Social outcomes of community-based rangeland management in post-socialist Mongolia: Influential factors and favorable institutional designs

Includes bibliographical references.2015 Summer.Community-based rangeland management (CBRM) has been proposed as a promising option to reduce rural poverty and resource degradation in post-socialist Mongolia. To date, research on CBRM in Mongolia has been limited to small samples and case studies within one or two ecological zones. Results have been mixed, with some studies showing favorable outcomes and others no effect or negative impacts of CBRM. Few studies have directly compared the outcomes of formally organized CBRM with management by traditional herder neighborhood groupings, or attempted to identify the causal mechanisms that explain variations in CBRM outcomes. Using data from 142 pastoral groups and 706 member households across 36 counties (soum) in four ecological zones, I assessed social outcomes of CBRM organizations in comparison with non-CBRM groups, explored causal mechanisms underlying these social outcomes, and examined the effects of external facilitation on institutional design of formal CBRM organizations. I found that formal groups had more information sources, stronger leadership, greater knowledge exchange, cooperation and more rules. Members of formal groups were more proactive in addressing resource management issues and used more rangeland practices than traditional neighborhoods. However, the two types of groups did not differ on most livelihood measures and had a weak difference in social capital. Four factors, access to diverse information sources, leadership, knowledge exchange and resource management rules, significantly facilitated the effect of formal organization on pastoralists’ traditional and innovative rangeland practices, proactive behavior and social networks. Importantly, information diversity had a triggering effect on other three mediating variables creating a sequential chain of information diversity leadership knowledge exchange rules. This ordered chain of four mediators explains the mechanisms through which formal organization leads to comparatively greater social outcomes. I also found that these mediated effects on members’ proactive behavior and social networking varied among ecological zones. Donor facilitation approach significantly influenced CBRM group attributes and external environments, but did not affect institutional arrangements. Small group size, homogeneous interests, and heterogeneity of well-being predicted higher levels of intermediate outcomes including information diversity, leadership, and income diversity. Institutional arrangements such as the presence of sanctions, group-devised rules, frequent meetings, and recording documents increased cooperation, rules and information diversity. Similarly, access to training and local government support provided a favorable external environment for achieving intermediate outcomes. Regarding ultimate social outcomes, group characteristics such as dependence on livestock, homogeneity of interests and leader legitimacy were critical for increasing social capital, livelihoods, rangeland practices, and proactive behavior. Frequent meetings of group leaders had the greatest influence on ultimate social outcomes. Local government support and ongoing donor support were associated with increased trust and norms of reciprocity, rangeland management practices, proactiveness, and per capita livestock holdings. Overall, group attributes and external environment had a greater influence on social outcomes of pastoral CBRMs in Mongolia than institutional arrangements. I found strong evidence that formal CBRM is leading to increased social outcomes across Mongolia. Many CBRM facilitation strategies were shown to be adequate for fostering social outcomes of the pastoral groups. Early achievements of individual household level variables such as rangeland practices and behavior appeared to be “fast” variables that respond quickly to new institutions. In contrast, building social capital and reaching livelihood improvement may be “slow” variables that require time and larger scale changes. Globally, the promising case of CBRM in Mongolia may encourage mobile pastoral communities elsewhere to cooperate on the sustainable management of their resources. However, as this study showed, careful facilitation is needed to achieve intermediate outcomes, and consideration of the distinct dynamics of local resource systems is a necessary prerequisite for achieving increased social outcomes

Contemporary mobility of herders in central Mongolia

Includes bibliographical references.Presented at the Building resilience of Mongolian rangelands: a trans-disciplinary research conference held on June 9-10, 2015 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.Social-ecological changes occurring in recent years have complicated herders' migration patterns, and because of rangeland climate variability, nomadic movement patterns have changed. The aim of this study was to determine how the present movement patterns of herders situated in different steppe regions along the road infrastructure corridor of central Mongolia have been affected by the intensification of community-based natural resource management activities and household livelihood levels, and to identify how herders adapt to those changes in their movement practices. The number and distance of herders' movements increased between 2010 and 2011, depending on regional geographical location and community-based natural resource management activities. In particular, household income and the number of livestock herders owned determined how far they moved. In the period 2010-2011 in central Mongolia there was a trend of movement from the western aimags to the forest steppe and from the desert steppe to the steppe and forest steppe, across administrative borders. Herders have a variety of ways to cope with social-ecological change which demonstrates the basic need for developing location-specific policies when establishing movement regulations and implementing risk reduction measures

Co-Produced Research Supports Pastoralists to Pursue Transformative Social and Ecological Change in Rangelands

