Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Short Report
Pastoralism and Pastoralists in Sudan: A Stakeholder Mapping and Survey
Helen Young, Afaf Rahim, Abdelhafiz Mohamed, Merry Fitzpatrick Background Since 2010, the Feinstein International Center (FIC) at Tufts University have embarked on a major three-‐year research project on Pastoralism, Trade and Markets which is part of the UNEP Sudan Integrated Environment Project funded by UKaid from the Department for International Development1. This short report summarizes the findings of a three stage stakeholder mapping exercise2, which was undertaken as a foundational activity to inform subsequent research studies, and to promote and further develop stakeholder participation in the project. For this project, stakeholders are defined as an individual, group, organization, or institution, which affects or influences pastoralism and pastoralist livelihoods either directly or indirectly. The Tufts work builds upon and expands on our earlier research on livelihoods and conflict, which involved studies of the early impact of conflict on people’s livelihoods, IDP’s livelihoods, migration patterns and remittance flows, and the marginalization and vulnerability of pastoralist livelihoods in Darfur. The earlier undertakings, which spanned the years 2004-‐2009, were widely disseminated and discussed by governments and aid agencies in an on-‐going series of debriefings and dialogue in Sudan, North America and Europe. Our current research covers two separate but related fields; pastoralism and pastoralist livelihoods, and markets and trade in the Darfur region. The pastoralist project aims to promote understanding of pastoralist’s livelihoods systems among local, national and international stakeholders and to strengthen the capacity of pastoralist leaders, organizations and other advocates to articulate the rationale for pastoralism. This work is in close partnership with several national and international partners, including UNEP Sudan, SOS Sahel Sudan, the Darfur Development and Reconstruction Agency, the International Institute for Environment and Development, and the Nomads Development Council. It also depends on the support and participation of a wide network of national and local organizations, professionals and academics. This paper is divided into three parts; Part 1 summarizes the objectives and methods used in each of the three phases of the study; Part two presents the results from the mapping, the stakeholder survey, and the analysis of the UN database; and Part three presents the discussion and conclusions from this work. Part 1: A three phase approach Pastoralist livestock production is practiced in every region and state throughout former Sudan, which is probably home to one of the largest pastoralist populations in Africa (although precise estimates are hard to come by). Pastoralist livestock production makes a remarkable contribution to securing livelihoods at the local level and also to the wider national economy and to livestock exports. Pastoralism is also conducive with the sustainable management of dryland environments. As well as being a crucially important rural livelihood,
June, 2012
2
pastoralism is also a cultural identity shared by rural and urban residents alike. There are many people who identify themselves as pastoralists who may no longer practice livestock herding or be connected to livestock production, yet maintain their identity as a member of a pastoralist group The specific objectives of this stakeholder mapping were to:
1. Identify the broad groups of stakeholders, as a base for providing a strong foundation and strategy for ensuring their participation throughout the project
2. Review the nature and level of their involvement or influence. 3. Solicit their views on key policies and challenges affecting pastoralists and pastoralist livelihood systems. 4. Identify the mechanism and strategy for making use of the analysis in order to support and promote
positive change.
Three complementary approaches were used to identify, review and analyse the interests of pastoralists. First, the project team identified and characterized the broad categories and sub-‐categories of stakeholders. Second, a questionnaire survey built on this earlier work, by capturing the profile of individual stakeholders and their institutions, including an analysis of their engagement with pastoralists, and their opinions on challenges and policies affecting pastoralist livelihood systems. Third, a desk based review of the 2011 UN project database allowed a profiling of the agencies and projects that target pastoralists or pastoralist livestock production. The results and discussion of the three analytical approaches were compiled in a “Pastoralists Stakeholder Mapping Report”, and in this short report we summarize and draw the most important highlights from the report.
1. Stakeholder identification The first stage involved the identification of broad stakeholder groups, with an initial brainstorming by the project team (Tufts, UNEP, SOS Sahel) followed by reviewing, further characterization and cross-‐checking at a multi-‐stakeholder group meeting in Khartoum. In total 14 broad stakeholder groups were identified. This process in turn informed the development of the stakeholder questionnaire for the second stage of the mapping, and ensured the inclusion of international, national and sub-‐national levels.
2. Questionnaire survey Trained enumerators conducted face-‐to-‐face interviews with stakeholders covering eight states in North Sudan including: Khartoum, North and South Darfur, North and South Kordofan, Blue Nile State, Sinnar State and Gedaref. Coverage of the survey was further expanded by simultaneously undertaking a replica online survey distributed by email to national and international stakeholders both in Sudan and abroad. Snowball sampling, which encouraged respondents to name other potential interviewees or forward the online survey link, was used to increase coverage of the survey beyond the initial sample. The questionnaire covered the respondent’s background, their organization, sectoral focus and programmatic engagement with pastoralists. It also asked their opinions on challenges and policy issues affecting pastoralist livelihood systems. The survey took place during February to March 2011, with the online survey open for respondents for 6 months.
3. Analysis of the UN project database An excel file listing the projects in the 2011 UN database was obtained from the UN Office of Resident Coordinator/ Humanitarian Coordinator (UNO RC/HC). A total of 4793 projects listed on the database with a
June, 2012
3
total value of $137,788,159, were selected for further analysis. These projects were reviewed to determine: the scale and distribution of agency engagement with pastoralists, the programmatic or sectoral focus, and to identify the organizations with pastoralists as their target communities. Limitations of the study: It should be noted that the study is an overview of stakeholders, their activities and perspectives on certain issues. It is not a comprehensive analysis on capacities, effectiveness and impacts. It is not possible from the UN database to accurately estimate the budget dedicated to pastoralists, as these are usually incorporated into projects that are aimed at a broader population or other sectors not benefitting pastoralists. In order to improve estimates, two separate estimates were made, including those livelihood programs with “significant” pastoral components and those with far smaller pastoralist components. However, even those with significant components appeared to be less than 20% relating to pastoralists. Part 2: Results 2.1 Who’s Who? Stakeholder Identification and Mapping Pastoralists as a group and pastoralism as a livestock production system encompass multiple wide-‐ranging interests across sectors, disciplines, state and non-‐state groups. In total some 14 broad stakeholder categories were identified, including:
1. Government, Federal and State Levels for Political and Civil Administration.
2. Pastoralist Groups (where they have a distinct group identity) and Customary/Local Governance
3. International Organizations 4. Non State Actors 5. Universities and Research Institutions 6. International –National Universities
bilateral agreements and initiatives
7. Other Livelihood Groups 8. Traders and Consumers 9. Private Sector 10. Armed Groups 11. Media 12. Regional Bodies 13. Financial Institutions 14. International – National Initiatives
Within each category, there are multiple sub-‐categories; departments, units, etc., some of whom have specific responsibilities that influence or impact pastoralism and pastoralist livelihoods.
Key Government Departments As this project is concerned with both pastoralism as a livelihood system and pastoralists as citizens of Sudan, a wide range of government ministries at both federal and state level are relevant. A more detailed breakdown of ministries, departments and their role and function and relevance to pastoralism is available in the full report. The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) is of particular interest and importance to livestock producers. Despite the focus on livestock, there is little acknowledgement of the importance of pastoralist livestock production. Generally MARF is oriented towards commercial productivity – quality and quantity, and generating export revenues. The new three year economic strategy for Sudan highlights three aims for the
June, 2012
4
livestock sector related to: privatization; settlement of pastoralists and improved cross-‐breeding. A focus on pastoralist production systems is not explicit, for example, livestock censuses and estimates of production rarely, if ever, acknowledge the source of production. Within the government sector there are only a disproportionately small number of key departments that have a specific focus on pastoralism or pastoralist issues. Key government departments with an explicit focus on issues of concern to pastoralists include the General Administration of Pastures and Fodder (National/Federal) within the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries; and the Department of Education for Nomads within the Ministry of General Education. This department was established by a direct presidential decision in May 2000, and has set up sub-‐departments in all northern states for the education of nomads, with the exception of Gezira State. The aim is to absorb 99% of nomadic children into education by 2015, paying specific attention to the education of girls. The organizational home of the pasture and fodder department has been transferred many times between different ministries related to agriculture, livestock and natural resources, thus stifling its effectiveness. Most recently it has been situated within MARF. The main tasks of this department are the formulation of regulations for efficient protection of pasture, providing technical support to States, and coordinating and cooperating with relevant government and non-‐government institutes/departments. At the time of writing, further restructuring and re-‐organization of ministries is apparently underway as the government of Sudan is reviewing new austerity resource-‐saving measures. The Zakat Chamber, under the Ministry of Extension and Religious Affairs, is responsible for the collection of obligatory zakat payments, their management and their disbursement for charitable and religious purposes in accordance with Islamic law. Zakat payments are obligatory for animals not used for ploughing land or other work, which are owned for at least one year. The minimum herd size for the zakat is 5 camels, 30 cows, or 40 goats and sheep. There are specific problems with collecting the livestock-‐based zakat payments, including: evasion of payments; insecurity; livestock residing in multiple states and provinces which makes it unclear where the collections should occur; and the high administrative cost for zakat collection and supervision. Given the scale of livestock production in Sudan, this is a major source of revenue for the Zakat Chamber.
Bodies Representing Pastoralists There are two major bodies representing pastoralists at national level: the Pastoralists Union (PU) and the Nomads Development Council (NDC). The PU is the trade union or guild for Pastoralists in Sudan, acting as coordinator between the pastoralists and other relevant actors. The work is carried out on a voluntary basis. The future of the long established PU, however, is unclear, and it is likely to be dissolved when the 2010 Agriculture and Animals Producers Association Act is fully implemented. The NDC is a relatively new organization and is initially focusing its efforts on the Darfur region. The strategic goal of the Council is to create a well-‐developed nomadic community and promote sustainable development to achieve prosperity and welfare, with particular focus on improving the status of nomadic women as an essential element in the promotion of a spirit of peace and peaceful coexistence.
June, 2012
5
Civil Society Organizations Pastoralists and pastoralism are not well represented by civil society organizations (CSOs) in Sudan. At national level there are only four Sudanese NGOs working specifically to highlight and address pastoral concerns (Al Massar, Elhawdag, the Sudan Camel Association (SUCA) and the Pastoralism Association (PAS)). Regionally, for example in Darfur, in a survey of CSOs only four CSOs focus on pastoralists out of a total sample of 104 4, which is less than 5% of local agencies on the ground. This very poor civil society representation is a major obstacle for outreach to pastoral communities and wider representation. Since this stakeholder report was first written, the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue has established a ‘Nomadic Network’ in Nyala, El Fasher and El Geneina. It also facilitated a number of workshops in June 2011 to enable the nomadic communities to discuss humanitarian and reconciliation activities with the national and international agencies. 2.2. Survey Results The survey coverage was much larger than expected, as a result of the practical support of the Pastoralists Union and the Nomads Development Council, and because of the higher than expected response to the online questionnaire5. A total sample size of 505 responses, including 298 via face-‐to-‐face interviews and 207 using the online questionnaire, was achieved6.
Geographic coverage Figure 1 shows the geographic distribution of the sample by five geographical areas: Khartoum Region, West Region (North and South Darfur States, North and South Kordofan), East Region (Gedaref, Sinnar and Blue Nile States), South Region (covers all South Sudan states), and finally an "Abroad" category to cover the diaspora and the international stakeholders living/working outside Sudan. Stakeholders based in West Sudan represent the bulk of our sample (40%) while the next largest group is Khartoum based stakeholders (26%). The sample is larger for West Sudan as field teams from Tufts, SOS Sahel, and the Nomads Development Council, were able to visit North and South Kordofan, and North, South and West Darfur, all of which fall under West Sudan. In addition the North Darfur sample included at least 20 interviewees from each of 5 localities (Kutum, Kebkabiya, Waha, El Fasher and Malha/Mellit). Figure 1 Geographic coverage of the survey sample by Region7
0 10 20 30 40 50
KhartoumWest SudanEast Sudan
South SudanAbroad
Khartoum West Sudan East Sudan South Sudan Abroad
Region Percent 26 40 14 3 3
Region Percent in the sample
June, 2012
6
Organizational categories
Respondents were drawn from the entire range of stakeholder groups identified earlier, and these were further aggregated into four groupings: Government Institutions (government departments and national media) with 32% of the sample, International Actors (international NGOs, UN agencies and donors) with 25%, Non-‐state Actors (National NGO, Tribal Leadership, Political Representatives, Association/Unions and Private Companies) with 28%, and University/Research Institutes representing 15% of the sample. Figure 2 shows the representation of each organizational category in the online survey. University/research institutes represent 49% of the online sample (most of which are national), followed by government departments (18%). Many government employees receiving the initial email invitation to the online questionnaire forwarded the link to colleagues they thought would be interested. The large online response from government employees who received and responded to these forwarded survey links is indicative of a high general interest in pastoralist issues within government departments. Figure 2 Representation of the organizational category in the online survey
Sectoral focus Overall, stakeholders were most heavily involved in food security, natural resource management, conflict resolution and livelihoods. As expected, research and training are associated with Universities/Research Institutes. Non-‐state Actors, on the other hand, are involved mainly in conflict resolution and political representation and Government Institutions are heavily involved in food security, natural resource management and in conflict resolution. In contrast, International Actors have considerably less involvement in conflict resolution and political representation, and tend to focus on relief, research, training and media.
Multiple Challenges Facing Pastoralists in Sudan Survey respondents were asked to describe in their own words three major challenges to pastoralism and list them in order of importance. Answers were clustered into 10 broad groupings (Table 1). Fully half of respondents answers (50.4%) fell into the first category ‘Environment and Natural resource Issues’, showing a
Government Dept.
University/Research Insltute
Internalonal Actors
Non State Actors
No category
18
49
17
14
1
20
73
23
31
14
Percent of online sample of the total category sample Stakeholder Category percent of the online sample
June, 2012
7
strong belief that the major challenges facing pastoralists are issues related to the environment, unavailability/depletion of natural resources, and general problems with natural resource management. The four top-‐ranked categories include: environment and natural resource challenges (50.4%); conflict and security (12.9%); basic services (education and health) (11.7%), mobility and livestock migration (9.6%). Together, these four categories account for more than 84 per cent of all the answers given as the major challenge facing pastoralism, with environmental challenges coming out highest. Table 1 The first major challenge facing pastoralists according to respondents (open question)
Challenging Area Number Per cent
ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES ISSUES 211 50.4% Water scarcity (16%) Pasture scarcity & depletion (10%) General problems with natural resource management (8.1%) Agricultural expansion (5.5%) Land tenure and rights (4.1%) Climate & climate change (3.8%) Desertification/ decline in NR (2.9%) CONFLICT & SECURITY (national and local level tribal and natural resource conflict, & security) 54 12.9%
EDUCATION, HEALTH & BASIC SERVICES 49 11.7%
MOBILITY, livestock migration & livestock routes, restriction of movement 40 9.6%
Government policies and marginalization 17 4.1%
Livestock health 13 3.1%
Governance – voice 11 2.6%
Poor understanding of pastoralism 8 1.9%
Finance & trade 6 1.4%
Other* 9 2.2%
TOTAL 409 100%
Next respondents were asked to rate a list of 16 predefined challenges as either: a major issue, minor issue, not an issue or "don't know." Figure 3 shows the six challenges receiving the highest scores as a major issue, including; lack of basic services and poor investment in human capital (88%); natural resource management (86%), lack of understanding of pastoralist issues among policy makers (83%), land rights and tenure arrangements (79%). Survey respondents in the face-‐to-‐face interviews and in the online survey identified broadly similar challenges facing pastoralists.
June, 2012
8
Figure 3 Major challenges facing pastoralism in Sudan (closed rated question)
This closed rating question allowed respondents to choose any number of "major issues". The open-‐ended question about challenges, on the other hand, forced respondents to select one issue as the first challenge, one issue as the second challenge, and so on. While this is limiting it was found that respondents often listed other common categories as their second or third challenge. So while some issues were only mentioned a few times as the first challenge e.g. governance or voice of pastoralists, overall this was mentioned many times as the second and third challenge. While this analysis allowed the consensus issues to emerge (natural resources, conflict, basic services and mobility) it also shed light on the diversity of current challenges that are felt to be affecting pastoralists, including for example, climate change, desertification, secession and cross-‐border issues, expansion in the extractive industries, changes in lifestyle and livelihoods.
Differing Perceptions by Region Interestingly, the survey found differences in perceptions between stakeholders in different geographical regions, with Khartoum-‐based and online respondents reflecting differing views from those at State level. The starkest example was water, which was mentioned as the primary challenge in East Sudan by 19% and in the West by 30% of respondents, but in Khartoum only 3% of respondents mentioned water and only 5% in the online responses. The importance attached to Natural Resource Management and Pasture and Rangelands8 also varied according to location, with Natural Resource Management more of a challenge in the West than the East, and Pasture and Rangeland more so in the East than the West. In western Sudan the second most pressing challenge facing pastoralists was conflict. Education was prioritized as the major challenge by 13% of stakeholders in Khartoum, while in eastern Sudan and western Sudan only 6% of stakeholders mentioned it.
