1. Terms of Reference

2. Progress on Terms of Reference

2.1 Botswana

2.2 Lesotho

2.3 South Africa

Itinerary

Annex 1: Work Plan for 1998/99: Botswana

Annex 2: Botswana Team: Note on Integrative Data Analysis And Reporting

1. Terms of Reference

To visit each of the collaborating institutions at the University of Botswana, the National University of Lesotho and the National Botanical Institute, Cape Town, and other relevant authorities to:

• ascertain the progress currently being made on project activities
• ascertain if any problems are foreseen in implementing future plans, especially those that might be overcome with assistance from the Project Coordinators at CAZS
• assist, as far as possible in the time available, with the formulation of a livestock self-recording scheme.

 

2. Progress on Terms of Reference

<2.1 Botswana

2.1.1 Meeting with Mr E G Ring, EU Delegation, 2 November, 09.00 to 10.00 hrs

(i) Mr Ring explained that, as a member of DG VIII, he did not receive information on DG XII financed activities unless he requested it. He thought that this loophole in EU management is a point to be addressed and welcomed the offer made by Jaap Arntzen to provide him with details of progress, copies of reports, etc. Invitations to attend workshops would also be favourably received.

(ii) Mr Ring asserted that he was happy to accept proposals for development project activities, which fall within DG VIII. If large-scale, they must have the support of the GoB but less expensive projects might be financed through Country Budget Lines, over which he had a greater measure of autonomy.

(iii) The name of Chris Toulass (Wildlife Authority) was mentioned as a possible source of information on wildlife census.

(iv) Mr Ring asked that a copy of the latest INCO-DC project list be sent to him by CAZS.

 

2.1.2 Plenary Session of University of Botswana (UB) members, 2 November, 11.00 to 12.15 hrs.

(i) Teaching commitments and leave periods prevented all except Jaap Arntzen, Raban Chanda and Lapologang Magole from attending this meeting.

(ii) Copies of the Work Plan for 1998-99 (see Annex 1), Analytical and Reporting Structure and Distribution of Tasks (see Annex 2) were received for forwarding to the CAZS Project Coordinators.

(iii) Jaap Arntzen gave a brief account of project activities to date which corresponded to the report of September, 1998.

(iv) The UB members felt that there is an urgent need to discuss analytical issues among the participating institutions. There is need for sufficient common ground in the analysis to successfully model the interactions. CAZS is requested to initiate a discussion among all centres to exchange ideas of a) the framework of study for each subject area; b) methodologies and analytical approaches. UB's views are attached (see Annex 2), and comments from partner institutions are welcome. The UB team would like to contribute towards the further development of the analytical methods.

(v) The socio-economics group were happy with the sampling method, collection of data and statistical techniques for analysis. Data input into the computer had already taken place but the data had not been analysed.

(vi) The UB members felt that progress had not been as rapid as it might have been and Jaap Arntzen volunteered his services to improve matters if this was acceptable to CAZS.

(vii) Jaap Arntzen regretted the delays in submitting financial accounts in EU approved format due to the misplacement of the required format and time taken by the UB Bursary Department. This should not happen again next year. A letter from Gareth Wyn Jones to the Bursary Department copied to the Head of Department pointing out the need for timeliness would be welcome.

(viii) Regarding the proposed 'livestock self-recording scheme', it was not possible for me to meet the person most directly involved, Gubungano Tacheba, as he was on leave, nor was it possible for me to visit the field. A visit by Dr Ian Robinson early next year to supervise this aspect of the work is imperative if meaningful data is to be collected in 1999.

(ix) The Botswana team has an interest in incorporating more information on indigenous knowledge into the project. CAZS is requested to look into the possibility of contributing expertise on this within the context of existing obligations on milestones and deliverables.

(x) UB would welcome the participation of University of Wales, Bangor, MSc students in project implementation.

(xi) The UB team regretted not having been able to access the web site. The photos of team members (passport size) requested for inclusion on the site would be mailed to Bangor soon.

(xii) UB felt that there is a need to develop within the project the publication guidelines discussed at the Gaborone Workshop, and to aim at the publication of a book as a project output.

 

2.1.3 Meeting with Raymond Kwerepe, Ministry of Agriculture, 2 November, 14.15 to 15.00 hrs.

(i) Raymond Kwerepe confirmed his interest in the progress of the project but explained that all contributions made by Ministry staff were 'unofficial' and could only be made in areas of common interest.

