Grassroots participation in land regeneration
through the Landcare approach
Joseph Tanui, Mieke Bourne & Joan Cheronoh
World Agroforestry Centre

Defining Landcare – Landcare International
 As a MOVEMENT ... Landcare is a movement of
autonomous farmer-led organizations.
 As an APPROACH ... Landcare is an extension approach/
method that rapidly and inexpensively disseminates
agroforestry practices.
 As a BODY OF KNOWLEDGE ... Landcare is a set of
appropriate land management practices.
 As an ETHIC, a PHILOSOPHY ... Landcare is an ethic, a
philosophy that enables individuals and communities to
approach agriculture in a nurturing way.

Sri Lanka
Nigeria
South
Pacific
Indonesia

Examples of Landcare programs

Landcare Australia
 Landcare is an amazing grass roots movement
that harnesses individuals and groups under the
ethic of caring for the land.
 Landcare is a voluntary community movement of
about 4500 groups across Australia
 National Landcare program initiated in 1989.
About 40% of Australian farmers are involved in
Landcare
 Landcare in Australia initiated as a community
response to large scale land degradation.

Landcare Principles South Africa
 Integrated Sustainable Natural Resource Management
addressing natural resource decline
 Community based and led natural resource management within
a participatory framework
 The development of sustainable livelihoods for individuals,
groups and communities utilizing empowerment strategies
 Government, community and individual capacity building
through targeted training, education, and support mechanisms
 The development of active and true partnerships between
governments, Landcare groups and communities, NGOs, and
industry
 The blending together of appropriate upper level policy
processes with bottom up feedback mechanisms

Institutional Challenges for African Farming
Break-down in traditional & modern systems of natural
resource governance
Current approaches to extension are reductionist focusing on
technical and component specific solutions, leaving many issues
unaddressed
Barriers to income generation and investments of rural
communities are poorly addresses by current development
strategies
Few mechanisms for cooperation among communities and
district institutions (local government, development
organizations, etc.) on land management
Potential of District as nexus for development & innovation is
very under-exploited

Uncontrolled communal grazing

Addressing Institutional Challenges
 Ensuring participation, ownership and demand-driven
development
 Linking biophysical, governance and socio-economic factors
in formulating solutions (need for multi-institutional
strategies)
 Seeking sustainability through processes that link livelihoods
and conservation (understanding & managing trade-offs)
 Enhancing the role of local government in legitimizing
district level processes
 Need for historical perspective and strategy to build on past
experiences

Methodology
Multi-Level Action Research & Learning
Program Level:
Analysis &
Synthesis IPGs
of Cases (Best Practice)
Program-Level
Planning of Research
Community Level: & Facilitation Processes
Re-
Problem Planning PM&E
Diagnosis /
Appreciative Planning Implementation Implementation
Inquiry

Entry point based interventions

Innovation platforms
Kapchorwa Landcare Chapter : District level innovation Platform
 Formation of a village representative
committee drawn from Landcare
members in 50 households per village,
initially in 4 villages
 Committee representative, and village
head elected to the parish level
 Parish level committee members
constitute the community’s
representation to the district Landcare
chapter, with inclusion from NGOs,
CBOs.
 Members also include, Local government,
Action Aid, Alliance of civil society
organization, Sebeny Elders Association,
Community based organizations ( TUFA,
CIFA, Tuikat Watershed)

Negotiating support
Issues: Opportunities:
- Boundary demarcation - Co-management law reinforcing community
- Access & use to park resources claims
- Local UWA-community conflict - Opportunities for increased forest protection
- Illegal logging with blame placed through greater local involvement (re-definition
on clearing for agriculture of “custodians”)
- Physical & sexual abuse - Collective action a pre-condition for eliminating
scapegoats used by guards
- Common interests by communities & national UWA
Figure 3: Community discussing protected area
boundary

Local byelaw reforms
Emerging Outcomes
 Development of bylaws and
documentation of a participatory bylaw
making process
 Local government involvement in
legitimizing the process and supporting
its implementation
 Adoption of soil and water
conservation technologies and practices
in the area
 Initiatives to scale out the documented
process in neighbouring communities
Figure 2 : A sustainable environment

Evaluation results

Evaluation Results

Evaluation Results

 THANKS
Thank you