Over the last two decades, pastoralists and researchers have formed powerful alliances to transform how we think about and do research-with-action in rangelands. These alliances promote faster learning about problems and their potential solutions by bringing together diverse partners and their different ways of understanding important issues. They also ensure research is fully relevant to real problems, so it supports pastoralists to act on both old and new issues that they face. While these approaches can be contentious when perspectives and experiences do not align, team members are finding them transformative, if they commit to working together over the long term. Based on a long history of participatory research approaches in the social sciences, these alliances are now inter- and trans-disciplinary, spread throughout the sciences. This paper uses six case studies to explore the experience of teams who have used this research-with-action approach in the rangelands of Kenya, Tanzania, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Spain and the US. These teams developed and implemented this approach not in halls of academia, but in equal pastoralist-researcher partnerships by creating full co-learning and democratized processes together. These teams then purposely built the capacity of all stakeholders to act together to promote desired change. The case studies integrate diverse knowledges at multiple scales into collective ‘learning and doing’ teams composed of pastoral peoples, policy makers, scientists, business people, and others. This process ensures a broad range of understandings and interpretations form the foundation of the actions and adaptations taken by actors across landscapes and scales. The approach contributes to the resilience of place-based social-ecological systems in rangelands by avoiding top-down, one-size-fits-all approaches. Uniting these ideas and practices has allowed research-with-action to become truly transformative, by accelerating the capacity of all stakeholders to learn and act more effectively

Do formal, community-based institutions improve rangeland vegetation and soils in Mongolia more than informal, traditional institutions?

Includes bibliographical references.Presented at the Building resilience of Mongolian rangelands: a trans-disciplinary research conference held on June 9-10, 2015 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.Since the 1990's, herding communities across Mongolia have established over 2000 community-based rangeland management (CBRM) organizations to improve livestock grazing management and reverse perceived declines in rangeland (grassland) productivity. Here, we compare the vegetation and soils of rangelands managed by these formal community-based herder groups (CBRM) with those managed by informal traditional neighborhoods (non-CBRM) in four ecological zones across Mongolia. A companion study shows CBRM used both traditional and innovative rangeland management practices more often than traditional neighborhoods. We hypothesized that this should then result in better rangeland vegetation and soils in CBRM-managed than non-CBRM managed rangeland. We sampled vegetation and soils in winter pastures around 143 livestock camps or water points in soums (counties) with and without CBRM management. We explicitly controlled for grazing intensity by sampling plots along grazing gradients at 100, 500 and 1000 m from these impact points. At each 50 x 50 m plot (n=428) we sampled standing biomass, plant cover, basal gap, species richness, forage quality, and soil and site characteristics. We also compared paired time series of MODIS NDVI data in counties with and without CBRM organizations from 2000-2014 to quantify changes in length of the growing season, and current and previous season greenness (a proxy for biomass accumulation). We then analyzed all data using general linear models and χ2 tests. CBRM had surprisingly few and subtle impacts on vegetation and soils in Mongolia's rangelands, whether measured in the field or by remote sensing, compared with areas managed by more traditional neighborhood groups. Some CBRM pastures supported more litter biomass, plant connectivity and less soil erosion, and a lower abundance of grazing tolerant or annual plant species than non-CBRM pastures in some ecological zones. CBRM management appears to modestly improve vegetation condition in the steppe than other ecological zones. At the soum level, we could see no differences in the length of the growing season, current season greenness or current and previous season greenness of the vegetation over the 15 years from 2000-2014. We did find, however, that herding families that participate in CBRM groups hold more livestock, sometimes twice as many, in 3 of the 4 ecological zones. This suggests that CBRM management may be having more impact on pastures than our data show, since these pastures can support more livestock without losing rangeland vegetation abundance and soil retention capacity

Cross-cultural communication of knowledge and study results: a case for Mongolia

Presented at the Spring 2014 Center for Collaborative Conservation (https://collaborativeconservation.org/) Seminar and Discussion Series, "Collaborative Conservation in Practice: Innovations in Communities around the World", April 8, 2014, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. This series focused on the work that the CCC's Collaborative Conservation Fellows have been doing across the Western U.S. and around the world.Tungalag Ulambayar is a PhD candidate working under guidance of Professor Maria Fernandez-Gimenez in the Forest and Rangeland Stewardship department of WCNR. She grew up in Southgobi of Mongolia raised by her grandparents who were Gobi nomadic herders. Tungaa studied in Moscow State University after Lomonosov where she received her undergraduate degree in Philology. She has over 20 years of work experience in rural development and environmental conservation including community forestry and rangeland management. Tungaa has MA degree from International University of Japan in International development field. Before joining Colorado State University, she worked as Team Leader for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction at United Nations Development Programme in Mongolia.Recorded speech.Tungaa's fellowship project aimed to support the outreach objectives of the Mongolian Rangelands and Resilience (MOR2) project of Colorado State University by implementing two activities. The first was to create a nation-wide radio program targeted to the learning needs of pastoral herders and the second was to contribute to increasing research capacity of Mongolian students to conduct studies using MOR2 data. Her radio program communicated preliminary research results of MOR2 regarding effects of collaborative management practices of formally organized community groups on their livelihoods, social relations as well as resource conditions contributing to their resilience to climate change. The project was implemented for a 4-month period starting from mid-June, 2012. Proposed activities took place both in Mongolia and U.S.A in collaboration with the Mongolian National Radio, individual young researchers based in Mongolia and the CSU MOR2 team members. Lessons learned from the fellowship project include that scientists should provide feedback to local communities after their survey taken in their places. In Mongolian condition summer time is not very good time to broadcast educational program on radio. Designing short-term training requires extra careful consideration of content in order to prevent incomplete understanding of the key topics