(ii) He explained the aims and purposes of the Botswana Range Inventory and Monitoring Programme, covering two large areas in the north and south of the country. This project is nearing the end of its two-year term, but it is expected that a second phase might be funded by DFID following a re-tendering process.

 

2.1.4 Meeting with Otlogetswe Totolo, 2 November, 15.30 to 16.00 hrs

(i) OT identified the following hindrances to progress:

• The high cost of hiring UB vehicles made the acquisition of a project vehicle highly desirable. This is likely to be provided by NORAD.
• Consequent on the delay in recruiting a suitable Research Fellow and pressure of time was the failure to carry out soil analyses at UB or Sebele.

• Water samples taken June/July had been analysed for a range of characteristics. Bacterial counts were not taken in view of the impossibility of transferring samples from the field to the laboratory within 24 hours. It would be useful if CAZS could look into the possibility of procuring suitable field equipment for this to be undertaken. Samples from one pan, amounting to about 10% of the total number, had not been analysed due to shortage of time.

• It had been hoped that satellite imagery would be available, and CAZS was asked to look again at the possibility of procuring such on an affordable basis.

(ii) OT explained that he planned to repeat samplings of soil and water on a wet/dry season basis throughout the project.

 

2.1.5 Meeting with Raban Chanda, 2 November, 16.15 to 16.30 hrs

Raban had few significant problems and was happy with manpower and analytical methods. He indicated that it might be necessary to return to the field for 'gap-filling' once the analysis of data in hand had been completed.

 

2.1.6 Meeting with Moffat Setshogo, 3 November, 08.30 to 09.00 hrs

Again there were few problems but satellite images would be appreciated, if possible.

 

2.1.7 Meeting with Happy Fidzani, 3 November, over luncheon

I passed a copy of the methodology and rationale for livestock self-recording to Happy Fidzani.

 

2.2 Lesotho

2.2.1 Meeting with Peter Smith, British High Commissioner, 5 November, 12.00 to 12.30 hrs

Note: Though I reached Maseru at 09.00 hrs after being collected at the airport by None Mokitimi, it was not possible to meet as a group until 13.00 hrs. Accordingly I took the opportunity of meeting Peter Smith.

(i) A new Minister of the Environment has been appointed, Mrs Kabi, whose powers are considerable. Formerly, the Prime Minister's Office fulfilled a cross-cutting role, influencing all relevant ministries (Agriculture, Water, etc). However, it appears that some of the powers held by the Prime Minister's Office have been devolved.

(ii) On 10 November, Peter Smith will visit the Pelaneng-Bokong RMA carrying with him a cheque for Rand 113,000 (Pounds Sterling 12,000). This he has found from British High Commission funds as a one-off grant. The money will be used to part-fund a budget prepared by NUL for the components shown below:

Technical Assistant for Field Surveys:
(socio-economic and bio-physical) - 100%
Travel to and from experimental sites - 50%
Computer costs - 50%
General office and map costs - 100%.

(iii) Peter Smith leaves Lesotho for another post in January 1999.

(iv) Professor Cedric Milner, CAZS, is due to visit Lesotho soon on Dolen Cymru business.

 

2.2.2 Meeting with None Mokitimi, Makoala Marake and Chaba Mokuku, 5 November, 13.00 to 15.15 hrs

(i) A hard copy of 'Task 0' was passed to me. An e-mail copy had already been sent to Bangor.

(ii) The desk-top study, concerning the identification and analysis of environmental policy papers, is about to commence. Two Assistants will be appointed (possibly using British High Commission money) to find relevant material in the possession of Ministries, etc. A week will be allocated to this initial task. Analysis of information and the synthesis of summaries will continue into 1999. Once these are prepared, a workshop will be convened to which Ministry, NGO and University staff will be invited. Consideration will be given to inviting other collaborating centres.

(iii) Two study areas, one within the Pelaneng-Bokong RMA, the other outside, have been demarcated. On the socio-economics side, surveys relating to the inter-relationships between peoples' livelihoods and rangeland conditions have yet to be carried out. This will be possible on the appointment of the Technical Assistant. On the bio-physical front, relationships between soil and plant communities will be studied with particular reference to a search for indicators of degradation.

The team has had plots in the RMA for about 10 years and already has firm ideas about invasive species (karoo scrub, etc) and the degradation of the boggy areas. Maybe the non-RMA areas will have to have new plots established.

