June 1999

INCO-DC Project No. ERBIC18CT970162

Global Change and Subsistence Rangelands in Southern Africa: Resource Variability, Access and Use in Relation to Rural Livelihoods and Welfare

Proceedings of 2nd Joint Workshop

held in Paulshoek, Namaqualand, South Africa,

7th to 12th March 1999

CONTENTS

List of Participants

Executive Summary

1. General Introduction and Welcome

2. General Update on the Project

3. Session 1

3.1 South Africa

3.2 Botswana

3.3 Lesotho

4. Session 2

4.1 Work Package 4. Resource management and policy analysis

5. Work Package 6. Project coordination and reporting

5.1 Coordinating and Communicating

5.2 The way forward

5.3 Reporting

5.4 Installing First Class Client on your computer

5.5 Standardisation of Data Acquisition

6. Evening Session

6.1 Field Visit - Paulshoek

6.2 Grazing impacts on plants and animals

6.3 Grazing and cultivation impacts on soils

6.4 Fenceline at Slootjiesdam

6.5 Moedverloor - Land Care Project

- Rehabilitation Project

7. Modelling and Integration

7.1 Data Modelling in Paulshoek

7.2 Ecological/Climate Modelling in Lesotho

7.3 Modelling and reporting on the relationships with Project Figures

1 and 2 in the light of the Technical Annex

7.4 Lesotho's Comments on Project Figures 1 and 2

7.5 Botswana's Comments on Project Figure 1

7.6 South Africa's Comments on Project Figure 1

7.7 Project Figure 3

7.8 Similarities and Dissimilarities between the Sites

8. pm Session

8.1 Three key issues

8.2 Modelling

9. Policy Analysis

9.1 General Introduction

9.2 Comparison between the 3 Countries

10. pm Coordination Session

10.1 Publishing

10.2 Reporting back to the EC

10.3 Discussion on the possible production of a book

10.4 Tying up loose ends - Coordination

11. International Links

12. Publications

13. Finance

14. Beyond 2001 - Comments

15. Concluding Remarks

INCO-DC Project No. ERBIC18CT970162

Global Change and Subsistence Rangelands in Southern Africa: Resource Variability, Access and Use in Relation to Rural Livelihoods and Welfare

Proceedings of 2nd Joint Workshop

held in Paulshoek, Namaqualand, South Africa

7th to 12th March 1999

List of Participants

 

Name	Organisation	Tel	Fax	e-mail
Allsopp, Janet	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Allsopp@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Allsopp, Nicky	ARC-Range & Forage Institute	021 959 3373	021 959 2266	Nallsopp@uwc.ac.za
Arntzen, Jaap	University of Botswana	267 3552524	267 356591	arntzenj@noka.ub.bw
Carrick, Peter	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Carrick@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Cloete, Eric	Leliefontein Communication Directorate	0251 22011	0251 22174
Cloete, Mervyn	Member of Paulshoek Community/NBI	02792 3504
Friend, Andrew	Institute of Terrestrial Ecology	44 131 445 4343	44 131 445 3943	afriend@tsuga.giss.nasa.gov
Hoffman, Timm	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Hoffman@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Majoro, Moeketsi	National University of Lesotho	266 340601(w) 266 322668(h) 851674(mobile)	266 340000	mm.majoro@nul.ls
Marake, Makoala	National University of Lesotho	266 340 601(w) 266 340 374(h)	266 340000	mv.marake@nul.ls
Martinez Rica, Juan Pablo	Pyrenean Institution of Ecology (CSIC)	34 976 575883	34 976 575884	JPMR@IPE.CSIC.ES
Mobbs, Deena	Institute of Terrestrial Ecology	44 131 445 4343	44 131 445 3943	dcmo@ite.ac.uk
Mokitimi, None	National University of Lesotho	266 340247(w) 266 340391(h)	266 340004	nmokitimi@nul.ls

 

Name	Organisation	Tel	Fax	e-mail
Petersen, Ashia	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Petersen@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Rodkin, Hayley	Programme of Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS)	9462888/ 0834002383	7612266	Hrodkin@sog.uwc.ac.za
Schultink, Ger	Resource Development, Michigan State University	517-353-1903		Schultin@pilot.msu.edu
Setshogo, Moffat	University of Botswana	267 3552602	267 3552784	Setshogo@noka.ub.bw
Simon, Lee	University of the Western Cape	9593740	9592266	Lsimon@uwc.ac.za
Solomon, Anastelle	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Solomon@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Solomon, Ayele*	NBI/Michigan State University	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Solomo@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Todd, Simon	NBI	021 762 1166	021 797 6903	Todd@nbict.nbi.ac.za
Wyn Jones, Gareth	CAZS, University of Wales	044(0)1248 363737 044(0)1745 870204	01248 364717	gwj@minfford.demon.co.uk
Young, Einir	CAZS, University of Wales	44 1248 383709	44 1248 364717	e.m.young@bangor.ac.uk

INCO-DC Project No. ERBIC18CT970162

Global Change and Subsistence Rangelands in Southern Africa: Resource Variability, Access and Use in Relation to Rural Livelihoods and Welfare

Proceedings of 2nd Joint Workshop held in Paulshoek, Namaqualand, South Africa, 7th to 12th March 1999

Executive Summary

According to the guide books, Kamieskroon is one of the most scenic towns in Namaqualand and its name is derived from the Kamies Mountain Range. Tk'immie is the Nama word for huddle or bunch together. In other words, where the mountains bunch together, Kamieskroon is the crown.

The Kamieskroon Hotel was the excellent venue selected by the South African team for the 2nd Joint Workshop and we thank them for a well-organised and very interesting time. The intense timetable reflected the urgency to make the most of our short time together.

The visit to the Paulshoek community and rangelands, and the exchanges with the Paulshoek Development Forum, were invaluable. They provided the opportunity for the Botswana and Lesotho teams to make comparisons with their own sites. The Lesotho team was particularly amazed that anybody could eke a living from such a barren landscape. We were reminded that our research is a long-term commitment and cannot, unfortunately, address the immediate concerns of the community on issues such as water, energy and transport. However, we all hope that, in time, our findings will have a positive impact on the livelihoods of Paulshoek and the other communities.

The proceedings of this Workshop is a collection of notes as an aide memoire for the participants and to give other team members who could not be present a taste of the exchanges and discussions that took place. (Annex 1 is the impressive field notebook prepared by the South African team for the field visit). It is not intended as a comprehensive report of our work, and the detailed research findings of each team will be reported and published in due course. Meanwhile, if further information is required on any topic, we, the coordinators at Bangor, or the individual country teams can be contacted.

The following points emerged:

• Considerable progress is being made in all areas by all the country teams, and data gathering is and will continue
• Communication between partners and individuals within and between countries continues to be a challenge. The communication between coordinators and project leaders is well developed but wider exchanges need to be fostered.
• Integration of information is a challenge. A ‘toy model’ will be produced as a first step in the search for innovative ways to integrate data. The work will focus on Paulshoek initially but extend to all three sites as soon as possible
• Three years is clearly not long enough to address all the issues pertaining to global change in the three countries. The challenge of continuity needs to be addressed.

Timm welcomed all the delegates to the meeting and expressed the feelings of his team as a whole, that they were looking forward to sharing what they had been doing over the last 18 months, to learn what others had been doing and to discuss future goals and activities.

Nothing happens except chaos without organisation, and he thanked everyone who had been involved in the organising of the event.

It is clear that the group is a diverse one; even within the South African team there are different organisations working together. The map (Fig. 1) shows an impressive cooperation between delegates from different countries.

2. General Update on the Project (Presented by Gareth Wyn Jones, CAZS)

There is inevitably an element of repetition in what I am about to say. First of all I would like to thank the South African team for the immense work that they have put into the preparation of this workshop. It is great to see everyone again, individually and collectively. The size of the workshop is an indicator of how we are growing and it does suggest that we are making progress.

I would like to run through the history for the benefit of the people who have recently joined the team. There is a long-term history to be told. A workshop was held in Gaborone in 1996 where Jaap Arntzen and colleagues looked at the sustainability of rangelands in southern Africa.

The delegates at that workshop were convinced that there should be integration of disciplines to solve problems and this project was devised to do that. Timm Hoffman’s diagram did not show the interdisciplinarity of the group. It is easy to get members of the scientific ‘club’ together from around the world but not so easy to mix the disciplines together. This interdisciplinary group has members of a Central Bank and an Ecologist sitting together! (see Table 1).

Later, START in New York became interested and provided funds to develop a project proposal for EU funding. The first lesson to be learned was the complexity of bringing everything together, and the second, that the cogs of bureaucracy turn very slowly. The initial application was submitted two and a half years ago. It took one year for it to be funded. The project started in October 1997 with a workshop in Gaborone.

