Family Fortunes Analysis of changing livelihoods in Maasailand Final report - Project ZC0275 DFID Livestock Production Programme K. Cochrane, D. Nkedianye, E. Partoip, S. Sumare, S. Kiruswa, D. Kaelo, L. Onetu, M. Nesele, M. Said, K. Homewood, P. Trench, R. S. Reid and M. Herrero DFID LPP Project ZC0275 Family Fortunes Analysis of Changing Livelihoods in Maasailand K. Cochrane1, D. Nkedianye1, E. Partoip1, S. Sumare1, S. Kiruswa1, D. Kaelo1, L. Onetu1, M. Nesele1, M. Said1, K. Homewood1,2, P. Trench1,2, R. S. Reid1 and M. Herrero1,3 1International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, Kenya 2Department of Anthropology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK 3School of GeoSciences, The University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Scotland © International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya © Livestock Production Programme, DFID, United Kingdom Disclaimer: This document is an output of Project ZC0275 funded by the Livestock Production Programme of the Department for International Development (LPP – DFID) of the British Government. The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and may not represent the views of the donor. Correct Citation: Cochrane, K., Nkedianye, D., Partoip, E., Sumare, S., Kiruswa, S., Kaelo, D., Onetu, L., Nesele, M., Said, M., Homewood, K., Trench, P., Reid, R.S., and Herrero, M. 2005. Family Fortunes: Analysis of Changing Livelihoods in Maasailand. Final Project Report ZC0275. Livestock Production Programme. Department for International Development, United Kingdom. 261 pages For more information: Dr. Mario Herrero. International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, Kenya. [email protected] 2 DFID LPP Project ZC0275 I. Structure of the report In the first section we set out the aims and objectives of the project and the implementation of activities. Section two discusses the context of this work and how it complements existing studies of change in Maasailand. Section three describes the methodology used. The main analysis, in section four, discusses what the families told us about change, what drives it, its impacts at a household level, and their vision of the future. The annexes present a table that covers activities planned and implemented, a copy of the logical framework and the individual portraits of the families interviewed. 1. Background 1.1 Aims and Objectives The Department International Development (DFID) of the British Government, funded this project to support activities and work in collaboration with the Belgian funded project ‘Better policy and management Option for Pastoral Lands: Assessing Trade off between poverty alleviation and wildlife conservation (Reto–o-Reto)’ being implemented by ILRI, UC Louvain, University of London, Colorado State University and others in 5 geographical areas of Maasailand: Kajiado, Mara, and Kitengela in Kenya and Longido and Simanjiro in Tanzania. The main objective of this work was: To identify the direction and drivers of change in Maasai livelihoods and analyse at household level those factors and institutions that the Maasai consider help or hinder their development and survival. Specifically: - To undertake a series of at least five case studies or family portraits among Maasai households around the Amboseli area (as defined in the ILRI study), selected on the basis of socio-economic status. - To develop, with each family, a generic portrait, that could be used as a tool to initiate discussion among pastoralists, analysing complex patterns of change in livelihoods, the major factors driving those changes and identify means of addressing some of those factors that help or hinder development in pastoral communities. - To adapt and define the family portraits tool within the East African pastoral context. - To produce two documents (in addition to the portraits themselves) that could be circulated among fellow researchers and development organisations, as a contribution to further research and as basic information to facilitate dialogue with policy makers: a report on the main themes coming from the exercise; and a short document on the methodology. 3 DFID LPP Project ZC0275 1.2 Implementation of activities To undertake a series of 5 family portraits in Amboseli The portraits were developed between June and December 2004 by a team of male and female facilitators, who were responsible for the write up, translation and analysis with the family. The major change to the objectives was that we completed more portraits in more areas. Instead of doing 5 in Amboseli the team completed 9 portraits (3 in Amboseli, 2 in the Mara, 3 in Longido, and 1 in Simanjiro). This was in order to complement the cross- site socio-economic data that was also being collected, and to understand what was similar and different across sites. This was possible due to the strong synergies between this project and the Belgian-funded Reto-o-Reto project. To develop a generic portrait with each family Portraits are available in anonymous format. Families have agreed that they can be shared, and also think that they could be useful tool to initiate discussions amongst pastoralists in their communities and their institutions. To adapt and define the tool within the East African context The initial workshop discussed how to adapt the tool to the East African context. A new field guide was written. In January 2005 a presentation was made to ILRI staff and project partners of the process of doing a family portrait and some of the narratives that had come out of it. ILRI staff also met with the IIED/Reconcile project that were very interested in using the narratives to enhance their training course of Pastoralism which is currently being developed. The community facilitators who worked in the field were convinced that it is an excellent tool to use with the Maasai, who have a long oral tradition and history of storey telling. Produce two documents a report on the main themes and a short document on methodology This document includes the thematic analysis (see section). We would like to wait until verification has been done at community level (Family Portraits phase 2) before we circulate the results more widely and in different formats. With data that show the families are representative their stories hold much more weight. Again a publication on the methodology would be better when the community consultations are complete. This way it can be compared with work done in Mali between 2000 and 2002. We have kept a close record of the process and have a lot of feedback from the families about the method. 4 DFID LPP Project ZC0275 1.3 The project team Katherine Cochrane consultant, specialist in family portraits David ole Nkedianye sociologist, Maasai community facilitator Everlyne Partoip family portraits facilitator, editing and translation to Maa Sylvia Sumare family portraits facilitator, editing and translation to Maa Steven Kiruswa Maasai community facilitator, Longido Dixon ole Kaello Maasai community facilitator, Mara Leonard Onetu Maasai community facilitator, Kajiado/Amboseli Moses ole Nesele Maasai community facilitator, Simanjiro Mohammed Said ecologist and land use/biodiversity specialist Katherine Homewood Anthropologist Pippa Trench Anthropologist Robin Reid ecological systems analyst Mario Herrero agro-ecological systems analyst and project coordinator 2. CONTEXT There have been a number of studies done on how Maasailand is changing and the impacts of these changes on Maasai livelihoods. Key changes include the alienation of the Maasai from their lands in colonial times; the increasing demarcation of land into agricultural, pastoral and wildlife areas; the increase in education and the monetary economy; and the diversification of livelihoods to include wage labour, wildlife tourism and agriculture (Thompson and Homewood, 2002; Galaty 1992; Graham, 1987). Studies have also compared Tanzanian and Kenyan Maasailand (Coast, 2002). The countries are similar, sharing a common climate, similar natural resource base, rapidly growing population of small subsistence farmers, common cultural groupings and historical British colonial rule. However their particular political histories have resulted in some key differences. Kenya pursued policies that emphasised economic growth over equity, private sector development and receptivity to foreign private investment. On the other hand Tanzanian socialism resulted in self-reliance, a more equitable distribution of wealth, high levels of state intervention, reliance on exports of agricultural products, and forced villagisation (Coast, E, 2002). Below we give a brief historical overview of changing land tenure and access to land, human wildlife interactions, and changing populations. These are some of the key issues that the families discuss in section 4. 2.1 Changing access to land There have been substantial changes in land tenure across Maasailand. For a review see Herrero et al. (2003). In brief, the colonial period saw the decimation of the Maasai, the collapse of their control over East African rangelands, their restriction to a much smaller area with progressively more strictly defined internal boundaries. This was followed by continuing land loss to expatriate settlers and to non-Maa speaking immigrants in the post independence period (Homewood and Thompson, 2002). In Kenya setting up Group 5 DFID LPP Project ZC0275 Ranches in the mid 1960’s paved the way for privatisation, subdivision and sale of Maasai ranches (Galaty, J 1992).