Land Identified as the Main Policy Issue Respondents were asked for their opinion regarding the main policy issues affecting pastoralists, and the results are summarized in Table 2. National legislation relating to land was by far the top policy issue, mentioned first by 34% of respondents, with many respondents referring to the Unregistered Land Act of 1970. This suggests
88
86
83
79
78
75
Lack of basic services/ poor investment in human capital
Natural Resource Management
Lack of understanding of pastoralist issues among planners and policy makers
Land rights and tenure arrangements
Marginalization in development and socio-‐economic policies
Conflict trends and militarization
Top major challenges facing pastoralism
Percent
June, 2012
9
that while water and other natural resources are seen as the major challenges facing pastoralists, it is likely that land legislation is the major influence or determinant of access to those resources. The second major policy issue concerned livestock corridors and demarcation of stock routes (14%). While laws exist, several respondents noted that they are either not enforced or are ignored. The third set of important policy issues related to agricultural laws and policies, specifically access to pasture, farming corporations, and distinctions between pastoral and agricultural land. Table 2 Important areas of national laws, regulations and policies that affect pastoralism mentioned by respondents
Policy area Number Per cent Land law 67 33.8% Livestock corridors / demarcation 28 14.1% Agricultural Laws 17 8.6% Natural resources, forestry 16 8.1% Local governance 10 5.1%
Taxation & livestock fees 10 5.1% Animal health 7 3.5% CPA & secession related 7 3.5% Pastoral institutions 6 3% Investment Promotion 5 2.5% Trade & export of animals 5 2.5% Mechanized farming 4 2% Federalism 3 1.5% Land Commission 2 1% Security/ proxy militia formation 2 1% Zakat 2 1% Other 7 3.6%
Number of responses 198 No response 307 60.8% The non-‐response rate to this question about policy issues was relatively high at 61%. This is likely due to the difficulty of the open question, which requires specific knowledge of policies and legislation as it influences pastoralism and pastoralists.
Opinions on the 2010 Agriculture and Animal Producers’ Legislative Act To assess stakeholders’ awareness of new laws and legislation pertaining to pastoralists, they were asked about the recent 2010 Agriculture and Animal Producers’ Legislative Act. This act would effectively cancel the Organizations of Farmers and Pastoralists Act of 19929. If the new 2012 Act is endorsed by the General Assembly, pastoralists will lose their own unique nationally representative body and the 1992 Act will not be effective. As membership of the proposed agricultural & animal producers organizations is open to all those who own agricultural and animal resources, it is likely that pastoralist issues will be overshadowed.
June, 2012
10
The vast majority (85%) of respondents were not aware of the existence of this new legislation; of those that had heard of it most were from either Government Institutions or Non-‐State Actors. Given the implications for pastoralists in terms of local, regional and national level representation this low level of awareness is of serious concern. Support of the new legislation varied; among the Non State Actors 40% generally disagreed with the new act, while 28% supported in. For the government stakeholder group, 36% disagreed while 33% supported it, thus indicating a split in opinion. 2.3 UN project database results Several national and international organizations are working with pastoralist communities as part of the Sudan 2011 UN work plan. A review of the UN 2011 projects database was undertaken in order to gain a better understanding of the scale and type of UN supported programmes with pastoralists, their distribution throughout Sudan, and also to identify the main organizations working with pastoralists. Projects that included pastoralists as one of several target groups were valued at approximately 22 million US dollars (about 16% of the total), of which at most $5 million may be targeted directly at pastoralists (less than 4% of the total $137M UN work plan). Even this is an over-‐estimate, as less than 20% of the total budget is usually targeted at pastoralists, with a larger portion supporting livestock belonging to agro-‐pastoralists, who often do not share some of the unique barriers facing mobile pastoralists. Geographically, the Darfur region appears to receive larger amounts of funding with a pastoralist component (about $9 million) compared with other regions in North and South Sudan. However, as explained below only a small proportion of the programmed total is targeted directly at pastoralists. In northern Sudan, nearly all livelihood programming directed at pastoralists or agro-‐pastoralists are related to animal health, primarily Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) involved in extension, vaccination campaigns and ensuring the drug supply. A couple of programmes are concerned with more broadly addressing the particular challenges to the viability of pastoralism as a livelihood system, with ACORD’s programme in eastern Sudan notable in this respect. There were almost no programmes targeting other challenges or policy issues highlighted by the stakeholder survey. In South Sudan, nearly everyone is considered primarily “pastoralist” with other activities such as farming and fishing counted as secondary activities. Nonetheless, most livelihood