Figure 1: Geographic Perspectives

Table 1: Interdisciplinarity

 

Country	Name	Discipline
Botswana	Dr Jaap Arntzen	Environmental Ecologist
	Dr Raban Chanda	Human Geographer
	Dr Happy Fidzani	Economist
	Mrs Lapologang Magole	Development Planner
	Dr Otlogetswe Totolo	Soil Scientist
	Dr Moffat P Setshogo	Botanist
	Dr Gubungano Tacheba	Agriculturalist
	Dr Nkobi Moleele	Range Ecologist
	Dr Ezekiel Chimbombi	Temporary Researcher
Lesotho	Dr Moeketsi Majoro	Environmental Economist
	Dr None Mokitimi	Agricultural Economist/Livestock Specialist
	Dr Makoala Marake	Soil Scientist
	Ms Mokhantso Makoae	Sociologist
	Dr Emmanuel Rwambali	Rural Sociologist
Norway	Dr Christina Skarpe	Vegetation Ecologist
Scotland	Dr Andrew Friend	Ecosystems Modelling
	Dr Deena Mobbs	Ecosystems Modelling
Spain	Dr Juan Pablo Martinez Rica	Ecologist
South Africa	Dr Timm Hoffman	Botanist/Plant Ecologist
	Ms Ashia Petersen	Botanist/GIS/Data Management/Phyto-sociology
	Dr Rick Rohde	Socio-Economist
	Mr Peter Carrick	Botanist/Plant Population Dynamics
	Ms Anastelle Solomon	Botanist/Fuel Wood Studies
	Mr Simon Todd	Ecologist/Grazing & Biodiversity
	Ms Hayley Rodkin	Socio-economist/Livelihoods Study & Development
	Ms Karen Goldberg	Medicinal Plant Resources
	Ms Nicky Allsopp	Land Use Impacts
	Dr Ben Cousins	Social & Political Scientist
	Dr Coleen Vogel	Environmental Historian
U.S.A.	Dr Ger Schultink	Sustainable Resource Management
Wales	Prof Gareth Wyn Jones	Plant Stress Physiologist/Sustainable Agri-environmental Management Specialist
	Dr Einir Young	Plant Stress Physiologist/Rural Development Agronomy Specialist

The project has been going on for 18 months and the funding ends in another 18 months. We seriously need to consider continuity, and this is a considerable challenge. It should be noted that every group has found supplementary funding for itself or for partners in Botswana, South Africa and Lesotho in order to enable the work to go on. The three European groups have helped, which is an indication of their commitment.

At this moment in time we need to congratulate ourselves. Field work and data acquisition is going on at all 3 sites at a speed of knots. Lesotho had less money and the disruption of civil unrest to contend with but they are still managing to get the work off the ground. Others, who have a bigger resource base, are also doing well.

However, integrating data is a big challenge and, to this end, we will draw on the services of Andrew Friend and Deena Mobbs of ITE, Edinburgh. Andrew is leaving for NASA but will maintain a link to the project even after moving. Both will provide input on the modelling side of things which will assist us in putting everything together. Devising an integrated model which draws agriculture, ecology, sociology and economics together is a great challenge.

There is a great difficulty associated with seeking funds. If we put in for an extension without achievement, it becomes hype. We must have a message to present in the course of the next 6 months.

I should mention that there is only one absent friend, Christina Skarpe. She has been active and has made a large input into the Botswana side of the work.

Summary

We are making considerable progress in all areas. There is progress in the physical and socio-economic data gathering. In each team, the process of data collection is moving on with a degree of success. The challenge is integration. Specific elements of this programme will deal with it. Modelling will be important but we will also need a non-modelling component.

Three years is not sufficient and we have to face the challenge of continuity. To improve the chances of continuity, there are things that we have tried to do to publicise the project and to make sure that it is well received. We have put the project forward to be officially recognised by GCTE. We put forward for recognition a long time ago and, whilst I was in Kenya, I was shown a letter to the effect that we will be recognised. This letter is yet to arrive in Bangor!

LUCC in Barcelona has agreed that we should be associated with and part of the LUCC programme. We have written to GTOS and they have said that the sites are potentially relevant. They have not defined their sites yet but one hopes that at least one if not two of our sites will be selected as GTOS sites. As a result of the meeting in Kenya, the IGBP in Stockholm and IHDP have expressed an interest.

Otlogetswe Totolo and Lapologang Magole from the Botswana team were also in Kenya and were part of the interesting discussions there. This project was held up as a model for what should be going on and was very highly endorsed by Eric Odada of Kenya.

NB: Not everyone is of the same mind. There are some biophysical specialists who do not want to be encumbered by social science. In a sense there is something of a ‘purist v dirty scientist’ battle going on in some quarters. However, Will Steffen and Larry Kholer of IHDP gave their support and this will be very important.

The message seems to be that we are doing the right thing at the right time in the right place and that this could be a forerunner of future projects.

Today is a watershed. Europe is pleased and our contact there, Charles Kessler, is pleased but there are 3 messages on which we need to focus:

• data acquisition
• devise innovative ways to integrate that data
• address the problem of continuity of funding for the next and future years.

In the long term, the project is about people and their environment and how they interact sustainably.

3. Session 1

Reporting on work at the field sites specifically covering work packages and tasks due for completion at 18 months or reaching interim status, viz:

Work Package 1. Project initiation and community participation

3.1.1 Work Package 1

3.1.1.1 Task a. Study site identification

The NBI project site is a black, communal area of Namaqualand. Several have been in existence since the early 1800s and were often associated with the missions. It is attached to Paulshoek, which is one of 9 communities in the Leliefontein communal area. The reasons for this site selection is that the team feels comfortable and welcome in Paulshoek, and there has been some work carried out there since 1995.

3.1.1.2 Task b. Survey of community attitudes

The survey took place early in the project with input from Gareth Wyn Jones and Einir Young.

3.1.1.3 Task c. Community participation and training

We have

• Community numerators
• Field assistants
• Training
• Informing of communities.

Field assistants are employed for specialist tasks such as fencing. The 'training' aspect is weak and it is difficult to match community needs. There is some scope for community garden projects. There are some problems in keeping the community informed. "What is NBI doing in Paulshoek?" is a frequent question. The leaders have an idea but householders are vague. The idea of a newsletter is being discussed. We also need to discuss the role of research and development. There is a clear need for research information to be presented to the community in an accessible format.

Comments:

"Self-awareness" training as well as technical training is valuable. Working with the school may be a way forward in this respect.

The Land Care SA programme is underway and the Paulshoek community has successfully accessed money from the government.

The question is asked, "How representative is Paulshoek?" There is a trade-off between depth and breadth, and the South African team has opted to focus on one place. There has been plenty of 'wide' data gathering in Namaqualand; this project is seen as a means of addressing issues in more depth.

The South African team needs to be clear about its own agenda in the project as research and time is limited. We could employ someone from the village to take responsibility for the 'development' side of things but we must not be too ambitious.

It is essential to point out to research funders that there should be a development component to research funding.

3.1.2 Work Package 2. Biophysical data collection and analysis

3.1.2.1 Task a. Basic survey of water sources and hydrology

In Namaqualand there are a number of problems concerning water. There is firstly not enough water due to the low rainfall and, secondly, much of the water is contaminated. It is contaminated by high levels of fluoride, nitrate, uranium, salinity and faecal contamination. These all occur at different concentrations throughout Namaqualand, and are also found in the groundwater in Paulshoek. In Paulshoek there is no efficient mechanism of desalination, defloridation or chlorination, so unfortunately much of the water is contaminated.

Paulshoek, like most of Namaqualand, suffers water shortages. The average rainfall in Paulshoek is between 100 - 200 mm p.a. The rainfall in the Northern Cape ranges from less than 100 mm over much of the province to about 500 mm p.a. Due to the low rainfall, the community relies heavily on groundwater. There are major problems with the groundwater which make using it hazardous.

Specific water problems in Paulshoek (also true for most of Namaqualand) include fluoride, salinity, uranium and coliforms.

Fluoride: There are a number of side effects of excessively high fluoride in groundwater. Generally, fluoride is necessary for the proper hardening of dental enamel and is found in water and some food substances. However, in large amounts fluoride interferes with carbohydrate, lipid, protein, vitamin, enzyme and mineral metabolism. When fluoride concentrations in the water exceed 3-6 mg/l, skeletal fluorosis may occur (in Paulshoek the figures indicate levels higher than 2 mg/l). Systemic toxicity and interference with bone formation and metabolism occurs at high concentrations (see Table 2).

