The policy document uses 500 words to explain this pillar. By comparison, the five specific objectives altogether are dealt with in 136 words.

Here, as in the case of Pillar 1, the main goal is ‘to support the transformation to industrialization’ (p.30).

COMMENTARY

1. Sedentarization: whose choice? The phrase ‘Conduct voluntary commune programs’ in the title of this pillar replaces the term ‘sedentarization’ used in the past, but the intention behind the choice of words appears to be substantially the same. ‘Voluntary’ settling is discussed within the policy as something that will happen inevitably. Several passages in the policy openly talk about settling under the ‘voluntary commune program’ as something that is done to pastoralists, not by pastoralists. The ‘General Description of the Process and Brief Presentation of the Major Policy and Implementation Strategies’ talks of the intention of ‘settling pastoralists voluntarily in development centers’ (p.6), and is explicit about the government asking people to settle: ‘Communes … shall be prepared and organized before people are asked to settle’ (p.5). The same phrase is repeated in the description of the ‘General Orientation of the Policy’ (p.24). Section 1.2 talks of ‘communities who have been settled in development centres’ (p.21). Strategy 4 under Policy Issue 1 refers to the circumstances that might help pastoralists in development centers regain their livelihoods in the pastoral system, and describes such circumstances as ‘problems’ that might ‘force people to go back to their previous life’ (p.49).
2. A one-way ticket to government’s centers. Pillar 2 and the strategies that follow from it appear to be based on the assumption that a settled life in the government’s centers is the best option for pastoralists. Those who are still engaged in mobile pastoralism need to be shown that settled life is better. The description of Policy Issue 2 states that ‘It is important to … enable [pastoralists to] identify the differences in participation and benefits of settled and mobile life-styles … so that they would decide on their own to permanently settle’ (p.53). Those already in government’s centers need to be helped to avoid falling back into pastoralism: ‘problems that force people to go back to their previous life after voluntarily settlement shall be identified by conducting studies’ (p.49).
3. Not on the basis of pastoral livelihood systems. Sedentarization is presented as an opportunity for ‘communities who are not successful in mobile pastoralism’. There is no explanation of what being ‘unsuccessful’ means, or why impoverishment in pastoralism is to be considered a failure and a destiny rather than an accident or a temporary condition. Farmers in difficulty are regularly helped by development programs to remain in Why should pastoralists in difficulty be ‘helped’ to get out of pastoralism?
4. More land-use conversion away from pastoralism? Pillar 2 targets the land in pastoral areas that is best endowed with water resources – that is, the land which provides vital dry-season grazing reserves to pastoral systems. Rather than acknowledging its importance for pastoralists, this land is seen as a resource for the goal of industrialization: ‘In areas that are endowed with reliable water resources and that are convenient for settled life’ and where ‘it is possible to develop the reliable sources for irrigation and energy production to transform to industrialization that use pastoral products as input’ (p.30). Even beside industrialization, the priority seems to be on virtually anything apart from pastoralism itself. The description of the Pillar claims that: ‘It is important to develop the pastoral area land use plan and land administration on the basis of resource mapping … that is compatible to mobile pastoralism’, but recommends to focus on ‘identifying especially agricultural, touristic sites, etc.’ (p.30). Yet in other parts of the document the policy lists ‘land-use conversion … and a development strategy that does not consider [its] impact’ on pastoral systems as one of the bottlenecks of pastoral development in the past (p.22).

POLICY ISSUES / SECTORAL STRATEGIES / IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES »