SORDU. Distance to the service center will be used in this preliminary analysis as proxy for costs.
Mem = number of users that have access to the resource. In this preliminary analysis, this equivalent the number of households in the community.
Het = heterogeneity in terms of cultivation or wealth as defined by the communities.
SC = social capital—a dummy variable indicating, for example, the presence or absence of absence of rules and regulations regarding resource use and mechanisms of enforcement. For this preliminary analysis, the sum of resource use rules in the community will be the proxy.
α, ß: = productivity parameters of the rangelands—biomass and dry matter production; aggregate of the crude protein content of the different species comprising the forage. These constitute a score attributed to each community on a scale of 1 to 5. Mathematically, the range-quality index (R) is given as
R =
(i Hi).
i = the pasture score.
Hi = the proportion of area ascribed to score i.
n = upper limit of score (n = 5).
THE LAND USE MODEL. This model is developed in terms of land allocation to different activities. This model is intended to give an idea of the current utilization pattern of the rangeland resources among different activities—how these compare with optimal use and the significant variables that explain the observed trends. The relative importance of population, market access, relative prices, and other factors in determining land area allocated to different activities and under different regimes will be assessed. The land-use equation is as follows:
LU = f (d, ф, R, ma, a, pc, pl, t, Ai),
where
LU = land area allocated to crop- and livestock-production activities, in hectares, which will be the dependent variable in each of the equations;
d = population density, expressed in people per square kilometer;
ф = production risk for crop and livestock again, with the level and variability of rainfall used here as a proxy;
R = range quality index, determined as above;
a = agroecological conditions;
ma = market access in terms of physical distances (kilometers) from the markets where livestock (and products), input, and grains are bought and sold;
t = technology—a dummy variable expressing the presence or absence of cost- or labor-efficient technology that favors one activity; and
pc, pl = prices of crops and livestock, respectively.
The models are yet to be fully developed. The results of these models are therefore not included in this chapter.
The preliminary analysis presented in this chapter provides an overall picture of land-use and property rights in the Borana Plateau. The results indicate a large increase in the area cultivated since 1986. Slightly more than 16 percent of the area in the 40 ardas was reported to be within cultivated fields in 1997. This includes pasture land adjacent to cultivated fields within the thorn fences used to protect and demarcate the fields. This study was not able to distinguish between land actually cropped and pasture land within crop enclosures. The figures could be slightly understated for the whole of Borana, since very heavily cultivated areas around major settlements were excluded from the sampling because of the absence of pastoralism. Coppock (1994) estimates that 70 percent of cultivation in Borana takes place around towns and villages. The community survey also indicates a phenomenon that is apparently new in the Borana Plateau: private enclosures of pasture for grazing calves (3.6 percent of total area) and draught animals (4 percent of total area). This trend of private enclosure is observed in seven communities around Wachile and Arero.
Among the 40 communities, several distinct patterns of land use and property rights existed. It is useful to distinguish five types of communities:
Expansion of cultivation and enclosure of land around cultivated fields are two of the most noticeable and important changes in land use in the Borana Plateau. Up to 16.3 percent of the land area in the 40 communities is now cultivated, compared with 1.4 percent in 1986 (Coppock 1994). Approximately 80 percent of the communities in the sample now include some households that cultivate: 30 percent of the 40 communities took up cultivation within the last 10 years, and 53 percent took up cultivation in the last 20 years. Thirty years ago only 4 communities (10 percent) were cultivating. The average plot size of the cultivated fields has also increased from 0.15 hectares (Coppock 1994) to 2.4 hectares per household in agricultural year 1997/98.
Individualization—at the levels of the arda, olla, and individual—is also increasing rapidly in the Borana Plateau. All of the cultivated land is reserved for individual use. Warra grazing is the most significant of all the communal-grazing systems in Borana. It is present in 83 percent of the communities under investigation. The expansion of cultivation areas and the privatization of rangelands encroach a great deal on the warra areas. Despite this encroachment, warra areas still account for about 50 percent of the total land area of the sample communities, suggesting that it is the most important form of common-property regime that still prevails in Borana. The communal calf-enclosures are more regulated, with more restricted conditions of access and rules that are more strictly implemented than those of the warra. Calf enclosures have increased a great deal in the recent past with the advent of cultivation and sedentarization. Enclosure by private individuals is also evident in about 17.5 percent of the communities but composes only 4 percent of the available land area. Community-level enclosures are relatively more important and compose about 10 percent of the available land area, with about 65 percent of communities involved in the practice.