Salinity: The electrical conductivity is a good measure of the water quality because poorer quality water contains more ions, and the EC is a measurement of the ability of water to conduct an electrical current based on the number of ions present. This means that EC is a measure of the quality of water, which can easily be measured in the field (Parsons, 1992, Report 2). The recommended level for domestic water use is 70 mS/m while the maximum allowable limit is 300 mS/m (Report 2). Studies have been undertaken (Toens & Associates) to assess the groundwater in the area, and it has been found that, in Namaqualand, the electrical conductivity of most of the groundwater is very high and is unsuitable for use without treatment. The chloride concentration in the water is also too high in most of Namaqualand (see Table 3).

Faecal Coliforms: These are an indicator of the possible presence of disease-causing organisms. They establish if water is polluted with faecal matter. This is often because boreholes are placed too close to waste sites or pit latrines (see Fig. 4).

Uranium: Radioactivity is predominantly associated with granite and gneiss geological formations which are common in Namaqualand, and presumably in Paulshoek.

Guidelines for Water Quality

Table 2

Guidelines for Fluoride in Domestic Water (from Report No. 1b) [Details of references, etc, available from Janet Allsopp, NBI]

Fluoride Range (mg/l)	Effects
Target guideline range	The fluoride concentration in water necessary to meet requirements for healthy tooth structure is a function of daily water intake and hence varies with annual maximum daily air temperature. A concentration of approx 0.75 mg/l corresponds to a maximum daily temperature of approx 26-28°C (Kempster and Smith, 1985; Aucamp and Vivier, 1990; Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
1.0 - 1.5	Concentrations in this range are generally well-tolerated. Slight mottling of dental enamel may occur. No other health effects are expected and no tooth damage occurs (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
1.5 - 3.5	The threshold for marked dental mottling is 1.5 mg/l. Above this, mottling will probably be noticeable in most continuous users of the water (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
3.5 - 4.0	Threshold for chronic effects of fluoride exposure, manifested as skeletal effects. Effects at this concentration are detected mainly by radiological examination rather than overt effects (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
4.0 - 6.0	Skeletal fluorosis occurs on long-term exposure (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
6.0 - 8.0	Pronounced skeletal fluorosis occurs on long-term exposure (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
>8.0	Crippling skeletal fluorosis is likely to appear on long-term exposure (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
>100	Threshold for onset of severe, acute fluoride poisoning, marked by vomiting and diarrhoea (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).
>2000	The lethal concentration of fluoride is approx 2000 mg/l (Kempster and van Vliet, 1991).

Figure 2. Salinity Level in the Water in the Area around Paulshoek Village.

Figures 3 and 4 below indicate the various levels of water use, salinity, fluoride, and salinity (EC).

Table 3

Guidelines for Electric Conductivity (Salt) in Domestic Water

Electrical Conductivity Range (mS/m)	Treatment Process
70 - 300	Used without treatment
> 300	Recommended limit Electrodialysis, ion exchange, reverse osmosis or distillation

Paulshoek water supply and amount of water used per capita

In comparison to the other communities in the area, Paulshoek has the least amount of available water. The people in Paulshoek live on 13 l/cap/day, which is far less than the RDP standard, which is 25 l/cap/day.

Summary

• Fluoride: 2 mg/l in Paulshoek. Above 3 causes skeletal fluorosis. Above 1.5 mg/l mottling of dental enamel.

• Salinity: Recommended level = 70 ms/m; maximum allowable limit is 300 mS/m.

• Faecal coliforms: Presence of disease causing organism. The reading should be 0.

• Uranium: Caused by underground granite. High levels in Namaqualand.

• Less than 20 % of people in Namaqualand have an adequate water supply.
• In Paulshoek people live on ± 13 l of water/cap/day.

• The RDP water standard is 25 l/cap/day.

Questions:

Who funds borehole drilling?

Anyone can drill if they have the money. However, outside government, the boreholes are sometimes drilled in the wrong place if Toens are not consulted.

What is the effect of too salty water on livestock?

Could reduce number of offspring; affects conception rate and causes bloat.

There are also dug wells which have better quality water as it is less ancient.

3.1.2.2 Task b. Survey of soil fertility and erodibility

See Field Visit Guide, Annex 1.

This aspect of the work has relied on geological survey for geomorphology. They have been identifying critical processes in the soil and have looked at the patterns of soil nutrients on a fairly small scale in the open areas around shrubs. Shrubs are important for soil resource control. The effects of land use, especially overgrazing, which can lead to the replacement of one species by another, can cause a change in soil and a greater increase in poor soil.

Effects on ploughing for cropland. There has been an obvious depletion of nutrients even after land has been fallow. When the soil loses its cover, it loses its control of nutrients. (See graphs on p. 12 of Field Visit Guide, Annex 1).

3.1.2.3 Task c. Ecological analysis

A phytosociological study of Paulshoek: relating plant communities to physical parameters and different management strategies

Aim: To conduct a phytosociological study of the Paulshoek communal area and surrounding farms to produce a map showing the different plant communities, relating these different plant communities to the physical environment and to determine whether there is any change in plant community structure and composition under commercial and communal range management strategies.

Objectives:

• To compile a checklist of the plants in Paulshoek
• To describe the plant communities in Paulshoek in terms of composition, structure and distribution
• To relate plant communities to the physical environment, e.g., elevation, landform and aspect
• To determine plant community change in terms of composition and structure under different management strategies, namely, commercial and communal management strategies.

The study of Paulshoek commenced in 1996, which was a bad year due to lack of rain. The aim is to compile a checklist of all the plants in Paulshoek. The community structure and composition in relation to biophysical parameters will be studied on 150 plots on commercial and communal lands of which 90 have already been sampled.

Questions:

How do you choose sampling points?

Look at elevation map, divide Paulshoek into low, medium and high, and sample within communal and commercial areas within those zones. This is known as 'stratified, random sampling'.

3.1.2.4 Task d. Estimates of biomass productivity

This has not been attempted. There is no history of this in South Africa. They will request assistance from Christina Skarpe, NINA, for this aspect.

Several fenceline contrast studies have been conducted at Paulshoek since 1996 culminating in the production of a MSc thesis. Plots were selected on either side of the fence between the commercial and communal rangeland, and the impacts of grazing on various parameters assessed (see pp 10,11, Field Visit Guide, Annex 1).

a b

c d

Figure 5: The (a) plant, (b) invertebrate, (c) small mammal, and (d) bird community structure on the communal and commercial rangeland. Plant community structure is in terms of percentage plant cover while invertebrate, small mammal and bird community structure is represented by the number of individuals within a species or functional type captured during sampling.

3.1.2.6 Task f. Assess the availability of other rangeland products.

Use: To develop a descriptive inventory of fuelwood species used by people in Paulshoek for their various needs; to assess whether the availability of fuelwood resources has changed over time.

Value: To quantify the extent of use and provide an economic value for the direct use of fuelwood resources; to investigate whether seasonality influences the use and value of fuelwood resources.

Impact of use: To evaluate the impact of direct plant utilisation on rangeland degradation and its consequent effects on rural livelihoods.

Rationale:

Wood collection is an inherent part of subsistence life in Paulshoek, and is used extensively as a source of energy. Fuelwood is utilised for cooking, baking, warmth and various other activities. Despite increased electrification of some rural towns in Namaqualand, many households still prefer wood as a primary energy source, mainly because of its affordability. The fuelwood resources in Namaqualand are, however, declining rapidly because consumption is increasing with population growth. The dependence on veld resources in Namaqualand is likely to increase further due to escalating unemployment rates as a result of the closure of uneconomic mines and government welfare cuts. In the past, fuelwood was relatively freely available but increasing demand has led to a general scarcity, and the cutting of live trees is now increasingly practised. The general impact of fuelwood collection in Paulshoek and elsewhere is perceived to have had a negative impact on the proper functioning of the natural vegetation but few details are available. The aim of this project is thus to describe, quantify and value the direct use of fuelwood resources in Paulshoek, and to assess the impact of fuelwood collection on the resource itself as well as on key ecological processes in the rangeland. In so doing, the study may also complement the ecological research programme currently underway at Paulshoek, which addresses the impact of communal farming on the rangeland itself, and aims to develop restoration strategies to rehabilitate degraded veld. Relevant management strategies and policies will be suggested which could serve as a guide for policymakers and other practitioners.

This work is part of the use and valuation of natural fuelwood resources in Paulshoek, Namaqualand, and the ecological impact of fuelwood collection. (Honours project on medicinal plant collection). Further information can be found on pp 18, 19 of the Field Visit Guide, Annex 1.

3.1.2.7 Task g. Basic climatic data

Competition and Plant Strategies for Growth and Survival (Examining the implications of different plant strategies)

In this semi-arid environment, the biomass of plants that can be supported on the land is severely limited by water. Plants compete for the water that is available. However, when water is available, plants compete for available nutrients. Thus, below ground, competition for water and nutrient resources is important in structuring the composition of the community. Competition for light (and space) is not considered to be important in this environment.

Plants that have access to, and make use of, high resource availability will tend to be faster-growing than plants that are adapted to low resource environments. This has further implications: plants that are fast-growing will be better able to recover from browsing than plants that are slow-growing, etc.

Although equivocal, ecological theory predicts that, very generally, plant strategies lie on a continuum between the following 2 extremes:

Utilising High Resources	Utilising Low Resources
Rapid growth	Slow growth
More tolerant of losses of biomass (e.g., grazing & trampling) - otherwise	Less tolerant of losses of biomass (e.g., grazing & trampling) - otherwise
Stress intolerant	Stress tolerant
Root competition - by rapidly occupying available space in the soil	Root competition - by having greater uptake potential of rare resources and hence driving the available resources to a lower limit
Poor competitors over time	Superior competitors over time
Palatable	Unpalatable
Early succession	Late succession
High reproductive effort	Lower reproductive effort

Aims:

• To test the applicability of these predictions to perennial shrubs in this area
• To examine the different strategies employed by plants to maximise the acquisition of resources, storage of resources, growth and survival
• To understand the mechanisms which underlie the change in the vegetation communities from one stable state to another.

Root architecture perhaps best epitomises the different strategies that may utilised by plants of the same or similar functional groups (perennial shrubs). Mesembryanthemaceae, which are the dominant plant family in the succulent karoo, have succulent leaves and generally root extremely shallowly but quite widely (horizontally). Other shrubs, e.g., Asteraceae, tend to root much deeper; in this area they root down and into the bedrock which is some 30 cm deep. This has great implications for strategy. The annual rainfall event is significant for underground root architecture.

The rainfall in Paulshoek is the winter rainfall pattern of the succulent karoo compared to the summer rainfall pattern of the Nama karoo. This means that, during the hottest, driest months in Paulshoek, there is least fodder.

There are 3 stations providing rainfall data:

Windpoort

Paulshoek

Slootjiesdam.

The last 3 years have not been typical:

1996: double annual rainfall

1997: normal rainfall but fell early

1998: drought.

3.1.3 Work Package 3. Socio-economic data collection and analysis

• 1 of 9 villages which make up Leliefontein communal area
• + 800 residents, spread over +145 households
• Number of households likely to increase when the RDP houses are built
• No electricity
• Poor H₂O supply and quality
• No modern sanitation system
• Lack of clean water and a sanitation system leads to health problems, which is a concern, as is under-nourishment
• Long tradition of herbal medicine
• Health care consists of a visit by a mobile clinic twice a month, run by a nursing Sister and a Cuban G.P., who does not speak English
• Traditional residents are stock farmers
• High levels of unemployment
• An additional 3 farms have just been acquired via the Land Reform process.

3.1.3.1 Livestock Recording

Stock data is collected every weekday.

He also collects rainfall data from the weather station when it rains (infrequent).

The weather station is located in the community hall and measurements are taken at 11 a.m.

Mervyn Cloete, Timm Hoffman and each farmer have copies of the record book, sample sheets of which can be found in Annex 3.

Questions:

How do the farmers react?

Many cannot read or write and did not want to let Mervyn in to count. Prior to Mervyn being employed, there was no response from them at all.

Presented by Ayele Solomon^*, NBI (MSc student from Michigan State University, who has recently commenced work on the Project)

The stock census data collected by Mervyn will be used to produce a typology.

The following activities will be undertaken:

• carry out a farm budget analysis projected for 15 years
• check input/output
• prepare a cost benefit for fattening lambs, etc.

• aggregate data from all farms will be used to produce a general overview of farming practices

• the 2 commercial farms in the area will also be visited.

3.1.3.2 Cropping

• There are 16 ha. of croplands
• The farmers pay rent to Leliefontein Traditional Council: Rand 157.50/year
• They crop from original seed
• Yields are very variable, e.g., 1996 x 13; 1997 x 2; 1998 x 0 (x greater than that planted) reflecting the rainfall pattern.

3.2 BOTSWANA (Presented by Moffat Setshogo, UB)

The Botswana team is comprised of:

• 5 bio-physical experts
• 4 socio-economic experts
• 1 researcher
• Students used as assistants.

3.2.1 Work Package 1

The study site has been identified as the Matsheng Villages of the Kgalagadi District in southwestern Botswana. 'Matsheng' is the Tswana word for pans, the study site being an area of pans which may hold water during the rainy season. The area is part of the sandveld with low and unreliable rainfall and infertile soils, and where droughts occur frequently. The area is remote, approximately 550 km west of the capital, Gaborone, and is amongst the poorest in the country. It has a population density of less than one person/km². Gemsbok National Park lies to the southwest of the study area. People meet their needs through a combination of livestock, wildlife, crops and veld products. In addition, employment elsewhere is of critical importance to the local population.

Data collection started in June/July 1998 with a rapid rural appraisal of community attitudes and needs with respect to rangeland resources.

The Matsheng area is very dry with a rainfall of + 250 mm/year. It is very hot with temperatures rising to 40-50°C.

Seasons in the Matsheng Villages are as follows:

April - late July = winter

Aug - March = summer, hot season

Dec - Jan/Feb = rains, reasonable but late in 1999, very variable.

3.2.1.1 Activities:

• Kgotla meetings have been held in Hukuntsi and Tshane
• The Project has been introduced to the traditional and modern authorities
• Feedback of preliminary findings has been facilitated. More feedback will take place.

3.2.2 Work Package 2. Biophysical data collection and analysis

3.2.2.1 System development:

• Two transects for sample collection, north-south and east-west, have been established

• Sample collection takes place at dry and wet peaks.

3.2.2.2 Activities:

• Collection of water quality samples (Task a); analysis of water quality samples completed; initial analysis of borehole yields; no water point map yet available
• Collection of soil samples (Task b); analysis of soil samples is ongoing for pH, organic C and EC.
• Collection of vegetation samples (Task c); no ecological map has been generated as yet
• Identification of plant species; analysis of vegetation samples and biomass estimates completed (Tasks d + f)
• Collection of basic climatic data (Task g).

3.2.2.3 Observations and Findings:

There is no trend in organic C although increase was expected with distance from the settlements.

pH = 6.5 - 8

EC = low

Herbaceous plants, density of woody plants, and the canopy cover of woody plants have been measured. Between 4 - 18 km away from the settlements there are more herb plants. The ground is bad, with low herb cover near watering points.

Canopy cover - two main species dominated cover up to 4 km from the settlements: Acacia mellifera and Grewia flava. These are the species browsed in the overgrazed areas where there is a shortage of grasses.

Goats browse near watering points where there are no herbaceous plants. There are many legumes and there is an observable grazing gradient from the watering point.

Interestingly, the people do not blame overgrazing or farming practices for the degradation but drought. Christina Skarpe's browsing experiments tie in well with the grazing studies.

3.2.2.4 Still to be done:

• Mapping of land use (changes)
• Further collection of soil, water and vegetation samples
• Begin Task e in order to bring the studies together.

3.2.2.5 Other Comments:

The question needs to be asked: What are the dynamics of biophysical base within the so-called 'degraded' zones?

Useful data exists on fenceline contrast for 20 yrs - this will be analysed.

Veld products are being considered but at the moment are not being quantified.

Information on moisture availability index will be useful when evaluating policy changes in Botswana and for comparisons in different regions.

Questions:

At 4 km away from the settlement, there is so-called 'bush encroachment'. Is this a problem?

In other words, what is degradation? This depends on perspective.

In Lesotho, men think that the range is improving when there is more grass than shrubs but, from women's point of view, lack of shrubs means less firewood, which is a bad thing.

3.2.3 Work Package 3 (Presented by Jaap Arntzen, UB)

3.2.3.1 Introductory Comments

Fieldwork activities are concentrated in the Matsheng villages in southwestern Botswana. Matsheng is the Tswana word for pans, which may hold water during the rainy season. The area is part of the sandveld with low and unreliable rainfall and infertile soils, and where droughts occur frequently. The area is remote, approximately 550 km west of the capital, Gaborone, and is amongst the poorest in the country. It has a population density of less than one person/km². Gemsbok National Park is to the southwest of the study area. People meet their needs through a combination of livestock, wildlife, crops and veldproducts. In addition, employment elsewhere is of critical importance to the local population.