Following the Footsteps of the Mongol Queens: Why Mongolian Pastoral Women Should Be Empowered

On the Ground • Mongolian pastoral women have essential roles as caregivers to their families, keeping their household members well fed, adequately dressed, and clean. However, when they are forced to lead their households alone, female-led families are more vulnerable because of limited assets and restricted access to information and knowledge exchange. • When women are entrusted with leadership of their communities, they demonstrate equal leadership qualities, reputation, and governance processes over rangeland management with their male counterparts. • Women leaders display superior trust building among their community members when compared with the men. • We recommend empowering women by increasing their leadership roles in formal community organizations.The Rangelands archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform March 202

What matters most in institutional design for community-based rangeland management in Mongolia?

Includes bibliographical references.Presented at the Building resilience of Mongolian rangelands: a trans-disciplinary research conference held on June 9-10, 2015 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.This study tested the effect of institutional design principles on social outcomes of evolving pastoral institutions in post-socialist Mongolia. Using data from 77 community-based rangeland management (CBRM) groups and 392 member households, we examined the effect of donor facilitation on institutional design. We found that donor facilitation approach significantly influenced group attributes and their external environment, but not institutional arrangements. The study confirmed that small group size, homogeneous interests, and heterogeneity of well-being are important group characteristics that predict higher levels of information diversity, leadership, and income diversity. Institutional arrangements such as the presence of sanctions, group-devised rules, frequent meetings, and recording documents increased cooperation, rules, and information diversity. Similarly, access to training and local government support provided a favorable external environment for increasing social outcomes. Furthermore, group characteristics such as dependence on livestock, homogeneity of interests, and leader legitimacy were critical for increasing social capital, livelihoods, sustainable rangeland practices, and proactive behavior of members. More frequent meetings of leaders were the most influential for these outcomes. Local government support and available donor support were associated with increased trust and norms of reciprocity, sustainable rangeland management practices, proactiveness, and livestock holdings. Lastly, group attributes and external environment influenced social outcomes of pastoral CBRMs in Mongolia more than institutional arrangements

What explains positive social outcomes of community-based rangeland management in Mongolia?

Includes bibliographical references.Presented at the Building resilience of Mongolian rangelands: a trans-disciplinary research conference held on June 9-10, 2015 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.Community-based rangeland management (CBRM) has been proposed as a promising option to reduce rural poverty and resource degradation in Mongolia. However, results have been mixed. Studies about the factors influencing CBRM success have been limited. We explored the mechanisms underlying social outcomes of Mongolian CBRM. The study revealed that access to diverse information, leadership, knowledge exchange and rules facilitated the effect of formal organization on pastoralists' traditional and innovative rangeland practices, proactive behavior, and social networking. Importantly, information diversity had a triggering effect on the other three facilitating variables. This chain of four mediators collectively increased the effect of the formal organization on the above social outcomes. We also found that ecological zone had a moderating effect on the relationship between formal organization and members' proactive behavior and social networking

MOR2 organization profile survey data

Those listed as authors substantially designed instruments and data collection protocols, directly supervised data collection and collected data, designed database, and oversaw data entry and quality checking.Additional acknowledgements (people listed assisted with field data collection, data entry, and establishment of on-line data archive): The following individuals helped with data collection or data entry in Mongolia: Amanguli, Ariuntuya, Azjargal J., Battuul B., Enkhmunkh B., Erdenechimeg B., Gantsetseg A., Narantuya N., Nomin-Erdene B., Odgarav J., Pagmajav D., Solongo Ts., Tamir L., Unurzul A., Uuganbayar B., Vandandorj S. The following individuals guided establishment of on-line data archive at Colorado State University: Tobin Magle, Mara Sedlins, Daniel Draper.Organization level social data were collected from 142 pastoral groups.The following organizations provided funding for data collection, entry or analysis: National Science Foundation BCS-1011801, The World Bank, US AID, American Association of University Women, Open Society Institute, Center for Collaborative Conservation, Colorado State University

MOR2 household survey data

Those listed as authors substantially designed instruments and data collection protocols, directly supervised data collection and collected data, designed database, and oversaw data entry and quality checking.Additional acknowledgements (people listed assisted with field data collection, data entry, and establishment of on-line data archive): The following individuals helped with data collection or data entry in Mongolia: Amanguli, Ariuntuya, Azjargal J., Battuul B., Enkhmunkh B., Erdenechimeg B., Gantsetseg A., Narantuya N., Nomin-Erdene B., Odgarav J., Pagmajav D., Solongo Ts., Tamir L., Unurzul A., Uuganbayar B., Vandandorj S. The following individuals guided establishment of on-line data archive at Colorado State University: Tobin Magle, Mara Sedlins, Daniel Draper.Household level social data were collected from 706 households.The following organizations provided funding for data collection, entry or analysis: National Science Foundation BCS-1011801, The World Bank, US AID, American Association of University Women, Open Society Institute, Center for Collaborative Conservation, Colorado State University