Comparative Analysis of CBRM Cases in Kenya, Ethiopia and Tunisia

In various countries, development and conservation organizations and national policymakers have been experimenting with ways of applying the community-based natural resource management approach to the unique social and biophysical characteristics of pastoralist rangeland settings, with mixed results. We carried out comparative case study research on community-based rangeland management (CBRM) in a variety of settings in Ethiopia, Kenya and Tunisia with the objective of identifying what kinds of strategies and methods work in which social and ecological contexts. We used an “options by context” approach guided by a research protocol that includes key variables and descriptors for characterizing the implementing organization’s approach to CBRM and important contextual factors that may vary from place to place and affect the implementation and success of the approach. The commonalities among our cases include: i) community governance and management structures for rangeland management; ii) the geographic rangeland unit which those structures are managing, and iii) a development agent that is supporting the community. We found that differences among the cases in the challenges faced and their degree of success depended at least as much on certain aspects of social and biophysical context as it did on the exact nature of the approach being implemented by the development agent. For example, the extent to which there are effective natural or social borders that provide the rangeland community with some degree of separation from neighbours is crucial; without such landscape features, the design principle of clearly defined rights to a clearly defined piece of land belonging to a clearly defined community is difficult to implement in any straightforward way. In some pastoral rangeland contexts, conventional community-based approaches need substantial modification to be effective in contexts with the highest levels of spatio-temporal variability, mobility and openness of the landscape

Supporting community-based natural resource management in pastoralist societies in East Africa to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals

This is the final published report.Sustainable pastoralism provides a wide range of economic, social and ecological value. However, the sustainability of this global food system has been undermined by systemic low investment. The effects of inappropriate development policies, growing population pressure and escalating economic inequalities are all being exacerbated by the increasing climate variability over the past decades. In recent years, community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) has emerged as a potential solution to these challenges. Rangeland areas may be managed more effectively by enabling communities to develop more sustainable livestock practices, restore the quality of rangelands and ecosystem services, improve the quality and market value of livestock, and ultimately aim to increase food security while reducing social inequalities. Such community-based management of economically, socially and ecologically important areas of land therefore addresses at least nine Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Here, we outline the challenges facing pastoral systems, how CBNRM provides a potential solution, and the link between pastoral CBNRM and the SDGs. Our collaborative and interdisciplinary research network aims to provide context-driven evidence for pastoral CBNRM that will ultimately underpin co-designed sustainable land management strategies.University of Exeter’s Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF

Positive association between Brucella spp. seroprevalences in livestock and humans from a cross-sectional study in Garissa and Tana River Counties, Kenya

Background Brucella spp. is a zoonotic bacterial agent of high public health and socio-economic importance. It infects many species of animals including wildlife, and people may get exposed through direct contact with an infected animal or consumption of raw or undercooked animal products. A linked livestock-human cross-sectional study to determine seroprevalences and risk factors of brucellosis in livestock and humans was designed. Estimates were made for intra-cluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) for these observations at the household and village levels. Methodology The study was implemented in Garissa (specifically Ijara and Sangailu areas) and Tana River (Bura and Hola) counties. A household was the unit of analysis and the sample size was derived using the standard procedures. Serum samples were obtained from selected livestock and people from randomly selected households. Humans were sampled in both counties, while livestock could be sampled only in Tana River County. Samples obtained were screened for anti-Brucella IgG antibodies using ELISA kits. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed effects logistic regression models with the household (herd) and village being used as random effects. Results The overall Brucella spp. seroprevalences were 3.47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.72–4.36%) and 35.81% (95% CI: 32.87–38.84) in livestock and humans, respectively. In livestock, older animals and those sampled in Hola had significantly higher seroprevalences than younger ones or those sampled in Bura. Herd and village random effects were significant and ICC estimates associated with these variables were 0.40 (95% CI: 0.22–0.60) and 0.24 (95% CI: 0.08–0.52), respectively. In humans, Brucella spp. seroprevalence was significantly higher in older people, males, and people who lived in pastoral areas than younger ones, females or those who lived in irrigated or riverine areas. People from households that had at least one seropositive animal were 3.35 (95% CI: 1.51–7.41) times more likely to be seropositive compared to those that did not. Human exposures significantly clustered at the household level; the ICC estimate obtained was 0.21 (95% CI: 0.06–0.52). Conclusion The presence of a Brucella spp.-seropositive animal in a household significantly increased the odds of Brucella spp. seropositivity in humans in that household. Exposure to Brucella spp. of both livestock and humans clustered significantly at the household level. This suggests that risk-based surveillance measures, guided by locations of primary cases reported, either in humans or livestock, can be used to detect Brucella spp. infections in livestock or humans, respectively

The challenges of community-based natural resource management in pastoral rangelands

Recognizing that community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) approaches have had mixed success in pastoral rangelands, this paper compares five case studies—two from Kenya, two from Ethiopia and one from Tunisia—to identify aspects of social-ecological context that affect the implementation and success of CBNRM in pastoral settings. Data for each case was collected following a common protocol. Among the characteristics that emerged from our study as important were socio-political and biophysical characteristics of the wider landscape within which the community’s rangeland territory is located and the extent to which that territory is circumscribed by some combination of other land uses and land tenure types, major political boundaries, and physical landscape features. The analysis of these cases suggests that where pastoralist communities coexist in large, open rangeland landscapes, rather than a narrowly community-based approach, natural resource management interventions need to be explicitly multi-level and horizontally flexible

Association between Rift Valley fever virus seroprevalences in livestock and humans and their respective intra-cluster correlation coefficients, Tana River County, Kenya

We implemented a cross-sectional study in Tana River County, Kenya, a Rift Valley fever (RVF)-endemic area, to quantify the strength of association between RVF virus (RVFv) seroprevalences in livestock and humans, and their respective intra-cluster correlation coefficients (ICCs). The study involved 1932 livestock from 152 households and 552 humans from 170 households. Serum samples were collected and screened for anti-RVFv immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies using inhibition IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Data collected were analysed using generalised linear mixed effects models, with herd/household and village being fitted as random variables. The overall RVFv seroprevalences in livestock and humans were 25.41% (95% confidence interval (CI) 23.49–27.42%) and 21.20% (17.86–24.85%), respectively. The presence of at least one seropositive animal in a household was associated with an increased odds of exposure in people of 2.23 (95% CI 1.03–4.84). The ICCs associated with RVF virus seroprevalence in livestock were 0.30 (95% CI 0.19–0.44) and 0.22 (95% CI 0.12–0.38) within and between herds, respectively. These findings suggest that there is a greater variability of RVF virus exposure between than within herds. We discuss ways of using these ICC estimates in observational surveys for RVF in endemic areas and postulate that the design of the sentinel herd surveillance should consider patterns of RVF clustering to enhance its effectiveness as an early warning system for RVF epidemics