Two locations have been selected, viz, Tshane, a village, and Ngwatle, a settlement. It is important to note that there is a difference between settlements and villages. A village will have 500 or more inhabitants, and has village infrastructure such as schools, clinics, etc. A settlement is a less formal arrangement, which has no regular water supply, and where the people are from a nomadic background. Ngwatle is not a village and it does feel different to visitors. The people of the study area were disappointed that settlements have been included as they do not regard them as important.

There is resource conflict between wildlife and agriculture. There is a need for permanent wells for livestock. The pans, which are now rarely wet, were traditional watering areas for wildlife

The rangelands are relatively open savannas with grass, shrubs and trees.

Rangeland uses:

• Livestock production (cattle, goats and some donkeys and sheep)
• Wildlife utilisation (mostly hunting)
• Gathering of useful plants and wood.

Crop production

• Not a direct user of rangeland
• Source of livelihood and encroachment on rangeland
• Potential for intensification through mixed farming.

Development of a three-tier quantitative data collection system:

• General survey on rangeland uses among households
• Detailed survey on household budgets, returns and resource allocation
• In-depth monitoring system of rangeland uses by households

In addition, qualitative data are gathered through:

• In depth, semi-structured and unstructured interviews
• Participatory rural appraisals.

Survey activities are conducted in two distinct areas:

• Villages with predominantly agriculture
• Settlements with mostly hunting and gathering.

Activities carried out so far are:

• A general resource use survey in Tshane and Ngwatle (Tasks a-e)
• A budget and resource allocation survey in Tshane and Ngwatle (Tasks a-e)
• A survey on the impact of livestock expansion on hunting and gathering in three settlements with varying degrees of livestock penetration (Masters student)
• Data analysis of general survey and budget and resource allocation surveys
• Participatory rural appraisal in Tshane and Ngwatle (Task b)
• Establishment of the rangeland use monitoring system by households (Tasks a-e)
• Secondary data analysis (e.g., Task b).

Planned activities:

• Valuation of agricultural and wildlife areas (with a Masters student)
• In-depth surveys on gaps in knowledge.

Activity patterns and sources of livelihood:

• Gathering most common form of rangeland use followed by livestock production (Tshane) and wildlife utilisation (Ngwatle)
• Cattle ownership is relatively low: 26.2% in Tshane and 0% in Ngwatle. Herds are relatively small and declining according to farmers
• Rangeland uses do not represent principal sources of livelihood. The principal sources are:

• Government support
• Formal employment
• Remittances.

Gender influences rangeland use:

• Female-headed households are less likely to hunt, to have cattle, and to own assets such as water points and transport means
• Female-headed households are more frequently without any source of cash income
• Goat performance of female-headed households is poorer than that of their male counterparts
• Female-headed households in Tshane believe more frequently that rangeland degradation is a problem.

3.2.3.4 Ethnicity

The dominant ethnic group is the Bangologa. They:

• more frequently own cattle
• control the waterpoints
• more frequently have cattleposts
• engage less frequently in hunting. If they do, it is for commercial purposes
• can afford to use their cattle mostly for meat consumption.

Basarwa are marginalised. They have no cattle and depend almost entirely on government support.

Questions:

Is there theft, livestock theft, veld fires? Yes.

How do communities perceive them? Unknown.

All say that they want a regular water supply. People want to grow maize but spread the risks with sorghum and millet.

3.3 LESOTHO (Presented by Moeketsi Majoro, NUL)

3.3.1 Introductory Comments

In the original proposal, Lesotho had a very ambitious plan with a large budget. Subsequently Lesotho was the first candidate to experience deep budget cuts. As a result, during the first year of the project, the Lesotho work was restricted to the preliminary literature review (Task 0) and policy analysis.

At the 1st Workshop, Juan Pablo Martinez Rica wondered what he would do in view of the budget cuts.

Gareth Wyn Jones worked hard to secure additional funding for Lesotho and, finally, in November 1998, the Lesotho team received a cheque from the British High Commission in Maseru to enable them to carry out field work on the project.

The Lesotho team are now trying to streamline their activities and make up lost time. Studies began in January 1999 . The team is now travelling every weekend to the field site, whilst teaching during the week.

3.3.2. Work Package 1. Task a. Study Site Identification

The study area is a mountain rangeland at an altitude ranging from 2,200 to 2,700 metres above sea level. The site is about 160 kilometres northeast of Maseru, the capital. Pressure on the rangeland has increased over time as a result of increasing livestock population, an egalitarian property rights regime, and weak enforcement of grazing guidelines. Overstocking is believed to be a permanent feature of the rangeland. Two management regimes characterise the study area. One falls within the Pelaneng-Bokong Range Management Area (RMA) while the other falls under the traditional cattle post management. The former regime represents a tighter management style and requires increased participation by all members of the Grazing Association in monthly management meetings. The RMA comprises 17 villages with 332 farming households. The inclusion of these two separate, managerially-different areas in the study will allow policy-relevant comparison between the two areas in terms of impact of factors effecting global change as well as responses to such changes.

The Lesotho Highlands Water Project, which has dammed the adjacent Maliba-matšo River, has itself brought about major changes which have biophysical and socio-economic implications. The improved access to the area has resulted in opening the area to more vehicular traffic and tourism.

RMA members can graze animals on the RMA but can also graze the range.

Off-RMA: Chief = main 'ruler'

RMA - Committee makes decisions.

The Pelaneng-Bokong RMA is made up of 3 sections:

• Zone A has the highest altitude at around 3,000 m. It is uninhabited and is very cold at 5°C. The stockholders pull back at the end of April before the snow.

• Zone B is range
• Zone C is mostly arable land but is also used for grazing of crop residue.

The same demarcations exist in the off-RMA areas.

The grazing pattern is as follows:

• Animals can be found in Zone A during the summer months of December to March
• Between March and June, the animals are moved to Zone B, the range
• After June, during the winter months, animals are moved to Zone C to graze the crop residues.

Task c Community participation and training

The Lesotho team began their PRA exercise in January and are trying to understand practices, attitudes and sources of livelihoods.

3.3.4 Work Package 2. Biophysical data collection and analysis

3.3.4.1 Introductory Comments (Presented by Makoala Marake, NUL)

The dam has had an effect on the people's livelihoods. Some people list crops as their main source of livelihood and so there is animosity towards the dam as so much arable land has been lost.

The biophysical work has been restricted by the shortfall in funding. However, the Lesotho biophysical team was part of the introductory PRA activity. With the additional funding from the British High Commission, the team has the following intentions:

• Inventory of soil resources in Pelaneng-Bokong. Some soil maps are available characterising soil properties, soil quality and range quality. In April-May 1999, soil sampling will commence focusing on depth properties, slope, aspect, erosion properties and characteristics, e.g., slight, moderate, severe. Soil/plant ecology: plants are a reliable indicator of what is going on in the soil. Certain plant communities are associated with certain soils; the relation should be obvious. Soil fertility evaluation - nutrient quantities in the RMA and off-RMA
• Integrate first-level biophysical data into GIS
• Search Water Project databanks to fill the gaps in knowledge
• Climatic variables: Juan Pablo Martinez Rica will expand on this but the meteorological station has been installed.

The Lesotho team has been crippled in terms of ecological input. They have lost the services of Dr Chaba Mokuku, Ecologist, and need to recruit someone else to join the team.

3.3.4.2 Further comments on the biophysical work

He has only recently been introduced to Lesotho and can only visit for short periods. His conclusions are general, not well tested nor qualified.

3.3.4.3 Task a. Basic survey of water sources and hydrology

Lesotho is montane. There is especially clean water there, pH 7-8. Coliforms are very low but there are some from animal faeces.

3.3.4.4 Task b. Survey of soil fertility and erodibility

Soil fertility will be tested.

The general feeling is that the main problems regarding soil losses in the southern part of the mountains does not depend on management but on climatic and hydrological factors.

3.3.4.5 Task c. Ecological analysis

There is no vegetation map available. A list of plant communities has not yet been mapped. The plant communities, especially the peat bog in the head waters, is most interesting. Some special plant communities and endemic species of plants and animals are found only in Lesotho. It is important to protect these areas for biodiversity.

3.3.4.6 Task g. Basic climatic data

Funds from Spain enabled the building of basic climatic stations. The climatic/hydrological stations were purchased and built in Spain. They should have been installed in October 1998 but, due to civil unrest in Lesotho, this was postponed until January 1999. The Lesotho team are still perfecting reading and checking of the data. The intention is to measure climatic data every 30 minutes for 2 years. The station is powered by solar panels and batteries, and measures:

• temperature
• humidity
• snow depth
• rainfall
• light intensity
• UV radiation
• wind speed and direction
• pH of water
• turbidity
• EC.

