ICRISAT Archival Report 2006 - The seedlings of success in the ...

2.1.5 Projected potential impact
With the adoption of improved range management technologies, it is expected that primary and secondary rangeland
productivity and the living standards of the communities will be improved as well as reduction in rangeland
degradation.
2.2 Community based range resources monitoring and assessment in Marsabit
Over the last two decades community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) has become an important
strategy to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity in Africa. It is argued that the solution to the problem of
resource degradation in developing countries depends also on local level institutions of resource management and
the organizations to enforce them. Community resource management institutions and organizations are now
receiving greater attention as a viable alternative to regulation by the state or privatization as a means of rectifying
inefficiencies caused by attenuated property right systems and externalities. However, devolving rights to local
communities to help build institutions for common property management may not be a sufficient condition for
sustainable use of such resources. The challenge, however is the degree of effectiveness in internal governance for
efficient application of community rules.
2.2.1 The basis of the technology’s success
This approach was received with enthusiasm by the community members. This promises greater impact in
enhancing environmental conservation efforts at the community level. To sensitize the wider community on the
importance of biodiversity conservation, the results from the studies will be continuously made available to the
community through workshops and outreach to institutions like schools. Since the community makes the initiatives,
the results from these studies will plough feedback into the community policy structures for conservation of
resources.
2.2.2 How is it implemented?
Conventionally, the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute’s (KARI) Marsabit technical staff described the various
resource attributes within established permanent transects and also clipped the herbaceous vegetation falling at
specified intervals within transects. Data was collected along the 500 m long transects at every 100 m on grasses,
herbs, forbs, shrubs and trees using the nested quadrat method. The paced transect method was used to record all
species found within the transect area. Herbaceous, grass and shrub cover were clipped and weighed at the field
level and oven dried at 150 0 C. Other attributes taken were vegetation cover, density and species frequency.
Descriptions were also made of the vegetation species, and soil conditions and the results were compared with the
community description. Two transects fall within the community livestock home range and the third transect outside
the livestock home range.
For the community, data collected gives a general/subjective description of the area from their traditional indigenous
knowledge perspective. Their method of recording and analysis depends more on memory and discussion than on
written records. They described the environment and their observations which were documented in terms of
vegetation suitability, cover, soil conditions and general observations on use or misuse of resources.
2.2.3 Up-scaling the technology
This technology will be up-scaled in the other DMP sites within Marsabit, and then to other parts of the country. The
GEF funded Indigenous Vegetation Project (IVP) has shown interest in the data being collected and the approach of
involving the community in resource management. IVP was also set to make transects for monitoring in
collaboration with the community, hence this is an opportunity to share experiences. KARI Marsabit will also use
the information and experiences for other districts within its mandate region.
2.2.4 Contribution to the overall DMP project goal and objectives
The project goal of conserving and restoring biodiversity in the desert margins is being met since the project is aimed
at creating awareness on resource use dynamics and influence conservation policy at the grassroots level (Output 5 –
policy advocacy and 7 – stakeholders’ participation).
286