This article was downloaded by: [University of Toronto Libraries] On: 02 July 2015, At: 08:02 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG
Development in Practice Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdip20
Contextualising emergency responses to famine among Turkana pastoralists in Kenya Brock Bersaglio, John Devlin & Nonita Yap Published online: 02 Jul 2015.
Click for updates To cite this article: Brock Bersaglio, John Devlin & Nonita Yap (2015) Contextualising emergency responses to famine among Turkana pastoralists in Kenya, Development in Practice, 25:5, 688-702, DOI: 10.1080/09614524.2015.1049123 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2015.1049123
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Development in Practice, 2015 Vol. 25, No. 5, 688–702, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2015.1049123
Contextualising emergency responses to famine among Turkana pastoralists in Kenya Brock Bersaglio*, John Devlin, and Nonita Yap
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
(Received August 4, 2013; accepted September 18, 2014) The pastoralism of the Turkana has persisted in the challenging environment of northwestern Kenya for some 200 years. Yet many pastoralists find that they increasingly rely on food relief during droughts and famines. This article contextualises emergency responses to famine among Turkana pastoralists by considering their encounters with colonialism, development, and humanitarian interventions. It uses key informant interviews, participant observation, and content analysis, to analyse the benefits and challenges of a small-scale food relief programme. The article argues that such programmes can weaken the viability of pastoralism, and concludes with considerations for future policy and programming. Le pastoralisme des Turkanas perdure dans l’environnement difficile du nord-ouest du Kenya depuis quelque 200 ans. Or, de nombreux pasteurs constatent qu’ils sont de plus en plus tributaires des secours alimentaires durant les sécheresses et les famines. Cet article contextualise les interventions dans les situations urgentes de famine parmi les pasteurs turkanas en examinant leurs rapports avec le colonialisme, le développement et les interventions humanitaires. À l’aide d’entretiens avec des interlocuteurs clés, l’observation des participants et l’analyse de contenus, il analyse les avantages et les défis d’un programme d’aide alimentaire à petite échelle. L’article soutient que les programmes de ce type peuvent affaiblir la viabilité du pastoralisme et se conclut par des considérations relatives aux politiques et à la programmation futures. Durante aproximadamente 200 años, la ganadería del pueblo turkana ha persistido en el difícil entorno de la Kenia noroccidental. Sin embargo, cada vez más, muchos ganaderos constatan que durante las épocas de sequías y hambrunas deben apoyarse en los programas de asistencia alimentaria. El presente artículo contextualiza las respuestas emergentes de los ganaderos turkana ante la hambruna, a partir de una revisión de sus vivencias con el colonialismo, el desarrollo y las intervenciones humanitarias. Para ello, emplea entrevistas con informantes clave, observaciones participativas y análisis de contenido, con el fin de valorar los beneficios y los retos que conlleva un programa de asistencia alimentaria a pequeña escala. El artículo sostiene que tales programas pueden debilitar la viabilidad de la ganadería, realizando algunas consideraciones que pueden ser pertinentes para el futuro diseño de políticas y programas. Keywords: Aid – Aid effectiveness; Development policies; Civil society – NGOs; Environment (built and natural) – Agriculture; Food security; Labour and livelihoods; Sub-Saharan Africa
Introduction In 2011 “the worst drought in 60 years” struck the Horn of Africa (BBC 2011). As a result of the drought, an estimated four million people in Kenya’s arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL)
*Corresponding author. Email:
[email protected] © 2015 Taylor & Francis
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Development in Practice
689
alone required food relief for survival (WFP 2012). The effects of the 2011 drought in the ASAL were compounded by the fact that some regions, such as Turkana in northwestern Kenya, had experienced five years without the rainfall required to sustain livestock herds and crops (Oxfam 2012). Turkana households lost 50 to 70% of their livestock as a result of the drought, on average. Malnutrition in infants and children rose to 37.4%, the highest level ever recorded in Turkana. While the number of human casualties remains uncertain, at least dozens of people starved to death (GoK 2011; Oxfam 2012). Despite ongoing relief and recovery operations in Turkana since 2011, failing rains once again left hundreds of thousands of Turkana in need of food relief in the early months of 2014 (GoK 2014; Lutta 2014). Currently, some 70% of Turkana are classified as nomadic pastoralists. This means that they rely on the movement of herds to seasonal pastures and wells, strong socio-economic ties with neighbouring pastoralists, and a variety of livelihood adaptation strategies during drought and other lean periods (Eriksen and Lind 2009; Huho et al. 2011; Notenbaert, Thornton, and Herrero 2007; Schilling, Opiyo, and Scheffran 2012). In central Turkana, where the research for this article was carried out, nomadic pastoralism is the primary form of livelihood. Historical evidence suggests that the Turkana migrated to what is now northwestern Kenya over 200 years ago from Uganda, demonstrating the success of their pastoralism in the challenging environment of the ASAL (Ellis and Swift 1988; Lamphear 1992). Yet despite such success, the pastoral livelihoods of the Turkana have frequently experienced states of crisis, contributing to some of the highest poverty levels in Kenya (Demombynes and Kiringai 2011; Eriksen and Lind 2009). Prolonged conflict over land and resources, the failure of state-led and international development interventions, and a general decline in production have weakened the pastoralism of the Turkana, as well as their capacity for adapting to ongoing socio-ecological changes (Eriksen and Lind 2009). Moreover, the legacies of colonialism in eastern Africa continue to shape many of the challenges that pastoralists face in Turkana. In the twentieth century, colonial violence and the imposition of new forms of rule began to undermine the adaptability, mobility, and networks of the Turkana, which had contributed to the viability of their livelihoods (Eriksen and Lind 2009; Hendrickson, Armon, and Mearns 1998; Lokuruka and Lokuruka 2006; Oba, 1992; Ouma, Obando, and Koech, 2012). Keeping these factors in mind, the position we take in this paper is that the legacies of colonial encounters in Turkana continue to impact negatively upon pastoral livelihoods in the region. This occurs in part through humanitarian interventions that neglect herd survival and undermine cultural survival strategies. Yet by no means do we suggest that such programmes lack all merit, that they are coercive, or ill-intentioned. Rather, efforts to contextualise contemporary interventions in Turkana in past encounters with colonialism, development, and humanitarian interventions are essential in trying to understand contemporary crises. Our objectives are twofold. First, we aim to encourage and support efforts to recognise that colonialism, development, and humanitarian encounters have had some devastating impacts upon socio-ecological systems in Turkana. Second, we aim to document local encounters with recent interventions, and consider the implications for policy and programming in emergency responses to famine. Linking the past with the present serves to emphasise the fact that pastoralism is a deeply ideological issue, even in the context of emergencies. Moreover, most Turkana appear to favour interventions that support, rather than neglect or undermine, the viability of pastoral livelihoods. Ultimately, we argue that emergency responses to famine should include some form of restitution. The emphasis should be on restocking household herds and preventing further destitution among pastoralist households, rather than the free distribution of food. Emergency responses should also begin at the first signs of drought, and should involve community consultations and close collaboration with pastoralists.
