THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG

Land use variability and concomitant land use conflicts
Land use variability represents the different human uses of the land. For example smallholder
agriculture, grazing and wildlife reserves among others. 267 Discussing biodiversity perceptions
and national resource regimes in Kenya inevitably leads us into discussing the issues of land
use. Land use variations wittingly or unwittingly leads to escalation of land use conflicts, one
of the important factors helping us to understand biodiversity dynamics in Kenya. Like any
other African societal setting, ethnic arrangements form the social fabric of Kenya. As a
result, land use is defined basing on the ethnic tents. 268
Land use in Kenya is divided into two major types: pastoral and agricultural land use systems.
Rainfall irregularity is a characteristic feature from year to year and more severe within
particular years. In the east and northern parts of Kenya, rainfall is expected between March
and May, while in the south and western parts of Kenya, rain falls during March and June. 269
The lowest rainfall is registered along the shores of Lake Turkana and the central plains which
receive 150mm of rain fall per year.
The seasonality and distribution of rainfall has an important bearing in determining land use
patterns. Poor rainfall distribution creates patch vegetation, and during each interval of the
rainfall, the ephemeral vegetation continues to degenerate. If the season is prolonged, the
cycle continues. 270 It is imperative to note that, rainfall distribution and variability is extreme
in both time and space. When one part of the country receives rainfall, the other half
experiences a drought and its attendant problems. This kind of phenomena causes variations
in land use strategies and calls for copping mechanisms. These different copping mechanisms,
with regard to variable environment and land rights insecurity, were studied by Ellis and
Swift. 271 They noted that, when relations between pastoral groups are good, there is
reciprocity in access to grazing and water resources during periods of stress. As one group
crosses into another’s territory, access to key resources is governed by the host group’s
institutions and regulations. 272 The hosts by agreeing to host their troubled brothers in the
trade expect reciprocal rights in future when similar catastrophes befall them too. During such
friendly contacts, raids, killings and land conflicts are few or even rare. However, when there
are sour relations and more so when reciprocity is not met, the status quo is challenged and
there are concomitant clashes between rival groups competing among themselves, over access
to water and land resources. Here, raiding rather than reciprocity becomes the major facet
267 Lee, D.R and C.B, Barret. 2000. Trade offs or Synergies? Agricultural Intesfication, Economic Development
in Developing Countries. Wallingford: CAB International.
268 Scoper,R.C. 1985. Social Cultural Profile of the Turkana District. Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
269 Ngecu, W. M and E.M, Mathu. 2004. The El-Nino-triggered Landslides and their social economic Impact
on Kenya. Environmental Geology 38:277-284.
270 Murton, J .1999. Population Growth and Poverty in Machakos District, Kenya.The Geographical Journal
165.
271 Ellis, J.E and D,M. Swift. 1988. Stability of African Eco systems. Alternative Paradigms and Implications for
Development. Journal of Range Management 41(6):450-459.
272 Kamau-Kimani, J. 1998. Recent Trends and Implications of Group Ranch Sub-Division and Fragmentation in
Kajiado District,Kenya .The Geographical Journal 164(1):202-213.
54