Small sink devices to record temperature and pH are to be hidden at different locations of the field sites.

3.3.5 Work Package 3. Socio-economic data collection and analysis

The socio-economic survey will be carried out in April before the cold weather sets in. They will consult with the communities in 17 villages. There are around 1,000 households in the RMA and off-RMA.

Most households within the RMA have B grazing zones near to them. In the off-RMA villages to the south, it takes 2 days to reach their A grazing zones.

The management of the RMA is situated on the northern side. As one moves further south, disenchantment increases. In the south, the people on the off-RMA are giving them pressure. The southern RMA folk are not able to identify the benefits of belonging to the RMA so they do not attend meetings and are reverting to off-RMA practices.

The working hypothesis is that, as you move north, there is more commitment. However, there is disenchantment here as well. The management is elected but people are unable to vote them out. Rand 10 per animal is charged but questions are asked about where the cash goes. There is a problem with transparency.

Managerial Problems

Members of the Committee are responsible for problems such as theft. There is serious, organised livestock theft by thieves brandishing machine guns and stealing whole flocks. They take the sheep to the roads and load them into trucks. Marake's hypothesis is that cash compensation from the Lesotho Highlands Water Project was originally used to purchase livestock. However, money is no longer put into livestock because of the risks posed by theft.

Lesotho Highlands Water Project

The RMA has been significantly affected. There was good, arable land around the river, where maize, sorghum, peas and beans were grown in various plots at different distances from the house. The first plot would always be of maize, but if more plots were available, there was a greater variety of crops. The river area was also a source of wood and medicinal plants. All that land was lost to the dam.

The Water Project will talk of compensation. The loss of fuel wood was compensated by giving trees to plant but this is not mentioned by farmers. Fish is a benefit of the dam; there is so much fish available that clothes lines are now used to dry fish. The farmers say that the Water Project keeps the large fish in the middle; however, the fish are actually distributed by the Water Project. There is a sense of injury in the community.

4. Afternoon: Session 2

4.1 Work Package 4. Resource management and policy analysis

4.1.1 LESOTHO: (Presented by None Mokitimi, NUL)

Traditional range management system

• Chiefs control grazing
• Transhumance system: moving livestock from the lowlands to the highlands in summer and back again in winter.

Range Management Areas (RMAs)

• Introduced in 1975
• Presently there are about 8 RMAs
• Impact on power of Chiefs; Chiefs have no control in RMAs
• Give exclusive grazing rights to Grazing Association members.

Village Development Councils (VDCs)

• Established by government mainly for development purposes but also to control the grazing system
• Work in cooperation with Chiefs
• VDCs now control grazing.

Literature Review

• There is much literature on rangelands issues in Lesotho. They employed an assistant in 1998 to collect all literature on grazing management which they synthesised in order to see the trends (Task 0).

Stakeholder Workshop

• EU schemes are stabilising Lesotho
• Planning to hold a Stakeholder Workshop at which civil servants, farmers and NGOs will participate
• Impact on wool and exports will be evaluated
• Will be working closely with range management, and the agricultural extension services will be co-opted
• Questions on policy issues will be included in the socio-economic survey regarding knowledge of existing interventions on range management
• Plans to interview policy-makers especially those who are involved in the implementation stage.

Land Tenure

• 1979 Communal Land Act in Lesotho. Leasehold was introduced. It was thought that this would change how people would access and use the land
• It has not been implemented but they will evaluate the impact, if any.

4.1.2 SOUTH AFRICA: (Presented by Timm Hoffman, NBI)

Table 5: Influence of different land use practices on rangeland

Cropping	Livestock	Fuelwood	Medicinal Plants
Greatest impact			Least impact
Species replacement	Community transfer	Species - specific impacts pop. processes	Little direct impact - biological processes

4.1.2.2 Building Rural Infrastructure

(More information on the legislation of the Government of South Africa can be found at http://www.polity.org.za - ed.)

She is raising questions rather than making suggestions:

Broad overview of related policy issues

• DFA (Development Facilitation Act, No. 67, 1995)

http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/legislation/1995/act95-067.html)

• Rural Development Framework http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/rdp/rdevframe.html)
• Land Policy

http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/white_papers.landwp.html).

Questions which need to be clarified with the institution of Paulshoek:

• How do the above relate to grass roots issues and how can they be implemented and applied?
• How are these enabling strategies actually going to benefit communities such as Paulshoek?
• How are local institutions such as the POF (Paulshoek Development Forum) (see p.4, Annex 1), as well as other informal institutions going to be accommodated?

Other issues arising from discussions:

The work of Coleen Vogel and her Masters Student, Clare, will look at long-term data sets of environmental history using missionary diaries, and will be working closely with Rick Rohde. Photos are available of community life from the 1930s, etc. Aerial photographs from the 1950s show changes especially along the fencelines.

Simon Todd and Timm Hoffman have visited a retired Stock Inspector and went through his records of stock census from 1971. They also have historic rainfall data from Springbok.

It may be desirable for a Bangor MSc student to go to London to search the colonial archives for Botswana, Lesotho and South Africa; the Methodist Mission is also an historical source of information.

In Lesotho and Botswana, similar land pressures are mounting. People want exclusivity. This is not a problem in villages but there is a de jure and de facto use of land. Land may be communal on paper but boreholes are owned. Therefore de facto it is a controlled grazing area.

There is a struggle in the wildlife management area between land tenure and land access. There will be big differences between the countries on this aspect.

Marketing is a big issue. For example, sheep are sold for R40 each off-farm in Paulshoek but, if marketed at Garies, would fetch R200 each.

There is a need to:

1. Exchange questionnaires

2. Compare similarities and differences between each site

3. Exchange field staff if funding can be obtained.

4.1.3 BOTSWANA (Presented by Jaap Arntzen, UB)

Two-tier system: bottom-up and top-down approach:

• Evaluation of policies through interviews with policy makers and implementers at central government and district level
• Evaluation of policies through interviews with local people and traditional leaders (focusing on the role of local institutions and their links with government policies).

Activities:

• Policy evaluation interviews at district level (not yet completed) (tasks 4a-c)
• Policy evaluation interviews at central government level (on-going) (tasks 4a-c)
• Local institutions analysis through interviews (tasks 4a+b)
• Analysis of the use of government policies by local people (task 4c).

To be done:

• Completion of policy evaluation
• Case study of the impact of beef subsidies/prices on livestock production and other rangeland uses.

Demand for Rangeland Resources

Rangelands generate multiple products. Local processing of rangeland products is confined to the craft industry in Ngwatle.

Given the small herds of cattle, households try to build their herds, and are reluctant to sell or slaughter. Instead they use goats more intensely (meat).

Wildlife and gathering is mostly for subsistence purposes. The exception is crafts.

There are two veld products with a large commercial potential: mahupu (Kalahari truffle) and sengaparile (devil's claw). Many indigenous fruit trees can be used for jam, beer, etc.

The effective demand for wildlife and veld products is declining in Tshane because of growing distances.

Signs of over-utilisation:

• Rangeland conditions are worse than in the past, especially in Tshane
• Water conditions are bad, especially in Ngwatle
• Perceived decline in wildlife and veld products.

Causes of resource depletion:

• Drought is the primary cause
• Human activities are of secondary importance.

Impacts of resource degradation:

• Decline in living conditions
• More efforts and/or cash needed
• Less game meat and traditional food available.

5. Work Package 6. Project coordination and reporting

5.1 Coordinating and Communicating (Presented by Einir Young, CAZS)

The Centre for Arid Zone Studies is responsible for coordinating the project and this has largely been done via e-mail between CAZS and the country team leaders. Reports are requested and delivered, visits are arranged, etc, in a very satisfactory manner. Apart from one or two blips, the communication has been timely and excellent, and the EC has expressed satisfaction with our reports and presentations.

In the first workshop at Gaborone, the idea of Conferencing and First Class, as the package that might be used, was introduced.

The goal of having such a package is:

1. To enable a continuing and meaningful dialogue to develop between country partners and sub-contractors regarding issues pertaining to the project
2. To ensure that every individual involved with this project has access to some if not all of the discussions.

Before I expand on the First Class issue, I would like to discuss communication in general and to make suggestions. We know from the Botswana team’s concerns that, in order to be able to generate dissemination outputs in a meaningful way, the group as a whole is going to have to make a collective effort. As coordinators we know what is going on at each site and to a large extent everyone knows what is going on if they read the reports. As the reports are available on our web site, there is potential for a large number of people to be well acquainted with the project. However, we believe that communication is an art as well as a science.