(iv) Prospects for the launch of the livestock self-recording scheme have not progressed since Ian Robinson's visit, and the team has not as yet composed the lexicon of terms or records sheets. They fear that there will be local resistance and that enquiry will be regarded as intrusive. However, they will go ahead using the British High Commission money for the Technical Assistant and base the record sheets on the South African version. They will choose respondents from among those farmers who understand the nature of the work. The scale of the study will not be large. I passed a copy of my Eritrea report on recording to Marake.

(v) Passport photos of the team will be posted to Bangor shortly for inclusion on the web site.

(vi) They are looking to acquire satellite images over the past 15 years (see 2.1.4 (i) above).

(vii) The unfortunate civil unrest in Lesotho prevented Juan Pablo Martinez Rica from coming in August as scheduled, and he is now due in December or January. There may be some problems with the security of the weather station he is due to commission but steps have been taken to minimise the risks.

 

2.2.3 Visit to Study Area with Makoala Marake and Chaba Mokuku, 6 November, 08.30 to 15.30 hrs

The visit included a rapid appraisal of the area with particular emphasis on degraded areas and areas of tree establishment.

 

2.2.4 Summary Meeting with Makoala Marake and Chaba Mokuku, 6 November, 15.30 to 16.00 hrs

NUL members were asked to voice their concerns but, other than fears for the security of the weather station, they were pleased with progress to date.

 

2.3 South Africa

2.3.1 Meeting at National Botanical Institute, Kirstenbosch, 16 November, 09.00 to 11.00 hrs

(i) The members of the team that I met were: Timm Hoffmann, Ashia Petersen, Rich Rohde, Simon Todd and Janet Allsopp. The responsibilities of these and others (Anastelle Solomon, Hayley Rodkin, Colleen Vogel, Claire Kelso, Nick Allsopp, Peter Carrick, Peter Grubb, Mervyn Cloete, Brian Harne, David Richardson) were explained by Timm Hoffman.

(ii) All team members reported good progress in each of their subject areas. In response to my request that actual and potential difficulties be identified, the only responses were as follows:

• Timm Hoffman considered that not enough money for salaries and too much for travel and subsistence had been budgeted. Bangor was asked to investigate the possibilities of virement between the two budget headings.

• Rich Rohde believed that, as he travelled regularly between Edinburgh and Cape Town, he might fulfil a liaison role and would welcome the chance to visit Bangor.

(iii) Timm Hoffman reported that an application had been submitted by the Paulshoek community for funding under a local government scheme to carry out improvements to infrastructure, including the establishment of a community garden scheme and repairs to the local dam. This has been approved in principle, but final acceptance of the budget (Rand 209,000) is awaited.

(iv) GIS images of the project area are well advanced and currently show major geological features, roads, boundaries, boreholes, wells and streams. Information on the location of cattle camps could be included.

(v) The self-recording scheme, managed by Mervyn Cloete (a Paulshoek inhabitant), is proceeding very well.

(vi) Rick Rohde has acquired 1940s photos of several locations in the Paulshoek area, and has recently taken shots of the same scenes. Comparison of the two images reveals that little change has taken place over the past 50 years, though admittedly most if not all the shots were taken near to the village and may not be representative of less-populated parts of the project area.

 

3. Itinerary

Note: Project activities shown in bold.

 

12 October -	Depart Bangor for Pretoria
1 November -	Travel from Pretoria to Gaborone Overnight Gaborone Sun Hotel
2 November -	Meetings with European Delegation, Ministry of Agriculture and University of Botswana staff Overnight Gaborone Sun Hotel
3 November -	Meetings with University of Botswana staff Depart Gaborone for Pretoria
5 November -	Travel from Pretoria to Maseru Meetings with University of Lesotho staff Overnight Maseru Sun Hotel
6 November -	Visit to Study Area Meetings with University of Lesotho staff Depart Maseru for Pretoria
13 November -	Depart Pretoria for Cape Town
16 November -	Meetings with National Botanical Institute staff
26 November -	Depart Cape Town for Pretoria
1 December -	Depart Pretoria for Bangor

Annex 1

Annex 1 is not yet available

Annex 2

SUBSISTENCE RANGELAND RESEARCH PROJECT (SRRP)

NOTE ON INTEGRATIVE DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING

Background

The Botswana team has been discussing the best way of analysing the data collected from surveys and physical fieldwork. We had a major concern regarding the integration of the findings. With a team of our size, it is quite easy to end up with many publications on interesting details of rangelands, but these may not link up and leave many gaps. The same may happen at the regional scale, hampering regional comparisons and modelling. We need a constant focus on the integration and multidisciplinary nature of the project to avoid such problems. The focus is provided in the two diagrams, the two research questions and the research objectives of the research proposal. Consider the following of the research proposal:

• the project’s priority is on integration of biophysical and socioeconomic work by resolving two questions (figure 1; research proposal):

1. how does the state of the rangelands influence rural livelihoods?


