The Strategic Use of Private Property in the Kenyan Rangelands: Investigating the Tenure-Use Gap. A case study of Laikipia County

Transcription

1 The Strategic Use of Private Property in the Kenyan Rangelands: Investigating the Tenure-Use Gap A case study of Laikipia County The World Bank Land and Poverty Conference, Washington, D.C. Christopher Wade and Dr. Jon D. Unruh March 22, 2018

2 Acknowledgement of Funding and Institutional Affiliation The funding for this research was provided by: The MCRI Project of the Indian Ocean World Centre at McGill University ( ) and the Department of Geography, McGill University

3 Laikipia County Approx. 9,666 square kilometers Intersection of fertile/arable areas and drier, more arid parts of the country Rainfall gradients ranging from mm/year (driest in east + north) Land Tenure Mosaic 37% large-scale ranches 32% used by pastoralists/grazing 21% small-scale farming 10% other (References: LWF 2013, Georgiadis et al. 2007a, Graham 2012, Kinnaird and O Brien 2012; Map: Source Flintan, Broken Lands, Broken Lives ) 37%: Large-scale ranches 32%: Pastoralist grazing 21%: Small-scale farming (10%: Other)

4

5 The Laikipia Rangelands

6

7 Barley, Sorghum, and Wheat

8 Wildlife stable or increasing while declining elsewhere

9

10 (Map Source: Kenya Land Survey)

11 A key question: (In the context of Laikipia) what is someone going to do with three acres?

12 One example of how Laikipia s land categories are portrayed Map Source: Sundaresan and Riginos 2010: p19

13 Map Source: Letai 2011, Mpala Research Centre Another Map of Land Tenure Categories

14 Map Source: LWF 2013

15 Cadastral map showing extensive land subdivision (Map Source: Land Survey of Kenya)

16 Production on two different types of tenure

17 (Map Source: Kinnaird and O Brien 2012)

18 Conventional Private Property Theory: Evolutionary and Economic Perspectives Envisages property on a continuum leading on an evolutionary path to private property as an end state (Toulmin and Quan 2000) Emphasizes replacement, anticipates that private property will supplant or replace other forms of property Does not anticipate that land users will make use of private property in tandem with pluralistic notions or common property traditions Expectation of remaining confined within the boundaries of private property Economic: Private property as collateral taking on a parallel life (De Soto 1999)

19 The Adaptation Paradigm (Migot-Adholla et al.,, 1994; Bruce and Migot-Adholla 1994, Unruh 2006) Pluralistic approach to land tenure (legal pluralism, cultural pluralism) Emphasizes the agency and innovation of land users Use of creativity to solve land use dilemmas In an adaptive approach, norms of property may be combined, and amalgamated, to meet land user needs or overcome obstacles Hybrid properties may emerge due to being juxtaposed and appearing in close proximity to each other Innovation on the part of land users

20 Background to Hybrid Arrangements Extensive land subdivision (Successive Periods of Drought/Changing Tenure) Opportunities to use land Land in various tenure categories in close proximity to each other Mobile production utilizing areas scaled for small-holder stationary crop agriculture (Key studies: Kohler 1987, Flury 1988, Huber and Opondo 1995)

21 Grazing Agreements: Large-scale properties and pastoralist livestock owners/land users

22 Large-Scale Ranching Operation

23 Hybrid Property Rights System An informal amalgamation of various forms of property Incorporates different scales of private property Does not eschew common property after adopting private property Uses land that is zoned as nominally private in ways that reflect common property perspectives and traditions Accessing private large-scale ranches formally and informally

24 Hybrid Property Rights Formation: What are the key elements? Varying and divergent cultural and pluralistic notions of private and common / communal Subdivided land, plots of various small sizes (3-6 acres) Possibility of buying subdivided plots in multiple locations (with strategy) Absentee Land Ownership / Lack of Ownership Representation (Exclusion) Underutilized land of various categories surrounding and in close proximity Communal land in Laikipia and other surrounding counties Access to Formal Properties (including through Grazing Agreements to Formalize Access)

25 Two pathways: formal vs informal

26 Private Property/Commons Scenario The land tenure scenario that has been described here is a hybrid mixture of land tenure practices involving the combination of individual rights and collective use arrangements (Lavigne Delville 2003: p90). Private property is employed to perpetuate a commons scenario. Land users can modify rules of the game to serve specific objectives (Unruh 2006, citing Berry 1997 and Cleaver 2003). Institutional bricolage" (Benjaminsen and Lund 2003: p5, referring to Cleaver 2003: p11-25) legal benefits of private, statutory land tenure combined with advantages of the flexibility inherent to common property traditions and mobile livestock production.

27 How do pastoralists narrow the tenure-use gap? Purchase of titled, subdivided land in strategic locations (Van der Brink et al. 1999: property rights that have an economic value ) Informal Formalization (Benjaminsen and Lund 2003) Purchasing small-holder plots Renting/leasing grazing by entering into grazing agreements with large scale land owners, conservancies, land buying companies, and business owners Combining notions of common and private property to find a solution to the land use dilemmas present in the landscape

28 What does this case study tell us? Private property does not replace the approach that employs common property (Adapation Paradigm) Multiple forms of property rights can be effectively combined to create a hybrid form of property rights. The results of land subdivision are not always predictable. Enabled by mobility, land users are innovative and have agency adapt to circumstances.

29 What does this case study tell us about land subdivision? There are scales past which subdivision becomes economically unviable. Extensive subdivision on an inappropriate scale can unhinge land tenure from land use. Rather than clarifying user relationships, the subdivision process may introduce dynamics of fuzzy property rights leading to increased access for some, but also contested claims. Is it a judicious use of semi-arid and arid rangelands resources to allow extensive subdivision without limits on scale, location, or planning of landscape level dynamics?

30 Conclusions? Fairy tales as analogies for land management: Humpty Dumpty (amalgamation is possible, but extremely complex) Goldilocks Principle ( not to little, not too big, just right ) (Keller 1999) Land can get stuck in transition from extensive to intensive and thereby locked out of formal use channels, if fragmented at scales inappropriate to the environment/agro-ecological gradient It is challenging to return subdivided land to a consolidated form through formal channels