Benefits Derived From Rehabilitating A Degraded Semi-arid Rangeland In Communal Enclosures, Kenya

Mureithi, S. M., et al., 2016. Land Degradation and Development

Original research (primary data)
View External Publication Link

Abstract

Combating land degradation in the semi-arid rangeland of sub-Saharan Africa is essential to ensure the long-term productivity of these environments. In the Lake Baringo basin in Kenya, communities and individual farmers restored indigenous vegetation inside enclosures in an effort to combat severe land degradation and address their livelihood problems. This study quantified the benefits of rangeland rehabilitation using yearly communal enclosures’ utilisation data compiled by Rehabilitation of Arid Environments (RAE) Trust over a 6-year period (2005–2010). Results showed that communal enclosures provide a source of income through the sale of fattened livestock, harvested grass seeds, hay, honey and charcoal, among other products. Regression analysis showed an increasing total enclosure income with time. The enclosures also provide grasses for thatching, livestock feed and dry season grazing. Indirect products like milk, blood and meat are essential for household nutrition and food security. These benefits reinforce the management through incentive to maintain existing enclosures and establish new ones and therefore the increasing trend in rangeland enclosure. Increased soil and biomass carbon storage could come with other indirect environmental benefits including improvement in soil quality, land productivity for pasture production and food security, and prevention of land degradation, thus leading to economic, environmental and social benefit for the local agropastoralist communities.

Case studies

Basic information

  • Case ID: INT-078-1
  • Intervention type: Combination
  • Intervention description:

    rangeland rehabilitation through enclosures for revegetation Revegetation through ripping and grass reseeding has the potential to restore degraded rangelands and improve their potential for livestock production and wildlife conservation. Revegetation also has potential to provide direct economic benefit as a source of income through the pasture-related income-generated activities (IGAs), and a balanced diet from milk especially for children (Makokha et al. 1999; Mekuria et al., 2011b). The first category is the reseeded, communally owned, and communally managed enclosure. This belongs to the community and is managed by a community group with back-stopping from RAE’s extension. Nine communal enclosures were systematically selected across the Njemps Flats for this study (Table I). The selected communal enclosure’s ages ranged from 19 to 28 years in the year 2010.

  • Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: No
  • Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures
    Loss of food production  Positive income generated by enclosures through various goods including livestock production benefits, seed grass harvesting, dry season grazing, grass cutting for thatch, wood cutting, bee keeping. ‘ combined with what the authors refer to as a qualitative assessment of intervention impact on livelihoods (relating to the climatic impact land degradation leading to loss of ecosystem goods
    Loss of other ecosystem goods  Positive income generated by enclosures through various goods including livestock production benefits, seed grass harvesting, dry season grazing, grass cutting for thatch, wood cutting, bee keeping. ‘ combined with what the authors refer to as a qualitative assessment of intervention impact on livelihoods (relating to the climatic impact land degradation leading to loss of ecosystem goods)
  • Approach implemented in the field: Yes
  • Specific location:

    The Njemps Flats (1°45′ and 0°15′N latitude; 35°45′ and 36°30′E longitude) covers approximately 305 km2 and is one of 11 range units in Baringo County in Kenya (Figure 1).

  • Country: Kenya
  • Habitat/Biome type: Tropical and subtropical grasslands |
  • Issue specific term: Not applicable

Evidence

  • Notes on intervention effectivness: continued extension services and participatory education on management of the enclosures for owners and community groups are vital for the sustainability of the achievements attained so far.
  • Is the assessment original?: Yes
  • Broadtype of intervention considered: Not applicable
  • Compare effectivness?: No
  • Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
  • Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
  • Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: Yes
  • Impacts for the ecosystem: Positive
  • Ecosystem measures: Ecological field monitoring exercises carried out in the restored sites show high biodiversity of flora and fauna compared with the open grazing areas.
  • Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: Yes
  • Impacts for people: Positive
  • People measures: RAE’s long-term benefit data on both private and communal enclosures 1. Intervention contribution to livelihoods and financial security (Through creation of various products) Reduced transaction costs (time spent and distance covered for searching for water) Improved livelihoods: indicate that rangeland rehabilitation has improved pastoral livelihoods in the Lake Baringo basin in various ways. 2. social cohesion - Volunteers gains: Individuals or community groups came together to work in the communal enclosures in the spirit of harambee (meaning ‘all pull together’ in Swahili). The benefits were quantified in terms of harambee days, and the volunteers involved were compensated with free grazin days or at times direct cash compensation per harambee day per individual. 3. Capacity building for women and reproductive health care
  • Considers economic costs: Yes
  • Economic appraisal conducted: No
  • Economic appraisal described:
  • Economic costs of alternative considered: No
  • Compared to an alternative: Not reported

Evaluation methodology

  • Type of data: Mixed qualitative/quantitative
  • Is it experimental: No
  • Experimental evalution done: Not applicable
  • Non-experimental evalution done: Empirical case study
  • Study is systematic: