Forest Conflicts Amid National Controversy in Kenya
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Environment and Natural Resources J. Vol 8, No.1, April 2010: 9-22 9 Forest Conflict Amidst National Controversy in Kenya: Lessons of the Mau Forest Complex Elijah M Siringi School of Finance and Banking, Kigali, Rwanda Abstract Conflict of Mau forest Management continue amidst confusion and dismay in Kenya. Politics being at the centre stage; Mau forest complex has lost about 107,000 hectares, or 25 percent of its forest covers through: irregular and unplanned settlements, illegal logging and charcoal burning, change of land use from forest to unsustainable agriculture and change in ownership from public to private. This scenario threatens potentials of energy generation; tourism, agriculture and water supplies into Kenyan cities and industry and therefore deteriorate East Africa's biggest economy. The conflict resolution model in this paper describes participatory role of local institutions in conflict management as key, and argue therefore that enhancing communication and developing a framework of negotiation and dialogue among interested parties engaged in conflict will promote meaningful resolution of the Mau conflict. We suggest that Kenya as government need to engage on modern and skilful conflict resolution process that is not guided by politics but rather engage on forward looking process to resolve Mau conflict once and for all. This can be achieved through a conflict resolution management process which mobilizes local capacity through the use of local approaches such as customary laws, local leadership and negotiation skills. Key words: forest conflict / natural resources / Mau Forest Complex / conflict resolution process/ Kenya 1. Introduction the last remaining forest dwellers, are scattered all over the seven forest blocks. This paper focuses on forest Over the years, almost a quarter of conflicts and sustainable management the Mau forest has been lost to human challenges in Kenya with special settlements, illegal logging, farming and a reference to Mau Forest Complex. The host of other human activities. There are 400,000 hectares Mau Forest Complex more than 25,000 settlers, mainly farmers, sits on aquifers that provide water to who have totally degraded and destroyed millions of people in the Rift Valley and the environment to pave way for their western Kenya. The Mau comprises 16 settlement and farming. These combined contiguous forest blocks, gazetted as activities have caused several rivers to dry forest reserves or trust-land forest. The up permanently. Many research studies forest is divided into seven blocks have unveiled Mau‟s immense value. At comprising South-West Mau (Tinet), East minimum, twelve rivers spring out from Mau, Ol‟donyo Purro, Transmara, Maasai the Mau forest and flow to different Mau, Western Mau and Southern Mau. corners of the country. The rivers breathe These seven blocks merge to form the life and vitality into the world famous larger Mau Forest complex. Of all the Maasai Mara National Reserve, and forest blocs, only the Maasai Mau is not Serengeti and Lake Nakuru National gazetted. The Ogiek community, who are Parks (GOK, 2007) 10 Elijah M.S. / Research Article: 9-22 Currently there is an on-going 2. Conceptual Framework of Mau conflict between the government of Forest Complex Conflict Kenya and the farmers/new settlers and Ogiek community who are believed to In this section, we define our key have lived in harmony with forest concepts and assumptions and discuss biodiversity since immemorial in the some of the issues that have recurred in Kenyan Forests. The farmers/new settlers our work. Conflict is an emotive term that living in Mau Forest were allocated land provokes various images or associations by the previous KANU regime and given amongst people. As with all concepts in land title deeds by the government of social sciences a bewildering variety of Kenya while other group of settlers are definitions co-exist (Wall and Callister, believed to have encroached into the 1995). Daniels and Walker (2001) suggest forest illegally. that all social conflicts are based on The Government of Kenya has differences in things such as interest, taken stringent measures to evict the perception, power and goals. communities living in the Mau Forest Furthermore, Glasl (1999) argues that Complex forcefully and they have conflict only occurs if an actor feels become internally displaced people in „impairment‟ from the behaviour of their own Land. More than 2,000 families another actor. The experience of an are camping along the forest cut-line in actor‟s behaviour as impairment becomes Kipkongor, Terta, Chematich and a prerequisite for conflict, thereby Kapkembu in south western Mau. The providing a clear criterion to distinguish