690
B. Bersaglio et al.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
The paper unfolds as follows. First, we begin with a discussion on the socio-ecological systems of pastoralism in Turkana, introducing essential information on pastoral ecosystems in the region, including a brief discussion on the cultural survival strategies of the Turkana. Next, we review the relevant history of development policies and humanitarian interventions in Turkana. We demonstrate that many contemporary interventions are rooted in, and in some cases perpetuate, colonial encounters that were detrimental to the viability of pastoral livelihoods in Turkana. The third section introduces the case of a small-scale food relief programme in the village of Namoruputh, in central Turkana. This includes a discussion on the study area and methods used during the research. We also present key insights that were offered during key informant interviews and participant observation. Before concluding, we consider some of the implications of the research for future responses to famine in Turkana, particularly in the context of small-scale food relief programmes. The geography, ecology, and history of Turkana The geography of pastoral ecosystems The region of Turkana comprises a total land area of approximately 77,000km2, with an estimated population of 855,399 (GoK 2010). It is flanked by Lake Turkana to the east and international borders with South Sudan and Uganda to the west. It borders Ethiopia on the northern shores of Lake Turkana and the Kenyan district of West Pokot to the south. Most of Turkana consists of low-lying plains and isolated ranges of mountains and hills. From the western escarpment that marks the border with Uganda, the altitude descends from approximately 900m to 369m at the shores of Lake Turkana. There are numerous isolated mountains and hills throughout central Turkana, but a mountain range peaks in Loima at an altitude of approximately 1,800m. Numerous seasonal riverbeds, such as the Turkwel River, occur throughout Turkana, and are utilised by pastoralists as sources of wet season grazing and dry season pasture reserves. Because vegetation growth corresponds to the availability of moisture in the soil, the distribution of forage depends on both elevation and proximity to seasonal rivers (Barrow 1990). While the majority of range land in Turkana is considered marginal, it does contain pockets of high potential that are integral to pastoralist land use patterns (Oba 1992). The hills and mountains, plains and valleys, and streams and rivers all contribute to a highly heterogeneous pastoral ecosystem (Oba 1992). Yet it remains a challenging one that poses many survival risks to humans and non-humans alike. The climate in Turkana is both arid and semi-arid, with average daytime temperatures ranging from 24°C to 38°C. The average annual rainfall ranges from 120mm to 500mm, with long rains occurring from March to July and short rains from October to November (Notenbaert, Thornton, and Herrero 2007). Rainfall is highly variable in Turkana however, particularly in the drier western regions. Both the quantity and distribution of rainfall are critical to the livelihoods of Turkana pastoralists, as annual variations by as little as a few millimetres can significantly impact both the production and distribution of forage (Oba 1992). Historically, highland areas support much richer vegetation growth in comparison to the plains due to higher levels of rainfall. As such, they are used as pasture reserves by pastoralists in addition to seasonal riverbeds. Yet despite the fact that drought has always been a common occurrence in Turkana, records indicate that the frequency of drought has increased from one period every 10 years, as measured in the 1970s, to nearly one period of drought every year, as measured in the early 2000s (Huho et al. 2011). The frequency of multiyear droughts has also increased. Due to the historical prominence of drought, the Turkana have accepted it as a normal part of life. Generally, the pastoralism of the Turkana relies on various strategies aimed at managing local ecosystems for future use. These include the use of large and diverse range lands, the preservation
Development in Practice
691
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
of productive dry season pastures, levels of food stocking that are conducive to mobility, a reliance on wild fruits and other tree foods during drought and lean periods, and low-input gardening such as sorghum (Barrow 1990; Schilling, Opiyo, and Scheffran 2012). In order to capitalise on the diversity of resources in Turkana, pastoralists have also tended to keep multiple species of livestock, such as camels, cattle, goats, sheep, and donkeys. High levels of mobility have also enabled pastoralists to exploit different land areas and resources during different seasons and circumstances, according to the different dietary needs of their livestock species (Oba 1992). For example, cattle may be herded to mountainous regions and riverbeds during the dry season and to the plains during the wet season, whereas the plains typically contain enough forage to sustain camels, goats, and sheep during the wet and dry season (Oba 1992). Because the distribution of vegetation and water differs in both time and space, the movements of pastoralists also vary (Oba 1992). Drought survival strategies among Turkana pastoralists As a result of the historical prominence of drought in Turkana, it is not unusual for pastoralists to suffer catastrophic losses of livestock. The effects of such losses have tended to be particularly acute among already poor households, with smaller livestock holdings relative to others (Ouma, Obando, and Koech, 2012). It is common for Turkana pastoralists to lose up to 50% of their herds during prolonged or recurring drought periods, and it can take as long as ten years for a single household to recover from such loses (Notenbaert et al. 2007). As such, pastoralists have developed both individual and collective strategies for