The FDRE policy recognies in its premises the economic and ecological value of pastoral mobility (see commentary), but this never translates into practice. The policy addresses mobile pastoralism with the plan to maximize livestock production and productivity and eventually settle pastoralists in order to achieve livestock-based industrialization (Pillar 1; Pillar 2).

The AU policy framework emphasizes the economic and ecological value of pastoral mobility and therefore the importance of supporting it. Four of its principles (3, 4, 5 and 7) and Strategy 1.4 make specific reference to supporting mobility. Strategy 2.1 is dedicated to supporting to mobility within and between countries. Important references to mobility are also found in two passages in the introductory section (3.1, p. 12; 4.2, p. 22).

Principle 3: Pastoralism as a way of life and a production system. The framework supports pastoralism as a way of life and as a production system. It supports multi-sectoral, coordinated approaches which combine to protect and develop human, social, financial, natural and physical capital. Implicit in this principle is the concept of supporting livestock-based development while simultaneously, improving basic services and relevant infrastructure.

Principle 4: The importance of strategic mobility. The framework is explicit in its support to pastoral strategic mobility. It recognizes that mobility is the basis for efficient use and protection of rangelands, and, that mobility is key to appropriate adaptation to climatic and other trends. The principle is reflected in the practical strategies of the framework, such as securing access to rangelands for pastoralists through supportive land tenure policies and legislation, and further development of regional policies to enable regional movements and livestock trade.

Principle 5: The importance of regional approaches. Relevant to all four preceding principles is recognition that pastoralism has special potential to benefit from regional approaches to policy reform and harmonization. This potential stems from the cross-border nature of many pastoralist communities, and fits well with the existing or emerging policy frameworks of RECs

Principle 7: Acknowledge and build on existing policy processes. Policy on pastoralism has been evolving over many years, with a considerable body of negative and positive experiences to draw on. The AU policy framework recognizes the need to incorporate and support existing or emerging policies at national and regional levels which to varying degrees, all aim to: enhance the political representation of pastoralist women and men; integrate pastoral development policy into national and regional policy frameworks; promote sustained conflict resolution; legitimize alternative models of service delivery in pastoral areas; maximize efficient livestock production by enabling pastoral mobility and securing access to rangelands; manage risk by institutionalizing drought management; and, support the marketing of livestock and livestock products.

3.1 The colonial legacy. … In Eastern Africa, with the exception of Ethiopia (which was never colonized), pastoral development policy in British colonies, mainly Kenya, was influenced by the widely held view that pastoralism using communal rangelands was inefficient, with low productivity, and perceived environmental degradation. Thus, a sedentary life was imposed on pastoralist communities, confined on permanent rangelands where they were supposed to benefit from public services more easily. Pastoralists were stripped of their property rights on large portions of rangelands, which were given to the British colonial administration for ranching. These negative views on pastoralism were misguided but proved to be remarkably persistent, with apparently unproductive pastoral land still being appropriated up to the modern day…

4.2 Framework objectives and strategies. … This livestock-focused objective in the framework emphasizes the importance of mobility to make efficient use of rangeland resources, and the ecological and economic logic of enabling in-country and regional mobility …

Strategy 1.4 Acknowledge the legitimacy of indigenous pastoral institutions (p.26).
(i) Recognition by state and local authorities of the important role of traditional pastoral leadership and structures in governance, including conflict resolution, management of land tenure and mobility, and facilitation of interactions between pastoralists and other interest groups such as crop farmers; … (iv) The need to acknowledge the legitimate rights of pastoralists to pastoral lands by granting them communal land ownership on a priority basis’.

Strategy 2.2 Policy support to mobility within and between countries. Strategy 2.1 above focuses on security of access to traditional rangelands for pastoralists within countries. However, pastoral mobility also often requires movements through settled farming areas, movements across internal administrative borders within states, and movements across national borders. Therefore, strategy 2.2 is to support policy reform or development which enables these kinds of mobility. Such reform requires an understanding of the wider system boundaries within which pastoralists move, and requires dialogue and involvement of both pastoralists and non-pastoral actors.

By reference to section 3.3.2, it is evident that considerable progress has already been made in some parts of Africa, especially West Africa, in terms of formulating legislation to enable pastoral mobility. Experiences include the ECOWAS International Transhumance Certificate, whereas in COMESA certification systems for regional livestock movements are evolving which are tailored to the animal disease status of Member States and their requirements in terms of disease surveillance. Support to further developing, applying and evaluating these existing or evolving systems is needed, and these processes all require dialogue with pastoralist communities, traders and other stakeholders.

Related to the livestock trade and surveillance aspects of regional livestock movements is the issue of transboundary animal disease (TAD) control. In many countries, policies on TAD eradication or control date back to the colonial period. Therefore, these policies need to be updated using more contemporary assessments of the economic impacts of these diseases and market opportunities, epidemiological studies, and analysis of the available technical responses, including technical and economic feasibility.

Land and water development and commercialization »