activities are aimed at increasing the productivity of the farming and fishing activities. There is only one environmental programme (RADA) listed in the database. In this, pastoralism is seen as a challenge to natural resource management, stating “Pastoralism is rapidly giving way to cultivation of land that is degraded because of overgrazing and soil erosion.” WASH programs occasionally include adaptations for watering animals. Several mention building dams or hafirs to provide water for animals, partly to reduce sources of conflict with pastoralists. Education is one area where the special needs of nomads are occasionally taken into account, though it is in the minority of the cases. Very often education programs state specifically the number of nomads targeted within their beneficiary counts, but do not indicate if the education services are adapted to serve pastoralists. Two education programs specifically highlighting nomadic children propose to build static classrooms. Most
June, 2012
11
education programs expect nomadic children to attend normal static schools with sedentary children, though the Al Massar Charity Organization for Nomads mentions that there is tension when the nomadic children do attend these schools. Health and nutrition projects, like the education programmes, often list nomads among their beneficiaries and say they will target them as a “vulnerable” group, but do not appear to do anything specific to adapt their services to the particular needs of nomads. None appeared to mention training CHWs amongst the nomadic family groups so they would have access to care while mobile. Instead, they were expected to attend clinics in the same way the sedentary population living near the clinics would. Part 3: Discussion and Conclusions
Identification and review of stakeholder groups Given the size and scale of pastoralism in Sudan, there appear within the government sector a disproportionately small number of departments that have a specific focus on pastoralism or pastoralist issues. Key departments include the General Administration of Pastures and Fodder, and also the Department of Education for Nomads, which are both seriously under-‐resourced and lack the capacity to properly fulfil their mandates. There are two major bodies representing pastoralists at the national level; the Pastoralists Union and the Nomads Development Council. The future of the long-‐established PU is unclear, and is likely to be dissolved when the 2010 Agriculture and Animal Producers Act is signed and implemented. The Nomads Development Council is a relatively new organization and is focusing its efforts on the Darfur region. Civil society in general provides poor representation of pastoralist issues, especially at national level with only four NGOs working specifically to highlight and address pastoral concerns (Al Massar, Elhawdag, SUCA and the Pastoralism Association). Regionally, for example in Darfur, there are specific local CSOs but these still represent a very small minority of the total number of CSOs in operation. This poor civil society representation is a major obstacle for outreach to pastoral communities. The lack of awareness of legislation and the lack of involvement of certain key organizational categories in advocacy, research and governance means that outreach to pastoralists, and their voice in governance is limited.
Good response to stakeholder survey The survey results provide a comprehensive overview of a range of stakeholder groups mainly in northern Sudan, their sectoral involvement, and their awareness and opinions of the policy issues and challenges affecting pastoralists and pastoralist livelihood systems. The higher than expected survey coverage was made possible through the support of the Nomads Development Council and the Pastoralist Union, and also through the better than expected response, especially within government, to the online survey. Few if any government workers were sent the online survey link directly (assuming they would be reached in face to face interviews) yet a large proportion received the link indirectly from colleagues who had passed it on by email. This suggests that despite a lack of official institutional commitments to pastoralism, there is a wide interest and engagement on the part of civil servants.
June, 2012
12
The low response rate to the policy and legislation questions indicates a lack of understanding and a gap in knowledge in this area. Additionally the majority of respondents were not aware of the impending changes to legislation though it is likely to have implications for representation of pastoralists at national level, and will essentially make the PU disappear. Policy briefings and information updates are urgently needed to improve the generally poor level of awareness of current legislative changes affecting pastoralists. The survey findings also indicated that opinions of the major challenges facing pastoralists varied according to location, with Khartoum-‐based and online respondents reflecting differing views from those at State level. This indicates that a broad canvassing of stakeholder views at local level is needed in order to avoid elite capture of the pastoralist policy agenda.
Limited involvement of the international community with pastoralists This review of the UN work plan for 2011 indicates that pastoralists are generally under-‐represented or poorly considered in the UN humanitarian and recovery programs covering both Sudan and South Sudan. This echoes the gaps within the national and state level government.
Mismatch between programmes and challenges facing pastoralists While livelihoods programming appears to be the major programming area reaching pastoralists, it is not generally focused on those issues that were identified by stakeholders as the major challenges, which included natural resources, conflict and security, education, health and basic services as well as mobility and livestock migration. These wider issues represent the predominant challenges facing pastoralists, at least three of which are linked to land legislation and customary law. It is this area of policy and practice that warrants greater attention and analysis in order to redirect the programs and strategies of the international community.
How best to engage with stakeholders: the beginning of a pastoralism network and forum This pastoralist project is founded on a partnership of collaborating international, national and local organizations that share the same interests and overarching project goal. This pooling of the respective competencies of the project partners has proved invaluable in taking the project forward and ensuring wider support. For example, in its first year the project signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Nomads Development Council, and developed a collaborative relationship with the Pastoralist Union through the partnership with SOS Sahel. These three national groups actively supported the implementation of the Stakeholder Survey, and also the Pastoralism Validation Workshop in Wad Medani in April 201110. This workshop brought together more than 35 national representatives of the stakeholders included in this survey. This multi-‐stakeholder group has endorsed the project approach, and a smaller team selected from this reference group is working to adapt a policy training to the context of Sudan. The stakeholder mapping and survey has generated a network of stakeholders drawn from multiple sectors and regions, which will serve as a strong foundation for continuing stakeholder engagement throughout the lifetime of the project. Respondents were invited to submit their details to an online mailing database that will be kept updated and open to new members. This approach of seeking out stakeholders, soliciting their views and opinions, and importantly seeking their endorsement and support of project activities serves two purposes; first
June, 2012
13
it enables the project to directly connect to those organizations and individuals we are seeking to inform; and second it ensures that the project activities and even the research questions are ‘demand driven’ and have the wide support of a national group of stakeholders. Acronyms
ACORD Agency for Cooperation and Research in Development CAHWs Community Animal Health Workers CHWs Community Health Workers CSOs Civil Society Organisations DFID Department for International Development FIC Feinstein International Center IDPs Internally Displaced Persons MARF Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries NDC Nomads Development Council PAS Pastoralism Association PU Pastoralists Union RADA Relief and Development Action SUCA Sudan Camel Association UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNO RC/HC UN Office of Resident Coordinator/ Humanitarian Coordinator 1 This short report of the pastoralism stakeholder analysis forms part of UNEP Sudan Integrated Environment Project, funded by UKaid from the UK Department for international Development (DFID). The views presented in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of UNEP or UKaid from the Department for International Development. The authors would like to thank the Nomads Development Council and the Pastoralist Union for their support. Thanks also to the teams of enumerators and data handlers. 2 Stakeholder mapping and analysis is the process of identifying these individuals or groups and reviewing their influence or impact on pastoralism. 3 Only those projects that note the US dollar amount requested were counted. The status of a further 86 projects was unclear and so they were not included. 4 PDS. 2009. Mapping and capacity assessment of civil society organizations (CSOs) in Darfur. Darfur Livelihoods Programme. Khartoum: Partners in Development Services (PDS). 5 Many online respondents made positive comments at the end of the survey e.g. “Wonderful questionnaire”; “helpful in shaping our future programming”; “useful in providing information for good planning and strategic development issues related to pastoralism”; “thank you for taking the effort to bring nomads issues to the open”; “ this type of consultation is badly needed for the present Sudan”; “I'm really thankful for your positive survey”; “appreciate very much efforts of Tufts” 6 Unless otherwise stated, all analysis was done on the pooled data containing responses from both the face-‐to-‐face and on-‐line surveys. 7 14% of the sample were non-‐responses and are not shown here 8 These two categories; Natural Resource Management and Pasture and Rangelands were based on the respondents’ answers to the open ended question about challenges facing pastoralists. The former refers more to the institutions and mechanisms involved in managing resources while the latter is concerned with the resource itself -‐ pasture and rangelands. 9 The 1992 Organizations of Farmers and Pastoralists Act aimed to establish national and local institutional structures for farmers and pastoralists in Sudan. Pastoralist is defined by this Act as “any person who is dealing with animal husbandry and practicing it by himself”. 10 Tufts/FIC, SOS Sahel and IIED. 2011. Pastoralism Policy Options: Workshop to test and validate the Eastern Africa Training Course for use in Sudan. Validation Workshop Report, May 5th, 2011.
