174
7
thickness of the lichen layer from 29 mm to 23 mm (Tømmervik et al. 2011). This
occurred during a period when the reindeer population had continued to increase.
Despite this decline, the lichen layer increased in both extension and thickness for
the whole period investigated (1998–2010).
Nevertheless, it is not surprising that the amount of lichen is reduced with more
reindeer, although the relationship between reindeer and lichen is not linear, and
climate variation also clearly plays a role. Hence, grazing inevitably affects vegetation with regard to both species composition and distribution, but despite the high
reindeer numbers in 2010, there was no ecological crisis on the tundra. This conclusion stands in contrast to the public and policy-based image given of reindeer husbandry in Norway leading to overgrazing, which is depicted in . Fig. 7.3. The lack
of scientific evidence for the overstocking narrative testified by the conclusions from
this ecological monitoring and the problems with the analyses of satellite imagery,
combined with the massive media and policy obsession with this narrative, demonstrate that the narrative has taken the form of a myth in Norwegian society
(Benjaminsen et al. 2016; Benjaminsen 2020).
7.2 Debates About Economic Irrationality Among Pastoralists
It has long been the prevailing view that pastoralists keep unnecessarily high numbers of animals, which in addition to causing overgrazing are also in poor condition—simply because there are too many. In the African context, this has been
explained by pastoralists having a strong sentimental attachment to cattle, which
means that they have qualms about slaughtering or selling their animals. It is also
claimed that African pastoralists keep many livestock because they are used as a
symbol of wealth, power and prestige. These ideas have been wrongly attributed to
the American anthropologist, Melville Herskovits. He wrote about what he called
a ‘cattle complex’ in East Africa, but he was referring to cattle culture as an economic and cultural system (complex) (Herskovits 1926). This term, ‘cattle complex’ was, however, later picked up by white settlers in Kenya and used in a negative
way to describe African pastoralism.
It is said that because of the cattle complex, pastoralists remain poor. Lack of
economic rationality is also said to be an obstacle to modernization of pastoral
production and to a transition from herding and nomadism to a Western form of
ranching. Such perceptions of what has been seen as ‘traditional livestock keeping’, is still prevalent among government officials, politicians and some scientists,
and not only in Africa, as we have seen in the case of Saami reindeer pastoralism.
Comparisons with ranching or stall-feeding are usually made in relation to the
individual animal’s productivity—whether in terms of milk or meat. But what is
not taken into account then is that pastoralists maximize production per area
instead of per individual animal as opposed to stall-feeding and ranching. This is
simply a necessity, because they live in marginal and variable environments, where
migrations and the tracking of environmental variability are necessary. This
approach is also important in order to maximize the number of people who may
Chapter 7 · Pastoralists and the State
7
thickness of the lichen layer from 29 mm to 23 mm (Tømmervik et al. 2011). This
occurred during a period when the reindeer population had continued to increase.
Despite this decline, the lichen layer increased in both extension and thickness for
the whole period investigated (1998–2010).
Nevertheless, it is not surprising that the amount of lichen is reduced with more
reindeer, although the relationship between reindeer and lichen is not linear, and
climate variation also clearly plays a role. Hence, grazing inevitably affects vegetation with regard to both species composition and distribution, but despite the high
reindeer numbers in 2010, there was no ecological crisis on the tundra. This conclusion stands in contrast to the public and policy-based image given of reindeer husbandry in Norway leading to overgrazing, which is depicted in . Fig. 7.3. The lack
of scientific evidence for the overstocking narrative testified by the conclusions from
this ecological monitoring and the problems with the analyses of satellite imagery,
combined with the massive media and policy obsession with this narrative, demonstrate that the narrative has taken the form of a myth in Norwegian society
(Benjaminsen et al. 2016; Benjaminsen 2020).
7.2 Debates About Economic Irrationality Among Pastoralists
It has long been the prevailing view that pastoralists keep unnecessarily high numbers of animals, which in addition to causing overgrazing are also in poor condition—simply because there are too many. In the African context, this has been
explained by pastoralists having a strong sentimental attachment to cattle, which
means that they have qualms about slaughtering or selling their animals. It is also
claimed that African pastoralists keep many livestock because they are used as a
symbol of wealth, power and prestige. These ideas have been wrongly attributed to
the American anthropologist, Melville Herskovits. He wrote about what he called
a ‘cattle complex’ in East Africa, but he was referring to cattle culture as an economic and cultural system (complex) (Herskovits 1926). This term, ‘cattle complex’ was, however, later picked up by white settlers in Kenya and used in a negative
way to describe African pastoralism.
It is said that because of the cattle complex, pastoralists remain poor. Lack of
economic rationality is also said to be an obstacle to modernization of pastoral
production and to a transition from herding and nomadism to a Western form of
ranching. Such perceptions of what has been seen as ‘traditional livestock keeping’, is still prevalent among government officials, politicians and some scientists,
and not only in Africa, as we have seen in the case of Saami reindeer pastoralism.
Comparisons with ranching or stall-feeding are usually made in relation to the
individual animal’s productivity—whether in terms of milk or meat. But what is
not taken into account then is that pastoralists maximize production per area
instead of per individual animal as opposed to stall-feeding and ranching. This is
simply a necessity, because they live in marginal and variable environments, where
migrations and the tracking of environmental variability are necessary. This
approach is also important in order to maximize the number of people who may
Chapter 7 · Pastoralists and the State