178
7
keeping, without understanding the importance of natural fluctuations, prices
were allowed to drop when the production of meat increased, but when the production went down again, prices stayed low. The market had become a monopsony
with one big dominant buyer who had an economic interest in keeping the payments to the producers down (Reinert 2016). Due to widespread critique, some
cracks in this monopsony has emerged since 2012 combined with increased efforts
to market reindeer meat, which have led to increased prices to producers again.
Conclusions
Pastoralists sustain a living by using land in areas that are too marginal or unstable
climatically and ecologically to obtain sustainable agricultural production. These
areas are typically highly productive during parts of the year and resource scarce in
the rest of the year. Examples of such regions are African savannas and the Arctic
tundra. Because the grazing resources of these regions are unstable, unpredictable,
fluctuating and distributed thinly over large areas, the use of these resources must
be flexible and based on movement of livestock—often over long distances. Such
mobility fits poorly together with the will of modern governments to control land
governance and populations.
Similarly, mobile resource management stands in contrast to the principles of
sedentary agricultural production and will often be underestimated. In this way, the
modernization discourse neglects the traditional knowledge of pastoralists. This
discourse continues to dominate the understanding of most decision-makers on
pastoralism. Consequently, the modernization discourse contributes to the political
and economic marginalization of pastoralists, who operate in ecologically marginal
regions.
The modernization discourse on pastoralism builds on ecological succession
theory that was developed in the USA early in the twentieth century. There was,
however, a paradigm shift in international research on pastoralism in the 1980s and
1990s. While range management in the USA seems now to have changed to follow
the knowledge in the non-equilibrium model, in most African states as well as in the
governance of reindeer pastoralism in Norway, the old paradigm based on equilibrium theory and often associated with a top-down approach still dominates planning
and decision-making. It is this flawed governance that the young reindeer pastoralist
Jovsset Ánte Sara does not accept, and that he has taken to court to fight.
This chapter also illustrates two central themes in political ecology—a deconstruction of the idea of environmental degradation caused by small-scale and
subsistence- oriented users, and how these already marginalized users are subject to
further marginalization through persistent attempts to modernize their production.
Both are classic themes in political ecology. The first arises from critiques of neoMalthusianism and the second comes from the influence of Marxism on political
ecology.
Chapter 7 · Pastoralists and the State
7
keeping, without understanding the importance of natural fluctuations, prices
were allowed to drop when the production of meat increased, but when the production went down again, prices stayed low. The market had become a monopsony
with one big dominant buyer who had an economic interest in keeping the payments to the producers down (Reinert 2016). Due to widespread critique, some
cracks in this monopsony has emerged since 2012 combined with increased efforts
to market reindeer meat, which have led to increased prices to producers again.
Conclusions
Pastoralists sustain a living by using land in areas that are too marginal or unstable
climatically and ecologically to obtain sustainable agricultural production. These
areas are typically highly productive during parts of the year and resource scarce in
the rest of the year. Examples of such regions are African savannas and the Arctic
tundra. Because the grazing resources of these regions are unstable, unpredictable,
fluctuating and distributed thinly over large areas, the use of these resources must
be flexible and based on movement of livestock—often over long distances. Such
mobility fits poorly together with the will of modern governments to control land
governance and populations.
Similarly, mobile resource management stands in contrast to the principles of
sedentary agricultural production and will often be underestimated. In this way, the
modernization discourse neglects the traditional knowledge of pastoralists. This
discourse continues to dominate the understanding of most decision-makers on
pastoralism. Consequently, the modernization discourse contributes to the political
and economic marginalization of pastoralists, who operate in ecologically marginal
regions.
The modernization discourse on pastoralism builds on ecological succession
theory that was developed in the USA early in the twentieth century. There was,
however, a paradigm shift in international research on pastoralism in the 1980s and
1990s. While range management in the USA seems now to have changed to follow
the knowledge in the non-equilibrium model, in most African states as well as in the
governance of reindeer pastoralism in Norway, the old paradigm based on equilibrium theory and often associated with a top-down approach still dominates planning
and decision-making. It is this flawed governance that the young reindeer pastoralist
Jovsset Ánte Sara does not accept, and that he has taken to court to fight.
This chapter also illustrates two central themes in political ecology—a deconstruction of the idea of environmental degradation caused by small-scale and
subsistence- oriented users, and how these already marginalized users are subject to
further marginalization through persistent attempts to modernize their production.
Both are classic themes in political ecology. The first arises from critiques of neoMalthusianism and the second comes from the influence of Marxism on political
ecology.
Chapter 7 · Pastoralists and the State