The definition of communication as found in the Concise Oxford Dictionary is as follows:

1. The act of imparting news
2. A means of connecting different places, such as a door, passage, road or railway
3. Social intercourse
4. The science and practice of transmitting information especially by electronic or mechanical means.

We have already established a successful multi-channelled communication method of imparting news (e-mail, fax, telephone, internet site [see Fig 6]). We are in regular contact with country leaders for one reason or another, usually administrative. However, we now need to focus on developing the ‘social’ aspects of our communicating by finding a means of bringing everyone into contact with each other and to move the communication onto another plane (Fig 7).

Basically what we want to do is to develop dialogue between all the participants rather than channel announcements to and from the hub to the constituent lead members of the ‘wheel’. Announcements are useful and informative but limited. Dialogue involves conversation, which is a multi-way event between a number of people, which can evolve into a discussion and which will facilitate a ‘best practice pathway’. For example, one team may have a problem that needs solving and another may have already faced a problem and solved it. Alternatively, a team may try out an innovative idea which could be adapted or applied at another site. Everyone is aware of this, everyone expressed the desire to do this but it has not really taken off as we had hoped. Some groups are closer to each other than to others; we had always envisioned the ‘special relationships’ that have developed. We need to somehow enhance these sub-relationships to the whole group situation and to develop a cyber café/cyber pub atmosphere where everyone involved in the project feels able to join in and contribute. No idea should be considered too small or to off-beat to throw up for group discussion.

During the last 18 months, various unsuccessful attempts have been made to get everyone on line with First Class and there are possible reasons for this.

1. The idea was not explained clearly enough. CDs and instructions were sent out in May 1998 but very few people tried to install the software and the ones who did ran into difficulties.
2. The Bangor REM server was upgraded and further instructions were sent out to enable partners to download the software from the internet or to connect directly via the internet. This was also unsuccessful although a few people did get through. Unfortunately, there has to be a critical mass for this kind of activity to take off; otherwise the one or two people who join in feel very isolated. Following this workshop, if the consensus is that we should continue with this idea, we will have an official ‘start date’.
3. Internet connections to Africa are notoriously convoluted. A message from Bangor to Southern Africa goes through numerous computers, any one of which could be closed at a given time. I know this from experience as I tried to access the site from Ghana; it took hours to download.
4. Not everyone has equal access to a PC and are therefore not used to reading their e-mails instantly and replying instantly. There are also cultural differences with interpretation of what needs to be communicated; not everyone is comfortable with padding out their messages with lateral information and will initially feel uncomfortable and strange getting involved in an electronic discussion. One solution might be to use the ‘reply with quote’ option.

5.2 The way forward:

1. The group should decide if this is a good idea or not. If it is agreed that we should proceed, then we should decide on a start date and time when everyone should log in. It is suggested by those who use the system that everyone does not necessarily have to log in on the same day but for any given topic should aim to log in at least once a week.
2. Sub-groups should be set up during this workshop and the possible participants identified. It should then be up to those individuals to decide upon the frequency of their interactions and to commit themselves to contribute to the success of the venture. If necessary one person could be selected as a convenor for each sub-group.
3. If people have genuine difficulties with internet access, it would be helpful if they shared those difficulties with the group. We have identified people in Botswana for example who are using First Class. There is a server set up by the Northern College of Education, Aberdeen, at the Ministry of Education and they have 180 registered users. It might be appropriate to mention that it took quite a while for the idea to be accepted in that project as well.

5.3 Reporting:

I would like to gently remind you of a few requests to make life easier at CAZS, for Maureen in particular:

1. Please do not attempt to format any of your own documents. Write them in Times New Roman, font 12, single-line spacing, and NO FANCY FORMATTING. It is very time-consuming to work out what people have done and, as we are trying to coordinate style of presentation, it is better for you not to waste time being creative as well.
2. Please follow the guidelines for citation of bibliography decided upon at the Gaborone Workshop (Annex 6 of Proceedings).
3. Please cross-check your own references to ensure that they all appear in the text and that they are all cited in the bibliography. It is virtually impossible to extract the information after the event. Although we are publishing the reports, the responsibility for the accuracy of content is yours. We appreciate the difficulties of a multi-disciplinary team but multiply those problems by 5 and add several thousand miles to the equation and you will get our perspective!
4. The length and format of the reports are prescribed by the EC and must be strictly adhered to. We have been sending out a format and we would appreciate it if all partners follow the instructions. If we request a one-page document please do not send us two pages. You are in the best position to prioritise what you want included in short reports. We would prefer to keep the editing to the minimum so that we do not loose the individual country flavour of the reports.
5. Getting the financial report to Bangor on time in the correct format is critical. If one partner is late, it not only reflects badly on everyone but also delays the payment from Brussels to all partners. It is the responsibility of the team leaders to ensure that the Director of Finance at their institution meets the deadline; our Finance Team contact them directly but the team leaders are also signatories to the contract.

Figure 6: Existing channels of communication

Figure 7: Potential for using First Class Conferencing

Figure 8: Reporting

5.4 Installing First Class Client on your computer

1. Download FirstClass Client from Softarc http://www.softarc.com

It may be installed free of charge on any computer: it is the server software and user registrations which have to be purchased (Bangor has done this and have recently acquired an upgrade which will hopefully facilitate the communications between Europe and Africa).

2. Click the programme icon to start the programme. A login window appears.
3. Choose the file "home.fc"
4. Press "Setup". The "Connect via" box should say "TCP-IP.FCP"
5. In the "Server" box, type in "rem.bangor.ac.uk" You do not have to fill in any other boxes.
6. Click on "Save"
7. Fill in your username and password and click "Login".

This leads you to a desktop with these items on:

- your personal mailbox

- a news conference for information on REM

- online help

- the Rangelands conference.

There is a REM website for new users of FirstClass at http://weblife.bangor.ac.uk/firstcl/home1.html

Unfortunately this refers to and older version of FirstClass Intranet Client (FCIC5.1) but the principles are the same. In the new version more functions are performed by icons and fewer by pull down menus.

If you want your desktop to have a background picture and icons on, download the settings file from the Rangelands conference.

If you have connection problems, contact the REM office s.owen@bangor.ac.uk 01248 383639.

http://rem.bangor.ac.uk/Login can be used to access First Class via the internet.

It is important for us to remember that this type of conferencing is not easy to achieve even inside Europe. However, it is worth persevering as it will allow ALL the people involved the opportunity to join in the discussions and the debate, not only the project leaders. It will also allow smaller interest groups to get together to discuss their many and varied interests and problems.

We are operating within the framework of the REM project which is a EU funded project whose aim is to facilitate electronic conferencing and sharing of information and resources. The team is constantly attempting to improve the communications and have purchased new software with the aim of ironing out some of the difficulties. When you consider that the message goes through many servers in many countries the chances of one of them being down is quite high.

I have posted a resume next to my name and also a welcome message to everyone as they ‘arrive’. Please do the same – it is fairly easy to navigate yourself around using the Help.

Your usernames are as follows:

1. j.arntzen
2. r.chanda
3. t.hoffman
4. l.magole
5. m.majoro
6. n.mokitimi
7. m.marake
8. jpm.rica
9. a.petersen
10. m.setshogo
11. c.skarpe
12. o.totolo
13. gw.jones
14. a.solomon2 (unfortunately there’s another a.solomon!)
15. h.rodkin
16. r.rohde
17. s.todd
18. c.vogel
19. p.carrick
20. n.allsopp
21. d.mobbs
22. a.friend
23. h.fidzani
24. g.tacheba

Password = password until you individualise it by clicking on ‘Services’ and then on Change Password.

I will be posting a document produced by the Botswana team to the Rangelands conference on First Class and would encourage you all to participate in the discussion.

5.5 Standardisation of Data Acquisition (Presented by Gareth Wyn Jones, CAZS)

Standardisation of data acquisition is very important. We all tried to set this out at the beginning, at the Gaborone Workshop. It is essential that what each partner does is written up in sufficient detail so that it can be used and checked by others. It will be useful to exchange survey manuals and techniques so that gaps can be filled.

A discussion of Project Figures 1 and 2 took place (see Annex 5). Further details of conclusions can be found in section 7.3.

What is the relationship between data collection and modelling requirements?

Must do several different things and assess how they relate:

• Check on standardised methodology
• Check that data sets are complete (recognise that some are not as important)
• Exchange information - biological, ecological, social and economic
• Modification of the "soft" model in Project Figures 1 and 2 to specific sites.