Communal-grazing areas for dry herds (forra) is present only in about 2.5 percent of the communities and compose only about 1 percent of the study area. This observation does not imply an insignificantly small forra area all across the plateau, but rather, it points to the fact that forra areas are generally unsettled areas that are open to all Borans during periods of forage scarcity. Since forra areas fall outside the borders of the communities under investigation, their proportional representation in terms of community land area is therefore almost nil. The rest are areas around settlements that are communally grazed by small ruminants, camels, and equines. The pathway analysis that will use data from the follow-up in-depth surveys is currently in progress and could not be presented in this report.
The observed privatization of rangelands can be attributed to a number of exogenous and endogenous factors. Among important factors, population growth appears to have played a key role. Evidence compiled by Coppock (1994) suggests that the human population has been growing at a rate of between 2.5 percent and 5 percent per year. While the average population density in the west-central part of the Borana Plateau was 7.3 persons per square kilometer in the mid-1980s, average population density in the 40 communities in 1997/98 was 46 persons per square kilometer, with a range of 4 to 218 persons per square kilometer. This is a relatively high population density relative to other pastoral areas in East Africa. However, while it is a ubiquitous force, overall natural population growth cannot explain the rapid changes that have occurred in the last 20 to 30 years, and particularly in the last 10 years. Also important has been the recent influx of nonpastoralists into the area, particularly around the towns.
The main cultivation areas continue to be within 10 kilometers of the main towns. The cultivators around such settlements are mainly highlanders coming from the neighboring Guji, Gabbra, and Konso groups, or Boran who lost all of their cattle.
Preliminary estimations of the stocking-rate equation also show a positive relationship between population density and stocking rates. This is possibly explained by the fact that the larger the number of members with access to the resource, the more difficult it becomes to cooperate and to make and enforce rules on stocking rates and access to resources.
Climatic conditions are also important. First, some parts of the Borana Plateau are actually well suited for crop cultivation. Coppock (1994) estimates that 12 percent of the land, particularly valley bottoms and water swills, may be cultivated sustainably. As of the mid-1980s, most of that land was still used as pasture land. However, the drought of the mid-1980s resulted in a reduction of about 70 percent of the cattle kept by Boran pastoralists. Crop cultivation may have become a fall-back for many households. Again, however, this does not explain the virtual absence of cultivation 30 years ago.
The timing of the rapid change in property rights and land use is likely more related to the interplay of the external and local political systems. Until 1975, the rule-makers and rule- enforcers in the Borana Plateau were the traditional elders who were generally reluctant to grant individual rights to either cultivated land or to enclosed pasture land. The advent of peasant associations in 1975 created an alternative form of government, a form of government that favored the sedentarization of pastoralists. Peasant associations were rule-makers and rule enforcers that were strong enough compared with the Boran elders to facilitate the registration of individual use-rights to crop land. Many ardas saw crop cultivation for the first time after 1975. The Derg regime also supported the development of agriculture in the Borana Plateau through its external support to crop cultivation.
Another change in the external environment occurred after the change in government in 1991. Since that time, regional governments have become much stronger and some changes have been made to the structure of peasant associations. In some cases, the forced merger of two areas into one new peasant association has resulted in something of a land rush, with the members of resource-rich communities’ claiming private usufruct to cropland and rangeland, rather than letting it be exploited by a much large supra-arda population.
Thus the policies of the Ethiopian government since 1975 have been biased toward cultivation and, through the government’s system of individual land-use rights for cultivated land, toward individualization. The reach of those policies has been extended by the development of transportation infrastructure in the area by the SORDU. Cultivation and individualization thus go hand-in-hand in Borana. It can therefore be hypothesized here that the main motivations for both cultivation and individualization are related to appropriation of pasture land, and desired investments in pasture land. The demand for appropriation may have also increased because of changes in market conditions that have linked the Borana Plateau directly to the urban market in Nairobi, Kenya. At the same time, changes in the national government have made private appropriation more feasible. Demand for investment in pasture land has also increased as an indirect result of policies of the Derg government. Prohibitions on fire resulted in bush encroachment in the common pastures; individuals have more incentive to invest labor in bush removal on private cropland.
