Dynamics of Institutional Arrangements and
their Adaptation to Socio-economic and
Ecological Challenges in Pastoral Areas of
Northern Kenya
Caroline Kanyuuru
Livelihood, Gender and Impact Meeting
Nairobi, 1 October 2015

Content
• Introduction – Background, problem statement, objectives
• Methodology
• Results – (per paper)
• Conclusions
• Recommendations
Thesis link
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11295
/90151/Kanyuuru_Dynamics%20of%20institutional%20arrang
ements%20and%20their%20adaptation%20to.pdf?sequence=
1

Introduction
Background
• Kenyas’ drylands make up 84% of Kenya’s total
terrestrial land surface (Barrow and Mogaka, 2007)
• 80% of the country’s eco-tourism interests, 60% of the
nation’s livestock (Barrow and Mogaka, 2007) and
support about 10million people (CBD/UNEP/IUCN,
2007).
• Management of the environment has rested on
customary institutions to make and uphold rules and
sanction breach of those rules
• The governance approach needs to be flexible and
have the capacity to respond to environmental
feedback (Resilience)

Problem statement
• Customary institutions have weakened (group
ranch sub-division, change from community
to private) a significant threat to sustainable
natural resource management (IUCN, 2011).
• A general lack of understanding of the value
of the rangelands in entirety (Oba and Kotile,
2001).

Objectives
• Overall objective
 To understand dynamics of pastoral IA and how this is
influencing value of ecosystem services benefits
• Specific objective
 Identify existing IA and their change over time
 Measure direct and indirect values of pastoral
ecosystem services benefits in different IA (ESVA)
 Assess how external actors are facilitating IA dynamism
 Assess how IA are adapting to socio-economic and
ecological factors challenging development.

Methodology
Study area

Cont..
• Purposive (IA) and random sampling (Village,
HH)
• Sample size 150 HH- (Israel 2009)
• Data collection - Qualitative (FGDs and KI) and
quantitative (HH survey)
• Data mgt & analysis (MS Access, MS excel,
SNA, STATA, SPSS,)
• Economic valuation (TEV framework)

Paper 1
Existing Pastoralists’ Institutional
Arrangements and their Dynamic State in
the Northern Rangelands of Kenya
• Authors – Kanyuuru Caroline, Mburu John,
Njoka Jesse

Conceptual framework
Exogenous factors
(i.e. Land tenure)
Hybrid institutions
Customary
institutions

IA managing resources 2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Forest Mgt Land mgt Livestock & pasture
mgt
Water Mgt Wildlife Mgt
Institutionalarrangements
Resource management
Government &NGOs
Conservancy board
Group Ranch committee
Elders only

IA managing resources 2012
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WambaWest
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Kinna
MakurianGR
WestGateCC
Forest Mgt Land Mgt Livestock & pasture
Mgt
Water Mgt Wildlife Mgt
Institutionalarrangments
Resource management
Government &NGOs
Conservancy board
Group Ranch committee
Elders only

Cont..
Land tenure influence
County Area
(Km2)
Land
tenur
e
CC
(2012)
Laikipia 9,500 GR 4
Sambu
ru
21,00
0
GR 7
Isiolo 25,60
5
Trust
land
3
Principle component analysis
Resource IA mgt
2012
IA mgt
2002
IA mgt
2002
Forest (2002) -0.16 0.398 0.080
Forest (2012) 0.198 0.080 -0.040
Land tenure (2002) 0.137 -0.101 -0.011
Land tenure (2012) 0.219 -0.020 -0.018
Livestock&pasture
(2002)
-0.17 -0.011 0.845
Livestock&pasture
(2012)
0.211 -0.084 0.041
Water (2002) -0.006 0.413 -0.428
Water (2012) 0.212 0.023 -0.030
Wildlife (2002) -0.011 0.397 0.164
Wildlife (2012) 0.182 0.061 0.021

Perceptions on IA performance
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Transparency Participatory Equity Market creation Partnership Effectiveness
Activeinstitutionalarrangements
Socio-economic indicators of a robust institutional arrangement
Elders
Group ranch committee
Conservancy board

Paper 2
Economic Value of Ecosystem Services
Benefits across Different Pastoralist
Institutional Arrangements in the
Northern Rangelands of Kenya
• Authors - Kanyuuru Caroline, Mburu John,
Njoka Jesse

Conceptual framework (TEV)
Elders
Group ranch committee
Community conservancy board
Indirect
value
Direct
values
Aggregate
value

