| European
Tropical Forest Research Network |
Table
of contents
News 43/44 homepage
REDUCING CONFLICTS THROUGH
COLLABORATIVE FOREST
MANAGEMENT IN THE BORANA
LOWLANDS, SOUTH ETHIOPIA
By Ben Irwin, Gavin Jordan and Zelalem Temesgn
Setting the Scene
The Borana lowlands are located in the
Southern part of Ethiopia and in Northern
Kenya. They are largely managed as a
common property resource by pastoral
groups: the Boran, Guji, Burji, Arsii and
Gabra Oromo clans, and by the Garri and
Merihan Somali clans. These pastoral
groups have diverse ethnic backgrounds
but are predominantly Oromo. Lack of clear
land tenure rights and arrangements cause
conflicts about perceived ownership and
rights of use over the Borana forests1. Land
use conflicts and competition stem from
conflicts of interest between different land
users (Niamir-Fuller, 2000).
Conflicts in Borana: Competing livelihoods,
land tenure, land use and land
management
The lowlands are predominantly semi-arid
grazing areas, with isolated montane forest
fragments on elevated areas. These fragile
forests are subject to an increased use that
leads to conflicting claims over the use of
the resource. This often results in violent,
armed conflict. Borana’s forests play an
important role in a number of livelihood
options. Conflict and competition over forest
resources exists on different levels, locally
between Oromo and Somali clans and and
ethnic lines and, non-locally, with outsiders.
Guiding competition over forest
resource is key to development of forest
management systems that work. Rural,
urban, settled and mobile groups have
different needs in terms of timber, dry
season grazing and fuel wood. In addition,
there are conflicts between forest user
groups and the Government, represented
by the Forest Department. The Forest
Department still has a largely policing role,
and views most forest utilisation activities
as illegal.
Forest areas in the Borana lowlands represent a cause of conflict and yet they also provide a mechanism to reduce conflict and build long-lasting stability in the region by reaching agreed management practices and secured user rights between the various stakeholders.
Learning approaches to setting up new2
forest resource management systems
The corner stone of the project’s approach
has been to develop appropriate working
relationships with communities. The idea
was to restore traditional institutions and
management systems and help these to
regain the capacity to function within today’s
context (Tache and Irwin, 2003). This has
particular relevance to conflicts over natural
resources and to newly emerging forest
management systems.
A learning-based approach has been adopted to open up a dialogue over new resource management systems. This approach has three distinct stages; investigation, negotiation and implementation (Dubois and Lowore, 2000). The approach initiates a participatory process that is self-informing (investigation), provides space for key actors to discuss and decide on the structures and direction of management (negotiation), and recognises that real learning takes place once new decisions are put in to practice (implementation).
Investigation: Addressing conflict -
Relationship Mapping
Boran pastoralists perceive violent conflict
over natural resources as one of the most
important livelihood issues (Weiser, 1998
and SOS Sahel, 2000). To address the
issue, existing conficts were analysed first.
This helps to develop an understanding of
the conflict, its causes, impacts and interrelationships,
and helps determine where
intervention is appropriate.
Conflict analysis was the starting point of the forest user stakeholder analysis. The purpose was to break down the complexity of existing conflicts and to initiate a dialogue from which to develop a strategic plan of action. The work involved group exercises and discussions with all stakeholders in order to understand and map their respective ideas and perceptions. Work was initially done with small groups and then with larger groups, by bringing the initial smal groups together as opportunities arose, and through the identification of common interests and common ground.
The key tool used in this process was relationship mapping, adapted with Responding To Conflict (RTC, 2000) as part of a conflict training exercise. Participants were asked first to list all the different local groups using forest resources. All groups were marked on a large circle on the ground, and the participants placed themselves within the circle. Participants were encouraged to discuss and depict3 their relationships with all the other local groups. Once the exercise had been completed, the information was reviewed and detailed explanations sought concerning relationships between different local groups.
In this way the project built up a clear understanding of relationship issues, both positive and negative, between the forest users. Dialogue over sustainable resource use, the potential for shared management and the need for conflict resolution, were embraced by community groups and institutions as opportunities to re-assume their management roles and responsibilities.
Negotiating new forest management
systems and reducing conflict
These roles and responsibilites are being
formalised through legally recognised
community forest management plans. This
is an important mechanism for clarifying
user rights, responsibilities and for
protecting the rights of previously
marginalised groups, helping to secure
livelihoods (see Longley and Maxwell,
2003). Development of the management
plan includes a participatory forest resource
assessment, where Government staff and
forest users jointly assess the resource,
define management prescriptions and
establish monitoring criteria (Jordan, 2003).
This helps build trust and understanding
and reduces conflict between Government
officials and users.
Bringing all local groups together into one management body, and into negotiations over resource management, has enabled the resolution of a number of key conflicts between different clans and different ethnic groups. The on-going dialogue has created the medium to resolve differences. For example, in and around Arero forest tensions between forest settled Borana and Guji groups and nomadic Garri camel pastoralists that often resulted in violent conflict, have now been resolved. Since the new forest management system is in place, agreement has been reached over the need to negotiate access to the forest, rather than to follow the previous assumed open access.
Inter-Madda4 and Madda forest management groups include representatives from different clans and ethnic groups. These are set up as ground level forest management bodies. They deal with local problems and conflicts, e.g., they stop illegal harvesters from within the community. More serious problems or potential conflicts, e.g., new farmland clearances, are passed on to the District level PFM working group, for higher level negotiation and support. PFM working groups are set-up with the aim of conflict resolution and embody representatives of local communties and Government officials.
Potential disputes and conflicts of interest between different groups involved in the new management will continue to arise. In shifting from an open access system to a managed access system, a number of forest users must work under restrictions, with inherent problems. However, armed and violent conflict appears to have been largely eliminated as negotiation processes take place.
Note: This paper presents activities conducted in Ethiopia as part of the SoS Sahel Borana Collaborative Forest Management Project & the subsequent FARM Africa/SoS Sahel Participatory Forest Management Programme. Key funders have been EU, Comic Relief and DfiD.
Authors’ affiliations:
Ben Irwin
FARM Africa/SOS Sahel Participatory Forest
Management Programme
Gavin Jordan
Centre for International Development and
Training, University of Wolverhampton
E-mail: Gavin.Jordan@wlv.ac.uk
Zelalem Temesgn
FARM Africa/SOS Sahel Participatory Forest
Management Programme
References