2. How do people’s activities infleunce the state and productivity of rangelands?

The project’s objectives are the following:

1. Determine the impact of the state of rangelands on components of rangeland productivity (wildlife, veldproducts, grazing/water, crops)

2. Determine the contribution of productivity components (wildlife, gathering, livestock, crops) on rural people’s welfare

3. Assess the policy impact on resource access and use by different groups in society (subgroups based on income, gender, ethnicity, educational level and location)

4. Assess the impact of the variability in biophysical processes (mostly rainfall) on rangeland state, productivity and rural welfare

The choices we made since the start of the project are indicated in italics and apply to Botswana. As the concluding section of the Botswana Task Zero report adopts the same approach, our fieldwork data would build upon and elaborate the literature findings.

Data analysis and reporting structure

The Botswana team proposes that this same focus will guide data analysis and reporting. and a proper comparison of the countries of field study. This would mean that we distinguish five main blocks of analysis/publication:

 

I. STATE OF THE RANGELANDS with the following subsections:

I.1 State of the rangelands
I.2 Perceived State of the rangelands
I.2 Determinants of the state of the rangelands
I.3 Trends in the state of rangelands in time and in space

 

II. RANGELAND PRODUCTS AND PRODUCTIVITY

II.1 Supply of products and their regeneration
II.2 Demand for and use of rangelands products
II.3 Over-)Utilisation-regeneration
II.4 Actual and potential use and productivity

 

III. RURAL LIVELIHOODS

III.1 Sources of livelihood (rangelands: gathering, wildlife and livestock, crops and non-agriculture) and relative importance by stratum (gender, income, ethnicity, location and education)
III.2 Trends/changes in sources of livelihoods
III.3 Resource allocation, threshold and returns by activity

 

IV. RESOURCE ACCESS AND USE

IV.1 State of resource access: land, water, wildlife and distance to resources
IV.2 Trends in resource access
IV.3 Impact of government policies on resource access
IV.4 Resource use practices and impacts on the state of rangelands

 

V. INTEGRATION OF FINDINGS

These blocks of analyses could be five main reports too. In each block/report, we have to make sure that as many arrows of the diagrams are covered and that, where applicable, new ones are being added.

This approach may be more difficult in organisational terms, but it will give us substantial benefits on the longer run (modelling, data base). If we agree to adopt this approach, we must assign analytical and writing tasks to individual staff members

 

DISTRIBUTION OF TASKS FOR DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT WRITING

REPORT	SUBSECTION	Sub-subsections	SOURCE OF DATA
I. STATE OF THE RANGELANDS	I.1 State of rangelands	Vegetation, wildlife etc.	Secondary sources
	I.2 Perceived state of the rangelands		Surveys
	I.3 Physical Determinants	Field layer vegetation Soils Woody species and browse Water yields and quality	Biophysical field data Same Same Same
	I.3 Trends in rangelands	Trends in time Comparison of different sites along the transects	Time series from transects Comparison of different sites along the transects
II. RANGELAND PRODUCTS AND PRODUCTIVITY	II.1 Supply and Regeneration	Grass, veldproducts, browse, wildlife.	Biotic analysis
	II.2 Demand and use	Domesticated animals, veldproducts, wildlife	Surveys
	II.3 (Over-)utilisation		Cf. Physical and sociodata
	II.4 Actual and potential use		Cf. Physical and sociodata
III. RURAL LIVELIHOODS	III.1 Sources and importance of livelihoods	Source of livelihoods Relative importance by stratum	Both surveys + interviews
	III.2 Trends in livelihoods	Sources of livelihoods Changes in importance	Both surveys + interviews
	III.3 resource Allocation, thresholds and return by rangeland use		Both surveys + interviews
IV. REOURCE ACCESS AND USE	IV.1 State of Resource access: water, land, wildlife, distance		Secondary literature, interviews and surveys
	IV.2 Trends in resources access		Secondary literature + surveys
	IV.3 Impact of government policies on resource access		Policy evaluation + surveys
	IV.4 Rangeland use practices and state of the rangelands		Both surveys