Participatory Mapping, Learning and Change in the Context of Biocultural
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Participatory Mapping, Learning and Change in the context of Biocultural Diversity and Resilience A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Rhodes University by Million Belay January 2012 Abstract This study set out to investigate the learning and change that emerged in and through participatory mapping in the context of biocultural diversity and resilience in rural Ethiopia. It did this through examining the learning and agency emerging from three participatory mapping practices (Participatory 3 Dimensional Modelling, sketch mapping and eco-cultural calendars) using two case study sites, located in the Bale Mountains and the Foata Mountains in Ethiopia, and honing in on in-depth reflective processes in two community contexts located within the broader case study sites, namely Horo Soba, Dinsho wereda in Bale; and Telecho, in Wolmera wereda, in the Foata Mountain complex. This study tried to answer three research questions related to participatory mapping: its role in mobilizing knowledge related to biocultural landscape, its role in learning and change, and its value in building resilience. The study used qualitative case study research methodology underpinned by critical realist philosophy, and used photographic ‘cues’ to structure the reporting on the cases. It used four categories of analysis: biocultural diversity, educational processes, learning and agency, in the first instance to report on the interactions associated with the participatory mapping practices as they emerged in the two case study sites. This was followed by in-depth analysis and interpretation of participatory mapping and biocultural diversity, as well as participatory mapping and learning, with an emphasis on acquisition, meaning making and identity formation processes. The in-depth analysis drew on social and learning theory, and theory of biocultural diversity and social-ecological resilience. The study also included analysis of broader change processes that were related to and emerged from the social interactions in the mapping activities, and the resultant morphogenesis (change), showing that morphogenesis, while broadly temporal, is not linear, and involves ‘little iterative morphogenic cycles’. These insights were then used to interpret how participatory mapping may contribute to resilience building in a context where social-ecological resilience is increasingly required, such as the two case study sites, where social- ecological degradation is highly visible and is occurring rapidly. i The study’s contribution to new knowledge lies in relation to the role of participatory mapping in facilitating learning, agency and change which, to date, appears to be under-theorised and under-developed in the participatory mapping and environmental education literature. As such, the study findings provide in-depth insight into how participatory mapping methodologies may ‘work in the world’, in contexts such as those presented in the two cases under study. It has tried to demonstrate how participatory mapping has managed to mobilize knowledge related to biocultural diversity, facilitated the acquisition of knowledge and helped members of the community to engage in meaning making activities relevant to their biocultural landscape and renegotiate their identity within the wider community context. It has also shown that dissonance is an important dynamic in the learning process; and that morphogenesis (or change) occurs over time, but also in smaller cycles that interact at different levels; and that participatory mapping cannot, by itself mobilise significant structural change, at least in the short term. It has also shown, however, that learning and the desire for change can emerge from participatory mapping processes, and that this can be utilized to adapt to the changing socio-ecological environments, potentially contributing to longer term resilience of social-ecological systems. ii Acknowledgments I am hugely indebted to the farmers in Bale and Telecho who have kindly, generously and patiently taught me about their biocultural landscape. I am particularly grateful to the elder Obo Aman Mame for being my source of wisdom. I also wish to thank the MELCA-Ethiopia staff: Tesfaye Tola, Abebayehu Kassaye, Aman Mame, Shimeles Tegegn, Endale Sahilu, Samrawit Shiferaw, Edlwait Tegegne, Kirubel Teshome, Tesfaye Berhanu, Befekadu Refera, Mersha Yilma, Keria Yassin, Addis Tesfa and Elsabeth Abebe. You have taken this project up as a collective project and have always supported me with many requests for additional information. Thank you for your patience and responses to my endless and, at times, repeated and boring demands. I also thank the Board: Dr. Melaku Werede, Wzo Mahlet Teshome, Ato Shewaye Deribe, Wzo Tarik Kassa and Ato Alemayehu Tegegn for endorsing the study as MELCA’s work and for their moral support. I further wish to thank the African Biodiversity Network and the Gaia Foundation for introducing me to the mapping world and for creating various opportunities in the course of the study for deepening and exploring the use of mapping for various purposes. I thank Liz Hoskein from the Gaia foundation for being the driving force in creating the opportunities for mapping and for exploring its use for learning and change. My special appreciation goes to Professor Heila Lotz Sisitka for finding the support for my study, for her patience and confidence in me, for teaching me what humbleness, generosity and kindness means, and for working on my draft when she was so occupied with family matters. Your contribution is written in my heart with golden ink! Thanks also to Lawrence Sisitka for making me feel at home. Thanks are also due to Professor Rob O’Donoghue for always being available for intellectual discussions, for teaching me how to be a hands-on environmentalist and for making me feel at home. My thanks go to his wife Carmen too for taking care of me while I was away from the family. My special thanks goes to Kim Ward for diligently editing my thesis and for her kind words while doing so. iii I thank the Frankfurt Zoological Society, Farm-Africa and SOS Sahel, and the CTA Netherlands for creating the opportunity for the mapping project. My special thanks go to Giacomo Rambaldi for his intellectual, moral and material support. I also thank Degelo Sendebo for his insightful interview and for supplying me with materials on the history of mapping in Ethiopia. Thanks also to Soul Shava, Hailey, Mirella, Mindy, Charles, Injaru, Sirkka and Daniel for agreeing to look at my drafts and suggest corrections. Thanks to Gladys Tyatya, Ingrid Schudel and Lausanne Olvitt for support and advice. Thanks also Sashay for doing the diagrams and for giving me an administration support. I am indebted to you all. Finally, I thank my wife, Sr. Seblewongel Gebeyhu, for her psychological support and for taking care of my children and my mother while I was away for this study. I also thank my children Enku, Sosina and Girum for their support and patience in my long days of absence. iv Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY ..................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 MOTIVATION FOR THE STUDY: A BIOGRAPHICAL PERSPECTIVE ......................................................................... 2 Early interest in cultural biodiversity education and activism ......................................................... 2 1.3 INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT ........................................................................................................................ 10 1.3.1 The African Biodiversity Network (ABN) ............................................................................... 10 1.3.2 Movement for Ecological Learning and Community Action (MELCA) - Ethiopia .................. 12 1.4 CONTEXTUAL ISSUES .............................................................................................................................. 14 1.4.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 14 1.4.2 Brief history of natural resource management .................................................................... 15 1.4.3 Issues related to biodiversity ................................................................................................ 17 1.4.4 Land degradation ................................................................................................................. 18 1.5 THE STUDY SITES ................................................................................................................................... 22 1.5.1 The Dinsho wereda ............................................................................................................... 23 1.5.2 The Welmera wereda ........................................................................................................... 27 1.6 RESEARCH FOCUS .................................................................................................................................. 30 1.7 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................... 32 1.8 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ........................................................................................................................... 32 1.9 OVERVIEW