Private appropriation of pasture land without the pretext of cultivation is occurring in some communities. Detailed case studies indicate it is allowed to happen because of an implicit partnership between the wealthy households that want to appropriate land and the poorer households that seek to align themselves with those wealthy households. Poorer ones who cannot afford to erect their own fences assist wealthier neighbors so that they can be granted grazing rights in the dry season. First, they “forum shop” between two options of social groupings: either to align with the group of poorer pastoralists who cannot afford the investment in establishing the private claims and hence are opposed to the activity, or join the elite group of investors by occasionally assisting in fencing and other related activities in return for some form of grazing rights in the dry seasons. The current trend seems to favor the latter option, since social grouping by opposers is still not well organized enough to create a reasonable impact.
There is also evidence of the elites securing their interests through affiliation with the heads of the peasant associations. This trend is commonly observed especially in communities around Wachile and Arero. In communities where this trend was not observed, the claim was that the community is not interested because no attempt has been made so far to be followed by others—no beginner to spearhead the others’ conforming to the innovator line of argument.
The activities of nongovernmental organizations and other development agencies in Borana also should not be neglected here. The construction of large ponds by SORDU and to a lesser extent CARE–Ethiopia contributes positively to sedentarization and its associated cultivation. Results of these interventions have not been very consistent with expectation; the reasons for this are numerous (see Coppock 1994). The bush-clearing programs of the German Agency for Technical Cooperation and Norwegian Church Aid contribute a great deal to the management of communal warra grazing areas. One of the hypotheses behind the private appropriation of rangelands is that forage scarcity is due largely to the loss of grazing areas to bush encroachment following a policy that banned burning in the 1970s. The bush-clearing programs facilitate the reclamation of grazing areas that can once again be used by the community.
The changes in property rights and management institutions in Borana are explained by an interaction of internal and external factors. Adoption of cultivation and privatization of rangelands in Borana is partially demographic and partially market driven, as explained above. Evidences of endogenous individualization is found in traces as demonstrated by the “interest groupings” and “forum shopping” in a few communities. The current demand for the individualization of rangelands (for private grazing) is facilitated by the state through the formal institution of the peasant associations. National policies that support cultivation and sedentarization also play a paramount role in facilitating the privatization process.
The bush-clearing and “pasture reclamation” programs are desirable for supporting the local commons in Borana. As an alternative to privation, common management is consistent with traditional pastoralism in Borana, especially under equity considerations. The privatization path constrains mobility on which traditional pastoralism is based; and if the trend continues unabated, movements may become restricted in the future, perhaps to the extent of full sedentarization. The semi-arid nature of the Borana rangelands, with their recurrent droughts, will hardly be the basis for a stable production system if sedentarization results.
Anderson, T. L., and P. J. Hill. 1975. The evolution of property rights: A study of the American West. Journal of Law and Economics 18 (1): 163–179.
Assefa, M. 1990. Borana cattle herds: Productivity, constraints and possible interventions. M.S. thesis, Range Science Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
Assefa, E., J. C. Bille, and M. Corra. 1986. Ecological map of south-western Sidamo. JEPSS (Joint Ethiopian Pastoral Systems Study) Research Report 19. Addis Ababa: International Livestock Centre for Africa.
Ault, D. E., and G. L. Rutman. 1979. The development of individual rights to property in tribal Africa. Journal of Law and Economics 22: 163–182.
Binswanger, H. P., and J. McIntire. 1987. Behavioral and material determinants of production relations in land-abundant tropical agriculture. Economic Development and Cultural Change 36 (1): 73–99.
Birner, R. 1996. The role of livestock in economic development. theory and empirical evidence: The case of Sri Lanka. Ph.D. diss., Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany.