eviction of communities living Mau conflict from non-conflict situations. In Forest complex was enforced by the the context of common pool resource contingent of officers from the Kenya (CPR) management, impairment can be Wildlife Service after expiry of a experienced, for example, in terms of government notice to vacate from the restriction over access to certain forest or forest. Politics has taken the center stage fish products, exclusion from resource of this conflict despite the government of management, pollution due to resource Kenya through the cabinet endorsing extraction, etc. (Ostrom, 1990, Yasmi, recommendations of the task force on 2002, 2003, Peluso, 1994, Adams et al., Mau forest that were adopted by the 2003). There are a lot of factors that Kenyan parliament to evict communities trigger „impairing‟ behaviour such as living in the forest. unclear resource boundaries, scarcity, The purpose of this paper is to population growth and legal pluralism. critically appraise the current Mau Forest For example, conflicts over access to conflict as a challenge to sustainable agricultural land and other productive management of natural resources in uses at forest frontiers are mainly Kenya. The specific objectives of this attributed to the absence of clear paper are to: provide a situational boundaries (Hotte, 2001, Dennis et al., overview of natural forest resources in 2001). If boundaries are in place they are Kenya; assess the potentials of Mau often contested or interpreted differently. Forest Complex and; determine a conflict Access to resources is aggravated by management model for resolving the Mau scarcity and demographic pressures forest conflict. (Homer-Dixon, 1999). In addition, CPR management is often defined by different sets of rules (formal and informal). With all these phenomena conflict is unavoidable. In many places, the costs Environment and Natural Resources J. Vol 8, No.1, April 2010: 9-22 11 and consequences of resource conflicts spelt out of fundamental departure from have become unacceptably high (Watch, government ownership and control of vast 1997, Ho, 2006, de Jong et al., 2006, forest estates of both indigenous forests Bogale et al., 2006). Therefore, the call and exotic plantations to more for effective conflict management has participatory management of forest increased. Conflict management includes resources by communities and the private all activities that have the intention to sector. reduce or solve the conflict (Deutsch, Under the new law, communities 1973). Its „ideal‟ goal is to attain desirable living around gazetted forest reserves can positive outcomes (i.e. win-win solutions) establish and register forest user and reduce or eliminate escalation to associations and apply to the Kenya destructive levels (Kriesberg, 1998). Forest Service for joint management Scholars argue that conflict management arrangements of the respective forests. has to mobilize local capacity through the The act also provides for incentives to use of local approaches such as customary individuals and communities to establish laws, local leadership, and negotiation arboreta and forests on privately owned skills (FAO, 2000, Engel and Korf, 2005). land. A key departure from the old law is Local response to conflict is seen as the the requirement that before the first and quickest available conflict government de-gazettes an existing forest management strategy. It is often argued reserve or section of it; it must consult that stakeholders at local level know with the affected communities and seek „best‟ their conflict situations. The “ideal” approval from the parliament. The goal in conflict management is to achieve expected output of this conflict resolution positive changes and avoid unnecessary process captured in our conceptual escalation to destructive levels. While it framework is diverse: Mau will be has been argued that the role of local rehabilitated and restored; security of the institutions in conflict management is forest will be ensured; the size of the central, little is known about how these forest will increase; forest cover will institutions could actually deal with increase; water towers in Kenya will be conflict. In our conceptualisation restored; energy generation problems will framework, we argue therefore that be a thing of the past; soil erosion will be enhancing communication and developing controlled; drought incidence in Kenya a mechanism of exchange among may be controlled; tourism activites will settlements engaged in conflict will flourish; Biodiversity will improve; promote better understanding of the pastorism will be enhanced; sequester problem and thus allows improvement in more carbon; timber will be provided to the current approaches in managing local people. Among other environmental; conflict. We base our argument