Sources of household revenue
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Camels
Cattle
Chicken
Donkeys
Goats
Goat skin
Gum arabica
Maize
Milk
Sheep
Sugar
Tomatoes
Maize flour
Proportion of households trading
Generalsourcesofhouseholdrevenue
No of HH (2002)
No of HH (2012)

Livestock and livestock products sales
(2002, 2012)
-
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
Kinna Makurian GR West Gate
Livestockandlivestockproductrevenues
Study sites
Livestock & livestock products sales 2012
Livestock & livestock products sales 2002

Households employment revenue
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Kinna Division Makurian GR West Gate CC
Permanentandcasualemploymentaveragerevenues
Study sites
Average revenue (permanent)
Average revenue (casual)

Direct (HH revenue) and indirect
(communal revenue) values
-
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
Kinna Division Makurian GR West Gate CC
Aggregateeconomicvalues
Study sites
indirect value
Direct value

Effect of IA
Direct value Coef. Std. Err. t P>t [95% Conf. Interval]
Kinna (Elders)
Makurian (Group Ranch) -24095 48252.39 -0.5 0.618 -119640 71449.52
Westgate (Community
Conservancy) -150558 41182.37 -3.66 0.000 -232104 -69013.2
Age -240.857 749.0791 -0.32 0.748 -1724.11 1242.395
Gender -66874.8 28443.76 -2.35 0.0200 -123196 -10553.3
hhsize 8914.272 30191.65 0.3 0.768 -50868.2 68696.76

Paper 3
Assessing External Actors Roles in Facilitating
Institutional Dynamism and Socio- economic
and Ecological Development in the Northern
Rangelands of Kenya
• Author – Kanyuuru Caroline, Mburu John,
Njoka Jesse

Conceptual framework
State and non state actors
Socioeconomic and ecological
factors
Customary
institutions
Hybrid
institutions

External actors present
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Government
NGOs
Private ranches
Private sector
Religious organization
Research institutions
Government
NGOs
Private ranches
Private sector
Religious organization
Research institutions
Government
NGOs
Private ranches
Private sector
Religious organization
Research institutions
EldersonlyGroupranchcommittee
Community
conservancyboard
Level of engagement
Externalactorsoperatingindifferentstudysites

Addressing socio-economic and
ecological factors
Government and NGO support
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
Ecological Economic Social
Actoraddressingchallenges
Category of challenges
Government
NGOs
What government should
prioritize
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Notimportant
Important
VeryImportant
Notimportant
Important
VeryImportant
Notimportant
Important
VeryImportant
Kinna Makurian
GR
West Gate
CC
Categoryofchallenges
What government should prioritize in the study sites
Social
Economic
Ecological

Paper 4
Adaptation of Institutional Arrangements
to Management of Northern Rangelands
of Kenya
• Author – Kanyuuru Caroline, Mburu John, Njoka Jesse
• Published – Environment, Development and
Sustainability
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-015-
9718-y

Conceptual framework
Customary
institutions
Hybrid
institutions
• Co-management
• Livelihood
diversification
Resilience

IA addressing socio-economic and
ecological factors
2002 2012

Difference in IA in 2002 and 2012
(Pearson Chi-square)
Factors challenging development Institutional arrangement
(IA2002, IA2012)
Social
Insecurity, negative politics, cattle rustling, low
education levels, land tenure challenges and negative
culture practices
(χ2=28.567, p=0.001)
Economic
Low infrastructure, low financial services, low
entrepreneurial skills, lack of livestock markets,
middlemen and untapped ecotourism
(χ2=27.6159, p=0.001)
Ecological
droughts, disease, floods, pasture degradation and
water degradation.
(χ2=32.575, p=0.000).

Conclusion
• IAs managing resources in NK are changing and
existing land tenure may have an influence on the
change
• IAs are embracing a co-management approach
overtime
• Number of external actors present were higher
where IA had a semi formal structure (GR&CC)
• Co-management offers pastoralist more
opportunity to diversify livelihood

Recommendations
• In drafting the National land policy-
community land aspect, the government
should consider a co-management approach
• It offers rangeland management capacity
• Provides opportunity for livelihood diversification
• These are two features of resilient
ecosystems.

This work is financed by The Nature Conservancy
It is implemented in a partnership with University of Nairobi,
Northern Rangelands Trust
Acknowledgements

The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI.
better lives through livestock
ilri.org