surviving drought and other challenges, as well as for resuscitating their herds after losses. These include diversifying and splitting up herds, redistributing surplus livestock within social networks, forming alliances with neighbouring groups, and rustling livestock belonging to other pastoralist groups (Hendrickson, Armon, and Mearns 1998; McCabe 1990; Ouma, Obando, and Koech, 2012). However, in more recent years, pastoralists have turned to the market and food relief in order to compensate for deficits in food production (Hendrickson, Armon, and Mearns 1998). Food relief programmes that once functioned as temporary assistance for destitute households are increasingly being used as a permanent survival strategy (Oba 1992; de Vries, Leslie, and McCabe 2006). Development policies and humanitarian interventions in Turkana The legacy of colonialism in organised responses to famine Efforts to contextualise contemporary interventions in the colonial and development encounters of the past are essential in trying to understand contemporary crises in Turkana. Until recently, development policies in Kenya regarded pastoralism as an unproductive livelihood that was inherently destructive to the environment (Eriksen and Lind 2009). As a result, public resources were allocated to the high potential farming areas of the former white highlands in central and western Kenya. However, this agrarian bias has also been reflected in the failure of the state to invest in Turkana, among other dry lands in the ASAL. Historically, Christian missions and international organisations have played a prominent role in providing social services to the predominantly rural population of Turkana in light of the void left by the state (Eriksen and Lind 2009). In fact, humanitarian interventions have been conducted in Turkana nearly every year since the early 1990s by such groups. Despite the prominence of humanitarian interventions in Turkana in the contemporary era, their history in the region dates back to the 1930s (Lind 2005; McCabe 1990). The first documented interventions were conducted by the British colonial administration in 1934. Such interventions consisted of programmes that involved transportation subsidies for commercially imported grains, the distribution of free food to registered individuals living in so-called
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
692
B. Bersaglio et al.
paupers’ camps near new town centres, as well as in-kind payments through public workfare projects, such as locust eradication campaigns (Lind 2005). However, the scale of such interventions during the colonial era was small, with minimal coverage (Lind 2005). The scale of humanitarian interventions in Turkana increased towards the end of British colonial rule in 1963, with the first large-scale distribution of food relief conducted by the Kenyan government, in collaboration with Oxfam, in response to a drought in 1960/61 (Lind 2005). Other humanitarian interventions occurred intermittently throughout the 1960s and 1970s, until the Turkana Rehabilitation Project (TRP) began in the late 1980s. The TRP was implemented following an extensive relief operation launched earlier that decade, which responded to a famine caused by a combination of drought and an outbreak of Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia (CCP) – an extremely contagious livestock disease with high morbidity and mortality rates – made worse by a cholera outbreak in northern Turkana (Lind 2005). Partly for logistical reasons, the humanitarian interventions of the 1980s followed the colonial era trend of settling pastoralists in famine camps near town centres for emergency food and medical treatment. At the height of the famine in the early 1980s, some 85,000 Turkana had settled in famine camps in order to receive food relief (Lind 2005). The TRP perpetuated this trend through ongoing collaborative interventions conducted by the government and various international organisations, which pressured the Kenyan government to keep such programmes in operation. As a result, some 45,000 Turkana had permanently settled in famine camps by 1990 (Lind 2005; McCabe 1990).1 As such, the TRP is often criticised for institutionalising the famine camp approach to humanitarian interventions in the ASAL, despite growing recognition that pastoralists had an equal if not better chance of recovering from drought through the cultural survival strategies described above (Hogg 1987; Lind 2005; McCabe 1990). Nonetheless, such interventions continued to draw people away from highly mobile forms of pastoralism by distributing food relief from fixed locales during crisis and non-crisis periods alike. Since 1991, for example, there have been at least four major relief operations in Turkana supported by international organisations. Following the 2011 drought, the World Food Programme (WFP) extended its relief and recovery programme in northern Kenya from May 2012 to April 2015. It is noteworthy that the WFP’s most recent interventions in Turkana rely on measures strikingly similar to those used by the British in the 1930s. For example, the WFP programme distributes free food from fixed locations – no longer called paupers’ or famine camps – and in-kind transfers, such as food-for-work. Despite over 80 years of humanitarian interventions in Turkana, the WFP suggested on its website on 29 July 2011 that prior to the 2011 drought over half the population of Turkana was already dependent on food relief for survival. While such interventions have reduced human mortality rates and provided disincentives for out-migration to other parts of Kenya, they have generally failed to strengthen the viability of pastoral livelihoods and the ability of households to survive and recover from such challenges (Lind 2005; McCabe 1990). In many cases, such interventions have simply added to the already complex set of cultural, social, political, economic, and ecological circumstances that surround pastoralism by neglecting herd survival and undermining cultural survival strategies.
The case of small-scale food relief in Namoruputh Study area and research methods The study area for this research was the village of Namoruputh and its surrounding countryside, with some activities extending to more remote areas of the region. Namoruputh is located
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Development in Practice
693
southwest of the city of Lodwar, in the Loima Division of central Turkana. Namoruputh has a population of approximately 4,478 people, and covers a total land area of 243km2 (GoK 2010). The village proved to be a useful base for the research activities, as its central location within Loima made accessing more remote parts of the countryside relatively easy. This location also made it possible to interview nomadic pastoralists from across Loima, as many travel to or through Namoruputh – a hub for social and economic activities – when migrating with their herds or accessing food relief or other social services, offered primarily by a Christian mission in the village. This article is based on the analysis of the Emergency Response Programme (ERP) conducted by the Christian mission in Namoruputh. The mission has used the village as a base for its development projects and humanitarian operations since the 1980s. For example, during the 1980s and 1990s, the mission’s compound served as a famine camp and centre for emergency response activities. The mission has granted one of the current authors access to the ERP on more than one occasion, including before and after the 2011 drought that impacted much of the Horn of Africa. During the research, the mission’s staff and some of the beneficiaries of its programmes facilitated the research activities by introducing one author in particular to key informants. Moreover, they also facilitated access to important spaces of the mission’s interventions, both within Namoruputh and throughout the countryside. The research process lasted from April to August 2012, with the majority of activities in Namoruputh conducted in April 2012. However, some additional insights were gleaned from previous visits to the research area. The research methods involved qualitative interviews with 15 key informants in Namoruputh, as well as participant observation of ERP activities. For the most part, interviews were conducted in the Turkana language and later translated into English. Of the 15 key informants interviewed, nine were beneficiaries of the mission’s programmes. The remaining six were ERP practitioners. While this may seem a clumsy distinction – for example, practitioners may benefit from humanitarian interventions in the form of careers and salaries, whereas not all targeted beneficiaries end up benefiting from such interventions – the terms are useful for providing some further context to the research findings, as well as for evoking a general sense of the power dynamics at play. When possible, we have also referenced the gender of key informants for similar reasons. In addition to qualitative interviews and participant observation, this paper is based on a discursive analysis of interview transcripts and secondary data derived from the academic literature. In particular, the paper owes a good deal to the collaborative research produced by the South Turkana Ecosystem Project (STEP), which began in the 1970s. More generally, the research has analysed the content of government documents, NGO reports, academic research papers, and news releases dating back to the first large-scale humanitarian interventions in Turkana in the 1980s. Further insights were gained through informal interviews with practitioners, researchers, and beneficiaries of humanitarian programmes in both Turkana and Kenya more broadly beginning in 2009. The Christian mission’s emergency response programme (ERP) The ERP was based in the village of Namoruputh in Loima, and was primarily funded by donors in Canada. At the time of the research, the ERP had received funding to operate from November 2011 to March 2012. It is estimated that the ERP provided some 6,000 individuals with free food on a monthly basis. The food relief was procured in Canada by the mission’s Canadian partners, the Emergency Relief and Development Organisation (ERDO) and the Canadian Foodgrains Bank (CFGB). With the support of ERDO and CFGB, the mission had a budget of CAN$273,736 for ERP operations. Food inputs included 267 tonnes of maize, 54.5 tonnes of split peas, 33 tonnes of Corn Soy Blend (CSB), and 13.5 tonnes of cooking oil. Table 1 contains information on the type and quantity of food distributed to registered households on a daily basis. This includes extra provisions for seniors, those with disabilities, and children considered to be orphans or vulnerable.2
694 Table 1.
B. Bersaglio et al. Monthly distribution of food relief through the ERP.
Criteria Households
Seniors (55+)
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Patients (includes orphans, vulnerable children, and individuals with disabilities)
Units distributed 50kg (1 bag) of maize 10kg split peas 3kg CSB 2L cooking oil 10kg maize 2kg split peas 1L cooking oil Distributed on a weekly basis from the leftovers of the monthly distribution
Local discourses on the ERP: benefits and challenges The following section relays some key insights on the benefits and challenges of the ERP that were offered to us by beneficiaries and practitioners of the programme through key informant interviews. These insights were further contextualised based on the position of one author as a participant-observer in the ERP’s programme activities. Benefits associated with the ERP Generally, all of the key informants interviewed perceived the ERP as having some form of benefit, either to them personally or to their community. Of the nine ERP beneficiaries who were interviewed as key informants, eight claimed to have benefited from the programme directly, mainly through the distribution of food relief. Four beneficiaries were keen to discuss the benefits of the ERP rather than problems with it, with each of these being male. Most commonly, the ERP was credited with: saving lives, reducing anxiety, improving standards of living, creating new spaces for community collaboration, providing fodder for livestock (although the ERP’s food relief was intended for human consumption, many used it to feed their livestock), and enhancing spirituality. When asked to elucidate the benefits of the ERP, beneficiaries tended to reply with statements such as “it reduces the death cases that occurred some years ago” or “it has reduced anxiety and the strains of drought and malnutrition, [especially] in children”. For example, a female beneficiary from the nearby village of Lochor Ekuyen, located east of Namoruputh on a tributary of the Turkwel River, said that food distributions are “helping to reduce malnutrition cases and helps stabilise families”. Most key informants agreed that having a reliable food source close at hand helped to mitigate the strain of drought on households and reduce the anxiety associated with famine. The response of one man, an ERP beneficiary who has since taken up selling firewood in the village of Loima, nicely represents the benefits commonly attribute to the programme. When asked about the benefits of the ERP, he replied: ‘‘The food relief has really helped school going children have supper always in the evening and hence study at night. Those people who have no animals to depend upon now thank God for they were almost losing their lives and [experienced] hunger.’’
While the ERP particularly benefited pastoralists who lost all or most of their livestock by giving them free food, those with livestock also used the programme to their advantage. For example, an elderly lady from the village of Loima said that the “best thing” about food relief is that it “can be used as food for the other animals like chickens, goats, and sheep”. While ERP practitioners were aware that some beneficiaries used food relief as fodder for their livestock, they were not quite as
Development in Practice
695
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
keen to categorise this as a benefit of the programme. In the eyes of the practitioners, food relief was solely intended for human consumption. Other uses, such as using grains as animal fodder or to produce beer, were scorned upon. It is also worth noting that one beneficiary of the ERP praised the programme for “enhancing spirituality” among the Turkana. While this sentiment was not shared by the majority of key informants, it refers to the faith component of the mission’s programming. This is clearly reflected in the perspective of one ERP practitioner that was interviewed, who stated that: ‘‘Our focus is to respond to the need of providing food, providing medicine, providing clean water. However, we do not want to encourage sustained dependency. What we desire to do is to encourage and promote and aid in sustained development for God’s glory. I would like the very same dependency in God who loves me … that they [the Turkana] too would be completely fully dependent on him and not we.’’3
From this perspective, the benefits of the ERP are perceived as both material and immaterial. This is because the teachings of Jesus Christ were promoted among the programme’s targeted beneficiaries in the form of a short sermon or speech prior to the distribution of food relief. The same beneficiary who praised the ERP for enhancing spirituality among the Turkana also suggested that the programme created new spaces for people to come together and share their stories of gain and loss, success and hardship. In the words of this key informant: ‘‘Before they distribute [the food] people receive the word of God. It [the ERP] has also created social ground where people come together and share different challenges and experiences in various places.’’
While only one beneficiary and one ERP practitioner referenced the faith activities of the ERP as a benefit, others agreed that the ERP created new spaces for social interaction. For example, one man from Lokwatubwa suggested that the ERP “has led to the development of places and joint efforts as people work together”. On the one hand, we understand this statement to mean that the ERP created new spaces of meaning and social interaction for pastoralists, which indeed it did. However, the statement was likely meant to reference the development of Western-style infrastructure around the mission’s compound. Schools, clinics, and food distribution centres closely resemble the type of infrastructure associated with cities, rather than the temporary structures made of wood, straw, and animal skins that dot the countryside. Other statements shared by key informants capture some of the perceived benefits of the ERP, such as: “I no longer have to sell my livestock for food”, stated by a man from the village of Loima; “[Food relief] has also improved peoples’ standard of life”, a point made by four of nine beneficiaries; “sometimes it can be used as food for the other animals, such as poultry, goats, sheep, and so on”, a point reiterated by a female beneficiary from Namoruputh; as well as, “through this aid, they [other Turkana] acquire their basic needs, such as food, shelter, and clothing”, suggested by another female beneficiary from the village of Loima. While these benefits are not representative of the pastoralist population in Turkana, or even Loima, they do offer a useful snapshot of some of the different ways that pastoralists benefit from and make use of interventions like the ERP. Moreover, they are generally consistent with the findings of similar research carried out in other parts of Turkana. For example, Bush’s (1995) study of an Oxfam drought relief programme in northern Turkana suggests that the primary positive impact of food relief was the prevention of hunger and malnutrition, particularly among children. Bush’s (1995) study also suggests that food relief contributed to reducing the strains of drought through minimising the sale and slaughter livestock, creating an extra source of income for households that are capable of stockpiling and reselling the food, and creating
696
B. Bersaglio et al.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
new spaces for social collaboration and cohesion. These findings, though somewhat dated, are generally consistent with the ERP case. Challenges associated with the ERP The key informant interviews also suggested some degree of consensus on the challenges associated with the ERP. Of the nine beneficiaries interviewed, five said that they saw problems with the ERP. Moreover, six (three females and three males) argued that the benefits of the programme were distributed unequally among beneficiaries. Interestingly, the six ERP practitioners interviewed were keen to discuss the problems that they associated with the programme, rather than the benefits. The problems of the ERP most commonly referenced by all 15 key informants were the decline of pastoralism as a viable livelihood activity, the increasing sedentarisation of nomadic Turkana, the decline of cultural survival strategies, and (closely related) the Western education of Turkana children. Beneficiaries who saw problems with the ERP were particularly concerned with its impacts upon on the cultural survival strategies of the Turkana, which have been essential to the persistence of pastoralism in the ASAL. The majority of beneficiaries were suspicious of the ERP, as it was seen as an incentive for sedentarisation. For example, the idea that the ERP “has led to the development of places” was referenced on more than one occasion. One male beneficiary from the nearby village of Lokwatubwa stated that the ERP “has reduced the nomadic life, causing people to centralise in one place”. Similarly, other beneficiaries suggested that the ERP has caused people to surrender their reliance on nomadic pastoralism. For example, a female beneficiary from the village of Loima stated: ‘‘Before this aid came [the Turkana] were defending their traditional ways of survival. Even if the aid stops they will use their traditional ways, such as gathering wild fruits, hunting, and so on, to get their food.’’
In general, beneficiaries were particularly wary of the fact that the ERP did not focus on restocking or resuscitating livestock herds, or supporting nomadism. Rather, it neglected herd survival and was perceived as undermining cultural survival strategies. Other beneficiaries argued that, as a result of the programme, the Turkana were less likely to return to cultural survival strategies upon the ERP’s completion. According to one male beneficiary from the village of Lokwatubwa, this was “because their lifestyles have changed”. Instead, people in Namoruputh and the surrounding countryside may “look for other ways [to survive], for example starting a business”. This belief was shared by an ERP practitioner, who stated that “twenty to thirty years ago, people were not used to food relief … they were entirely reliant on animal products, such as meat, blood, and skin … their diet has changed”. Another ERP practitioner reiterated a commonly held belief that emergency responses to famine like the ERP created dependency on Western organisations, rather than cultural survival strategies, for survival. According to this practitioner: ‘‘NGOs foster dependency. They do not adapt programmes to specific contexts and do not take the time to build relationships, awareness, and skills to move the people towards sustainability.’’
In fact, all of the key informants interviewed agreed that pastoralists are increasingly surrendering cultural survival strategies in favour of food relief provided through programmes such as the ERP, although the degree to which this was seen as problematic varied.
Development in Practice
697
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
In many interviews with beneficiaries, new religious practices and modern forms of education were seen to be complicit in distancing the Turkana from pastoralism, nomadism, and cultural survival strategies. Because the ERP offered free food to children who attend local schools, some parents chose to send at least one of their children to school in order to reduce the overall burden on their household. However, most parents were still conflicted about letting their children attend school. This is because the knowledge and values taught at school often contradict local or traditional knowledge and values. According to one beneficiary of the ERP “the children of the community are not learning their traditions because they are now exposed to modernised lifestyles and [are] going to school”. Another beneficiary expressed a similar notion: ‘‘Because [children] have education they want to leave our animals for school. We are saying we want the school to balance both things. I take one boy to school and one remains guarding the animals … People are now used to modern ways, and also the young generations have lost knowledge about what was happening before.’’
According to this key informant, the loss of cultural survival strategies among young Turkana means that “there will be total distress and dying due to hunger”, should Western organisations in general stop their humanitarian interventions in Turkana. Despite this fear, other beneficiaries were confident that the Turkana would simply return to cultural survival strategies when the mission and/or other Western organisations discontinue their programmes. Common reasoning behind such beliefs included: In the words of a female, nomadic beneficiary of the ERP, “because it is through our traditions that we are united”; or “because tradition is law and it governs every bit of behaviour in the community”; as well as the belief that “the only way of survival is our traditional ways of living, hunting, wild fruits collection, rustling [raiding] cattle, and nomadic living”. While distinctions between traditional and modern or Western and non-Western may not be so neat in reality, references to tradition and the past serve as discursive strategies that many Turkana use to express their opinions about what was lost and gained through the ERP. Like the previous discussion on the benefits associated with the ERP, efforts to recognise the challenges and problems that pastoralists associated with the programme can serve as a useful step towards more nuanced and contextualised responses to drought and famine in Turkana. In the case of pastoralists in Namoruputh and the surrounding countryside, the problems that key informants associated with the ERP complement similar studies from other parts of Turkana. For example, a study conducted by Ng and Yap (2011) in Lodwar recorded mixed responses on whether food relief decreased or increased the vulnerability of pastoralists to drought. Some key informants in Ng and Yap’s study argued that food relief erodes the cultural survival strategies of pastoralists, a notion echoed by most key informants in our study. As with the ERP in Namoruputh, the case of Lodwar suggests that emergency responses to famine foster dependency and weaken the viability of pastoralist livelihoods. Additionally, our interviews with key informants in Namoruputh revealed that such programmes can also contribute to conflicts and struggles around issues of gender. Such struggles can have implications for gender inequalities within Turkana society, as well as whether households remain capable of surviving drought and famine, and resuscitating their herds, or not. One male beneficiary said that: ‘‘[Because of the ERP] our women are becoming reluctant. They don’t take duties because they have food at home. They are becoming rude and for now they want their children to go to school. What about the animals?’’
698
B. Bersaglio et al.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Women have historically played a vital role in ensuring that their households are capable of surviving drought and famine in Turkana, particularly through the diversification of livelihood activities (Omolo 2011). As such, it is essential to try to better understand how the gender implications of programmes like the ERP impact upon vulnerabilities to drought. Finally, a study conducted by Reidy (2012) focused on the experiences of a single household in the village of Nakapelewoi in northern Turkana. Reidy argues that the persistence of food relief in Turkana has contributed to dependency on humanitarian interventions for survival among previously nomadic households. This has also corresponded to the decline of pastoralism among Turkana households. For many Turkana, permanently gaining access to humanitarian interventions has corresponded to the loss of pastoralism. While many may be willing to modernise aspects of pastoralism or complement it with other forms of livelihood, the vast majority do not wish to lose it completely (Reidy 2012). Policy considerations and the case for restitution In general, the insights on the ERP that were offered by key informants in Namoruputh complement the results of other similar studies in Turkana. Our study suggests that although drought and famine may be chronic problems in Turkana, emergency responses that prioritise the distribution of free food should not be allowed to persist as chronic solutions (Kilby 1993; Ng and Yap 2011; Reidy 2012). While some key informants in our study recognised that food relief can alleviate immediate burdens of hunger and malnutrition, most emphasised the fact that the ERP has not improved the viability of pastoral livelihoods. Moreover, many argued that it has undermined cultural survival strategies. As such, future responses to famine should strive to strengthen the viability of pastoralism in Turkana. To begin with, there is a need to recognise the importance of incorporating some form of restitution into future programming. All famine response programmes should include a restocking component that seeks to restore the viability of livestock herds among households experiencing losses (Kilby 1993). While the piecemeal distribution of a few animals has proven non-effective, coordinated efforts to distribute smaller species of livestock to destitute households can assist in strengthening the viability of pastoralism, reducing cases of destitution, and mitigating the effects of drought and famine in the long term (Kilby 1993). Alternatives to food relief should also be explored and considered in the design of future policy and programmes, such as the provision of cash grants to destitute households. Such approaches enable people to choose whether they wish to purchase food or resuscitate their herds, or both (Kilby 1993). In comparison to food-for-work or food-for-assets programmes, cash grants are not based on the usually false assumption that there is a surplus in labour among pastoralist households. In fact, there is seldom a labour surplus in pastoralist economies, particularly during drought and other lean periods (Kilby 1993). This point is particularly important to consider in light of the fact that well-meaning programmes such as food-for-work can increase burdens on women. This is because such programmes encourage women to work for food, in addition to their many other livelihood activities, while men manage their herds (Kilby 1993; Omolo 2011). In addition to restitution, alternatives to food relief should carefully consider the contextual realities of Turkana which made food-for-work and other similar programmes unviable options. Another step towards strengthening the viability of pastoralism through emergency responses to famine is to ensure that community members have a voice in the design, implementation, and evaluation of emergency response and restitution programmes, and that their voices are rightfully heard. In the case of the ERP, community members played little to no role in such processes. Creating spaces for participation and collaboration with pastoralists can also provide early
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
Development in Practice
699
warnings of impending droughts or other crises. According to Kilby (1993, 101), “famine-relief policy has to accept that severe drought is a way of life in these areas, and that traditional management mechanisms are both efficient and important”. As such, cultural survival strategies should be incorporated into emergency response programmes through consultations and collaborative initiatives (Ng and Yap 2011). Efforts to include community members in the design, implementation, and evaluation of humanitarian interventions may also be useful for addressing the (un)anticipated gender implications of programmes such as the ERP. Women play a vital role in ensuring household survival during periods of drought and famine, particularly through the diversification of livelihood activities (Omolo 2011). While the gender implications of the ERP were not a focus of our study, steps should be taken to ensure that women – and female-headed households in particular – play an active role in such programmes, as women often experience poor cultural rights to land, water, and livestock (Kilby 1993; Omolo 2011). Female-headed households cannot own livestock if they do not have a son or cannot afford to hire a herder (Omolo 2011). As such, women and children tend to be the first to leave the pastoral sector during times of drought or famine, which ultimately dashes their hopes of recovery (Omolo 2011). Finally, the restitution of pastoral livelihoods through humanitarian interventions should also focus on restoring the position of destitute families within Turkana society, and not simply the free distribution of food. Freely distributing food has been inefficient in strengthening the viability of livestock herds among destitute households or households experiencing increasing losses of livestock and other assets (Kilby 1993; Reidy 2012). If destitution is to be minimised, programmes such as the ERP should focus on the restitution of livestock herds, rather than solely providing nutritional support to households (Kilby 1993). Moreover, the distribution of free food is not productive to the local economy as it does not address the most serious long-term effects of famine, which include destitution and the severing of important socio-cultural and economic ties to the rest of society. Conclusion This article has demonstrated that well-meaning responses to famine in Turkana continue to have negative consequences for the viability of pastoral livelihoods in ways all too reminiscent of colonial approaches to subduing and controlling a predominantly nomadic population. We argue that this is also evident in small-scale responses to famine, such as the ERP, which continue to neglect the importance of herd survival and undermine cultural survival strategies, doing little to restore the position of destitute households within Turkana society. Our discussion has shown that perceptions of pastoralism as backward, out dated, or environmentally destructive are actually rooted in stereotypes that emerged through past colonial and development encounters. Yet contemporary interventions have not progressed far from those of the colonial era, which were predicated upon such false assumptions. We are not arguing that programmes such as the ERP have no benefit to people in Turkana; nor are we arguing that they are coercive or founded upon ill-intentions, as insights from key informants suggest the opposite. However, recognising that colonialism, development, and humanitarian interventions have all contributed to contemporary crises in Turkana is an important aspect of contextualising emergency responses to famine. Moreover, seeking to contextualise emergency responses to famine among pastoralists may be an integral aspect of transitioning towards some degree of reconciliation in Turkana, as well as in progressing towards outcomes that are more ethical and more environmentally and socially sustainable in the long term. In tracing the linkages between the unique cultural, social, political, and economic contexts of Turkana with present inequalities we have demonstrated that the viability of pastoralism remains a
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
700
B. Bersaglio et al.
deeply ideological issue, even in the context of emergencies. While the effects can be polarising, the case of the ERP suggests that some pastoralists do wish to strive towards a balance. Many are in favour of striving to make progress towards more sustainable futures without losing important aspects of their economic and socio-cultural systems of production. Within such discourses however, most Turkana appear to favour interventions that support, rather than neglect or undermine, the viability of pastoral livelihoods. As such, we suggest that emergency responses to famine should include some form of restitution, with the goal of restocking herds and strengthening the viability of pastoralism. However, future programmes should explore alternatives that empower people to choose whether they wish to purchase food or resuscitate their herds or both, such as cash grants. Another step towards strengthening the viability of pastoralism in the context of famine is to ensure that community members have a voice in the design, implementation, and evaluation of interventions, and that their voices are rightfully heard. Moreover, it is imperative that consultations and collaboration seek to address the (un)anticipated gender implications of programmes such as the ERP, as women often experience poor cultural rights to land, water, and livestock. Finally, such programmes should prioritise restoring the position of destitute families within society, and not simply the free distribution of food. In closing, we wish to emphasise the importance of remembering the devastating effects that colonialism, development, and humanitarian interventions have had on the viability of pastoral livelihoods and socio-ecological systems in Turkana. As such, it is worth exploring opportunities to create spaces for conflict management, truth-telling, and reconciliation within various stages of the intervention process. Such efforts may serve to (re)build trust between disaffected and destitute households and well-meaning practitioners in the development and humanitarian industry. Such efforts could certainly benefit from more small-scale, context-specific research, as well as the constant (re)evaluation of policy and programme through ongoing collaboration with members from local communities. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding This work was supported by the Ontario Agricultural College at the University of Guelph under the Craig Pearson International Research Scholarship.
Notes on contributors Brock Bersaglio is a PhD candidate (ABD) in Human Geography at the University of Toronto. John Devlin is an Associate Professor in the School of Environmental Design and Rural Development at the University of Guelph. Nonita Yap is a Professor in the School of Environmental Design and Rural Development at University of Guelph.
Notes 1.
According to Fratkin and Smith (2005, 156), “over 75% of Turkana pastoralists moved to mission centers distributing famine-relief during the droughts in northern Kenya in the 1980s; after the droughts passed, over one half of these people returned to their mobile livestock economies”. Thus, sedentarisation is not always a one-way process, with some pastoralists returning to nomadism if and when conditions are right.
Development in Practice 2.
3.
701
In addition to the distribution of food relief, the mission also collaborates with Kenya’s Ministry of Education and the WFP in order to deliver general food distributions and supplementary feeding programmes to children and youth in schools. The mission is also involved in the provision of education and health services, water relief through the drilling of wells, and some agricultural training, among other initiatives. This quote was given by the ERP practitioner in a promotional video for the mission, which was analysed for the research. It is representative of other insights gained through interviews with the practitioner.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
References Barrow, E. 1990. “Usufruct Rights to Trees: The Role of Ekwar in Dryland Central Turkana, Kenya.” Human Ecology 18 (2): 163–176. BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). 2011. “Horn of Africa sees ‘Worst Drought in 60 years’.” BBC, June 28. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14417545 Bush, J. 1995. “The Role of Food aid in Drought and Recovery: Oxfam’s North Turkana (Kenya) Drought Relief Programme, 1992-94.” Disasters 19 (3): 247–259. Demombynes, G., and Kiringai, J. 2011. The Drought and Food Crisis in the Horn of Africa: Impacts and Proposed Policy Responses for Kenya. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network (PREM), 71, 1-4. Switzerland: The World Bank. de Vries, D., Leslie, P. and McCabe, J. 2006. “Livestock acquisitions dynamics in nomadic pastoralist herd demography: A case study among Ngisonyoka herders of south Turkana, Kenya.” Human Ecology 34 (1): 1–25. Ellis, J., and Swift, D. 1988. “Stability of African Pastoral Ecosystems: Alternate Paradigms and Implications for Development.” Journal of Range Management 41 (6): 450–459. Eriksen, S. and Lind, J. 2009. “Adaptation as a Political Process: Adjusting to Drought and Conflict in Kenya’s Drylands.” Environmental Management 43 (5): 817–835. Fratkin, E. and Smith, K. 2005. “Women’s Changing Economic Roles with Pastoral Sedentarization: Varying Strategies in Alternate Rendille Communities.” In As Pastoralists Settle: Social, Health, and Economic Consequences of Pastoral Sedentarization in Marsabit District, Kenya, edited by E. Fratkin and E. Roth, 155–172. New York and London, USA/UK: Kluwer Academic Publishers. GoK (Government of Kenya). 2010. Kenya: 2009 Population and Housing Census Highlights. Nairobi: Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. GoK (Government of Kenya). 2011. Turkana County: Drought Monitoring Bulletin, June 2011. Nairobi: Ministry of State for the Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands. GoK (Government of Kenya). 2014. Turkana County: Drought Monitoring and Early Warning Bulletin – January 2014. Nairobi: National Drought Management Authority. Hendrickson, D., Armon, J. and Mearns, R. 1998. “The Changing Nature of Conflict and Famine Vulnerability: The Case of Livestock Raiding in Turkana District, Kenya.” International Development Studies Bulletin 27 (3): 17–30. Hogg, R. 1987. “Development in Kenya: Drought, Desertification and Food Scarcity.” African Affairs 86 (342): 47–58. Huho, J., Ngaira, J. and Ogindo, H. 2011. “Living with drought: The case of the Maasai pastoralists of northern Kenya.” Educational Research 2 (1): 779–789. Kilby, P. 1993. “Emergency Relief Programmes for Pastoral Communities.” Development in Practice 3 (2): 92–102. Lamphear, J. 1992. The Scattering Time: Turkana Responses to Colonial Rule. Oxford, UK: Clarendon. Lind, J. 2005. Relief Assistance at the Margins: Meanings and Perceptions of ‘Dependency’ in Northern Kenya. London: ODI. Lokuruka, M., Lokuruka, P. 2006. “Ramifications of the 1918 Turkana Patrol: Narratives by Ngturkana.” Ethnohistory 53 (1): 121–141. Lutta, S. 2014. “440,000 Need Food Relief after Rains Fail.” Daily Nation, May 4. Accessed May 2014. www.nation.co.ke/counties/440000-need-food-relief-after-rains-fail/-/1107872/2303760/-/4g35n0/-/ind ex.html McCabe, J. 1990. “Success and Failure: The Breakdown of Traditional Drought Coping Institutions among the Pastoral Turkana of Kenya.” Journal of Asian and African Studies 25 (3–4): 146–160. Ng, A. and Yap, N. 2011. “Drought Preparedness and Response as if Development Matters: Case Studies from Kenya.” Journal of Rural and Community Development 6 (2): 15–35.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 08:02 02 July 2015
702
B. Bersaglio et al.
Notenbaert, A., Thornton, P., and Herrero, M. 2007. “Livestock Development and Climate Change in Turkana District, Kenya.” Discussion Paper No. 7, Targeting and Innovation. ILRI and VSF-B. Oba, G. 1992. Ecological Factors in Land use Conflicts, Land Administration and Food Insecurity in Turkana, Kenya. London: ODI. Omolo, N. 2011. “Gender and Climate Change-induced Conflict in Pastoral Communities: Case Study of Turkana in Northwestern Kenya.” African Journal on Conflict Resolution 10 (2): 81–102. Ouma, C., Obando, J. and Koech, M. 2012. “Post Drought Recovery Strategies among the Turkana Pastoralists in Northern Kenya.” Scholarly Journals of Biotechnology 1 (5): 90–100. Oxfam. 2012. The 2010–2011 Post Drought Situation Analysis for Northern Kenya – With Special Reference to Turkana and Wajir Counties. Nairobi: Oxfam. Reidy, E. 2012. “You will not die when your Animals are Shining: ‘Aid-waiting’ in Turkana.” Development 55 (4): 526–534. Schilling, J., Opiyo, F. and Scheffran, J. 2012. “Raiding Pastoral Livelihoods: Motives and Effects of Violent Conflict in North-western Kenya.” Pastoralism 2 (25): 1–16. WFP (United Nations World Food Programme). 2012. Protracted Relief and Recovery Operations – Kenya 200294. Nairobi: WFP.