Boserup, E. 1981. Population and technological change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
_____. 1965. The conditions of agricultural growth: The economics of agrarian change under population pressure. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
Bruce, J. 1993. Do indigenous tenure systems constrain agricultural development? In Land in African agrarian systems, eds. T. J. Bassett and D. E. Crummey. Madison, Wisc., U.S.A.: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bruce, J. W., A. Hoben, and D. Rahmato. 1994. After the Derg: An assessment of rural land tenure issues in Ethiopia. Madison, Wisc., U.S.A.: Land Tenure Center, University of Wisconsin; and Institute of Development Research, Addis Ababa University .
Coppock, D. L. 1994. The Borana Plateau of southern Ethiopia: Synthesis of pastoral research, development and change, 1980–91. Addis Ababa: International Livestock Centre for Africa.
Cousins, N., and N. Upton. 1988. Options for improvement of the Borana pastoral system. Agricultural Systems (27): 251–278.
Demsetz, H. 1967. Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review 57: 347–373.
Ellis E. J. 1991. The role of wildlife production systems in animal agriculture in SSA. Fort Collins, Colo., U.S.A.: Colorado State University.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1996. Food and agricultural organization of the United Nations. 1996 production year book. Rome.
Ghose, A. K. 1985. Transforming feudal agriculture: Agrarian change in Ethiopia since 1974. Journal of Development Studies 22: 128–149.
Helland, J. 1982. Social organization and water control among the Borana. Development and Change 13: 239–258.
______. 1997. Development interventions and pastoral dynamics in southern Ethiopia. In Pastoralists, ethnicity and the state in Ethiopia, ed. R. Hogg. London: HAAN Publishing.
Hogg, R. 1980. Pastoralism and impoverishment: The case of Isiolo Boran of northern Kenya. Disasters 4: 299–310.
_____. 1997. Pastoralists, ethnicity and the state in Ethiopia. London: HAAN Publishing.
Howitt, R. E. 1995. Malleable property rights and smooth-pasting conditions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77: 1192–1198.
Jahnke, H. E. 1982. Livestock production systems and livestock development in tropical Africa. Kiel, Germany: Kieler Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk.
Kirk, M. 1996. Crop farming and livestock keeping in Sudan: Destruction of autochthonous forms of land tenure. Agriculture and Rural Development 2: 22–25.
Kituyi, M., and N. Kipuri. 1991. Changing pastoral land tenure and resource management in eastern Africa: A research agenda. Paper presented at the workshop Land Tenure and Resource Management among Pastoralists, Nairobi, Kenya, June.
Legesse, A. 1973. The gada: Three approaches to the study of African Society. New York: The Free Press.
Lele, U., and S. W. Stone. 1989. Population pressure, the environment and agricultural intensification. Managing Agricultural Development in Africa Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
McIntire, J., D. Bourzat, and P. Pingali. 1992. Crop–livestock integration in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
North, D. C. 1995. The new institutional economics and third world development. In The new institutional economics and third world development, eds. J. Hariss, J. Hunter, and C. M. Lewis. London: Routledge.
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pender, J., G. Duron, and S. Scherr. 1996. Pathways of development in the central region of Honduras. Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Platteau, J.–P. 1995. The evolutionary theory of land rights as applied to Sub-Saharan Africa: A critical assessment. Cahiers de la Faculte des Sciences Economiques et Sociales No. 145. Namur, Belgium: Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix.
Posner, R. 1977. Economic analysis of law. Boston: Little Brown.
Ruttan, V., and Y. Hayami. 1984. Toward a theory of induced institutional innovation. Journal of Development Studies 20 (4): 203–223.
Ruttemberg, H. 1980. Farming systems in the tropics, 3d ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Swallow, B. 1994. The role of mobility within the risk management strategies of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists. SARLs Gatekeeper Series, SA 47. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
Teka, T. 1983. Agrarian transformation: The Ethiopian experience. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Transformation on Agrarian Systems in Centrally Planned Economies in Africa, October, 17–23, Arusha, Tanzania.
Winrock International. 1992. Assessment of animal agriculture in SSA: Constraints to livestock development. Morrilton, Ark., U.S.A.: Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development.
Zegeye Asfaw, G.-T. 1995. Land tenure structure and development in Ethiopia: A case study of ten peasant associations in Wara Jarso Woreda. Eschborn, Germany: German Agency for Technical Cooperation.
