ICARDA annual report 2004

ICARDA Annual Report 2004
64
ent approaches have been used:
1. Recognition and strengthening
of customary land-tenure systems
(Morocco, Mali, and Niger)
2. Individualization of collective
land resources and promotion of
privatization (Tunisia)
3. State appropriation of land
resources (Jordan and Senegal).
In general, land-related policy
reforms have aimed to strengthen
the land-tenure security of individuals.
Only Morocco and Mali have
encouraged communities to register
their collective use rights in order to
preserve land resources. However, to
fully address the trends emerging in
rural areas, use rights need to evolve
to full private property rights.
The study found that the legal
and institutional frameworks governing
water rights were similar in
all six countries. Legislation recognized
the rights of landowners to
harvest water or dig wells on their
land to irrigate their crops and
water their animals. Most governments
granted use rights to other
water users. However, Senegal
gave users added security by granting
them compensation if government
actions prevented them from
exercising their water rights.
With the exception of Jordan,
the governments of the countries
studied have introduced various
legal reforms to encourage communities
to manage their forest
Fig. 33. Conflicts
over resources.
resources. Legal distinctions are
drawn between protected forests,
forests managed by local communities,
and forest-service-managed
State forests, where neighboring
communities only have use-rights.
In the case of community-managed
forest, the managerial capacities
of local people need to be improved.
Development programs need to recognize
that urban demands for charcoal
and wood encourage local user
groups to harvest and sell their forest
resources. The expansion of cropped
areas into forests, and conflicts of
interest between user groups and the
forest services also need to be
addressed. However, community forest
management can be successful. In
Tunisia, it has reduced the illegal harvest
of forest products. By contrast, in
Jordan, where forest management is
state-controlled, encroachment and
the illegal harvest of forest products
has not been reduced.
Differences between statutory
and customary tenure systems cause
land-use conflicts between the State
and local institutions in all six countries.
Decentralization policies are
also causing conflict, as local communities
are attempting to assert their
right to manage their own natural
resources. However, in both Mali
and Senegal decentralization has
allowed local communities to oppose
government institutions and win
more control over their resources.
Conflicts also arise because many
different stakeholders lay claim to
the same resources making it difficult
for governments to determine
what rights to grant to various
users. In addition, conflicts over
land, water, and forest resources are
often closely linked, further complicating
the situation. Within the case
studies, there were a number of
examples of parties trying to use the
law to resolve their conflicts.
However, outcomes showed that
legal frameworks were not necessarily
the best conflict-resolution tool.
Conflicts also arise over
resource access and use, because
the rights allocated to users do not
always match their perceived
rights. Lack of convergence
between customary and statutory
tenure regimes creates loopholes,
allowing users to illegally encroach
on or harvest natural resources. In
addition, governments fail to
address all the constraints faced by
users when allocating rights, forcing
them to use their resources in
illegal and unsustainable ways.
The dissimilarity of statutory
and customary property rights systems
was one of the major sources
of conflict over resource use. The
framework helped to disentangle
the different types of conflicts that
resulted from interactions among
the resources, the legal and institutional
regimes governing those
resources, and the rights allocated
to the different resource users.
Scaling up innovative
livestock-management
practices: a new framework
Innovative technologies and policies
are not enough to alleviate
poverty and improve people’s
livelihoods. Research organizations
and financial development institutions
also have to ensure that new