159
7
after a shock such as a drought. In addition, arid regions constitute unstable systems that are dominated by one factor in particular—the annual rainfall, which is
usually subject to considerable fluctuations from year to year.
People who depend on natural resources in such arid regions have therefore
learned that the only certainty is uncertainty (Berge 2000). In such an environment,
it is necessary to be flexibly adaptive to survive. Moreover, uncertainty is not unique
to Africa, but is found in all environments where pastoralists live. These are usually
locations with marginal resources, whether in drylands, highlands or Arctic regions,
which means that the renewable resources that are used are often unstable and
distributed thinly over large areas (with some exceptions of key resources such as
wetlands in drylands). For centuries, pastoralists have developed various ways of
adapting to a changing resource base, which range from a purely nomadic life
(which is rare nowadays) to what is called ‘transhumance’. Transhumance means a
fixed base from which herders and livestock move for a shorter or longer part of
the year. This migration takes place in order to find pasture and water in a different
ecological zone, while the rest of the household stays in the base.
Ellis and Swift (1988) demonstrated, however, that it does not make sense to fix a
carrying capacity in a dry environment dominated by unstable rainfall. Moreover,
they concluded that it is the climate - more than the density of livestock - that
determines biomass and its composition and distribution in drylands.
Since the early 1980s, research undertaken by the French ecologist Pierre
Hiernaux in northern Mali has also played an important role as an empirical basis
Definition
Sandford (1983) wrote the first influential publication to criticize what he called
the Mainstream View on pastoral development. This was also one of the first
theoretical contributions to the new flexibility discourse, while Ellis and Swift
(1988) presented the first substantial empirical study to undermine the mainstream
view based on field data from 9 years of ecological research in northern Kenya.
According to Ellis and Swift (1988), the mainstream view (or modernization
discourse) has been based on three assumptions: that African pastoral ecosystems
are potentially stable (that a carrying capacity can be identified), that these
potentially stable ecosystems are frequently destabilized by improper use on the
part of pastoralists, and that alterations of system structure (reducing livestock
numbers, changing land tenure patterns etc.) are needed to return these systems to
equilibrium and a more productive state. Hence, the idea is that if ecosystems are
left undisturbed, they will evolve naturally towards a climax stage. Grazing
disturbs these systems and, if exceeding the carrying capacity, will lead to
degradation. In order to prevent such degradation, it is argued that those
responsible for management (usually a governmental unit), must determine the
number of animals the system can support. In order to be able to preserve the
ecosystem at an acceptable stable level, the number must not exceed this carrying
capacity.
7.1 · Debates About Overgrazing
7
after a shock such as a drought. In addition, arid regions constitute unstable systems that are dominated by one factor in particular—the annual rainfall, which is
usually subject to considerable fluctuations from year to year.
People who depend on natural resources in such arid regions have therefore
learned that the only certainty is uncertainty (Berge 2000). In such an environment,
it is necessary to be flexibly adaptive to survive. Moreover, uncertainty is not unique
to Africa, but is found in all environments where pastoralists live. These are usually
locations with marginal resources, whether in drylands, highlands or Arctic regions,
which means that the renewable resources that are used are often unstable and
distributed thinly over large areas (with some exceptions of key resources such as
wetlands in drylands). For centuries, pastoralists have developed various ways of
adapting to a changing resource base, which range from a purely nomadic life
(which is rare nowadays) to what is called ‘transhumance’. Transhumance means a
fixed base from which herders and livestock move for a shorter or longer part of
the year. This migration takes place in order to find pasture and water in a different
ecological zone, while the rest of the household stays in the base.
Ellis and Swift (1988) demonstrated, however, that it does not make sense to fix a
carrying capacity in a dry environment dominated by unstable rainfall. Moreover,
they concluded that it is the climate - more than the density of livestock - that
determines biomass and its composition and distribution in drylands.
Since the early 1980s, research undertaken by the French ecologist Pierre
Hiernaux in northern Mali has also played an important role as an empirical basis
Definition
Sandford (1983) wrote the first influential publication to criticize what he called
the Mainstream View on pastoral development. This was also one of the first
theoretical contributions to the new flexibility discourse, while Ellis and Swift
(1988) presented the first substantial empirical study to undermine the mainstream
view based on field data from 9 years of ecological research in northern Kenya.
According to Ellis and Swift (1988), the mainstream view (or modernization
discourse) has been based on three assumptions: that African pastoral ecosystems
are potentially stable (that a carrying capacity can be identified), that these
potentially stable ecosystems are frequently destabilized by improper use on the
part of pastoralists, and that alterations of system structure (reducing livestock
numbers, changing land tenure patterns etc.) are needed to return these systems to
equilibrium and a more productive state. Hence, the idea is that if ecosystems are
left undisturbed, they will evolve naturally towards a climax stage. Grazing
disturbs these systems and, if exceeding the carrying capacity, will lead to
degradation. In order to prevent such degradation, it is argued that those
responsible for management (usually a governmental unit), must determine the
number of animals the system can support. In order to be able to preserve the
ecosystem at an acceptable stable level, the number must not exceed this carrying
capacity.
7.1 · Debates About Overgrazing