A key issue is "Does this diagram work in the study areas?", e.g., water, wildlife are not in the model but are important in Botswana. Each group should make the modifications required to represent their study sites.

Rural livelihoods and the "welfare of community" are central to the study.

We are all very enthusiastic about the modelling aspect of the project but what comes first? A model is a sophisticated form of speech but it is possible to integrate qualitative data, e.g., on policy, without a model or in a "soft" model.

Conclusion:

The task is not easy but we must not be seen to be chickening out. If people subsist on the range from animals, crops and range products, this system ought to be described somehow. A mathematical model is one option; a "soft" model is another. This is what has evaded people before us.

The way forward:

Some components can be modelled hard; biomass, etc, can be quantified economically as well. Policy is more soft.

Andrew suggests a 'toy model' to look at system efficiency. What determines efficiency?

Make a list of data we have collected and determine what is the minimum data set that is of use.

We must find ways of quantifying wealth; find indexes of wealth ranking, e.g., human development index, UNDP, and compare each community with national average, etc.

6. Evening Session

Delegates were shown a desertification video, "A Season of Hope" (which includes footage of Paulshoek village and land degradation issues in the region).

Tuesday, 9th March

6.1 Field visit - Paulshoek (See timetable, p. i, Annex 1)

Meeting with Paulshoek Development Forum (POF)

Members:

Benjamin Corjeus	Chair for the day, representing Paulshoek, Mayor/also member of Leliefontein Traditional Council
Helen Cloete	new Deputy Chair of POF
Samuel Cloete	Chair, Job Creation Committee
John Corjeus	Chair, Sanitation Project
Mervyn Cloete	Sport and Recreation
Hans Sarah Gouws	Administrative Clerk, POF
Drieka Klaasen	Chair, Housing
Anna Links	Parks Committee
Hetta Joseph	Education Committee
Matilda Dirkse	Administrative Clerk, Leliefontein Traditional Council
Anita Cloete	Treasurer, POF (resigning)
Leraume Klaasen	Health & Welfare

Chair of Agricultural Committee was absent

6.1.1 Introduction

The Paulshoek Development Forum is a local development forum; in charge of development in Paulshoek (see p. 4, Annex 1).

The Workshop delegates were met by a combination of chair persons from different committees which comprise the forum, e.g., sports and housing.

The committees operate under the umbrella of the PDF. For example, if the Sports & Culture Committee wishes to instigate a project, they bring details to the POF, who draws up a budget, etc. If the Housing Committee wishes to start a project, they bring it to the POF, and the Committee will then implement the project.

NBI bring ideas to the POF. The community decides if they wish to take these ideas on board, e.g., the Parks Committee takes initiatives suggested by NBI.

The POF is a great example of the new, democratic South Africa. Everyone has a voice. All have freedom to speak. No-one from the outside can tell them what to do.

Questions to the Forum:

1. Water
2. Energy/Electricity
3. Transport.

Water is the biggest problem, especially access to fresh, clean water.

Lack of employment has impact.

Nearest hospital is in Garies, 65 km away; the road is bad and it costs R150 for transport.

Summary of burning issues:

• Transport is a major problem but no-one knows how to deal with it
• Understand the context is important but within stock farming - what is important and what are the priorities?
• Dryness; the stock is dying; even though they have additional farms now, the animals have not been taken to new farms. Income is poor and expenditure is huge.
• They believe that researchers can open the door and give them direction.

BUT

Q. Is this Project in a position to help them? POF can write up proposals and the project team can help target agencies that might help.

Gareth Wyn Jones (on behalf of the Project Team)

Research is orientated towards understanding problems. We hope from that understanding to produce options for the community to decide upon. Understanding is the first step.

The Project is taking place at 3 locations: Botswana, Lesotho, and Paulshoek, South Africa. It will be possible to see what the common problems are and how solutions can be learned from each other.

Even though it is a research project, it should lead to practical development as part of the NBI commitment, e.g., the campsite and ram camp have already been set up in association with NBI.

It will take time but some things can start, e.g., marketing, introduction of vegetable and other crops which are tolerant of salinity, maybe varieties of wheat and barley which are more drought tolerant. Options from around the world can be tested here if that is the wish of the community.

We do not come here with bags of money but we will continue to work with the people.

Request

Please provide the Paulshoek Community with information for their archives. They do not want people to take information away without giving something in return.

Fenceline contrast at Kuile

6.2 Grazing impacts on plants and animals

The Land Care Project is an attempt to instil an ethic around caring for the land sustainably and is similar to the Department of Water Affairs & Forestry "Working for Water".

Some of the issued raised at a workshop with the community included:

• Building of sand dam - improve water quality
• Improve road networks - access for farmers
• Produce a dam in an area without water in order to graze area for longer periods
• Borehole - too expensive
• 'Ethical' conservation - 'sustainability'
• Rehabilitation project in an area called 'lost hope', which is full of robusta.

Lee began testing rehabilitation techniques during February 1999.

The land is overgrazed as is indicated by the presence of gallena sp. Shrubs are not regenerating, and water infiltration is lower.

It is intended to use fencing as an exclusion method of restoration. Implementing is one thing but developing methods of monitoring is another. They intend to keep animals out for 2-3 years but this needs to be agreed by the community.

Thoughts on restoration include:

• Need more scientific 'monitoring'
• Who is to say that things are 'better'?
• Will be designing restoration projects with Paulshoek using exotic plants, e.g., salt bush, etc.

All of this, of course, depends on funding.

Socio-economic Synthesis and General Discussion

The Botswana and Lesotho delegates were surprised by Paulshoek. They had not expected to see such a marginal area where people are pushing livelihood to the edges of possibilities. Livestock and crops are strong features and the research on the range is moving in the right direction. There needs to be more of a focus on crops - looking for alternative crops and farming systems which would suit this area of unreliable rainfall.

There is an ARC initiative looking at wheat cultivars (Nicky Allsopp) and she hopes to be able to introduce other crops. There is a lack of cropping equipment: plough, tractor, harrow, harvester and, in 1997, some had access to equipment, others did not.

Pensions and livestock make up household incomes; pensions are subsidising agriculture.

How does crop failure affect household incomes? This remains to be answered.

The Botswana site and Paulshoek are similar, maybe not physically, but the people want to make a living in a hostile environment. Are there alternative livelihoods possible? This will be discussed during the remainder of the project.

Braai with Paulshoek Community

POF people present: Oom Dan, Chair of POF; Mary Smith, Chairperson of POF, Health & Sanitation/Welfare, Secretary of POF; Anita Cloete; Helen Cloete; Drieke Klaasen; Anna Links; Sarah Klaasen - Creche Teacher.

The community shared a delicious meal of freshly slaughtered sheep, salad and local bread with us at the camp site. They provided some entertainment of singing and dancing, and clearly held the South African team in high regard. The sun set, the fire died down, the music stopped, and the villagers streamed down the hill back to their homes, and we returned to our hotel to mull over what we had learnt during a very special field visit indeed.

Wednesday, 10 March

The country groups spent some time modifying Project Figure 1 (see Annex 5).

7. Modelling and Integration

A basic introduction to the value of socio-economic modelling was given by Andrew Friend as a foundation for his more detailed comments later. He discussed existing models and described the process-based approach to modelling the effects of land use change on ecosystems.

There are many things which can be modelled, e.g.:

Crop Production

• Planting decisions
• Yield - conditions, area, type
• Product usage - rates, function of animals, conditions.

Household Economy

• Income from sale of rangeland products: meat, wool, crops, honey
• Income from government: pensions, remittances
• Income from other sources: mine workers, others
• Outgoings for necessities: food, gas, building, clothes, grain, stock, tools
• Outgoings for non-essentials: beer
• Relationship between temperature (°C), wood burning, food intake and type, labour availability and range use (crops, wood, harvest).

Sub-model components include:

Physical Environment

• ET: climate (daily RH, T°C, PPT, Rn, wind
• Soil depth, texture, profile, infiltration cap, nutrients, rock content, slope, aspect.

Vegetation Dynamics & Productivity

• Types: palatable, unpalatable, grass, annual herbs
• Grazing, browsing, trampling effects and rates on stock condition
• Wood harvest rates
• Space for annuals
• Rooting depths and competition
• Growth rates - soil, water, radiation, T/C
• Physiological status: nutrient contents, stomatal conductivity, etc.

Livestock State

• Weight and grazing rate/quality
• Sheep: goat differences
• Grazing area
• Market value
• Production offtake
• Other feed effects (crop products).

Figure 9:

Figure 10: Outline of DIST Model

He then outlined a possible 'toy' model for Paulshoek.

Figure 11: 'Toy' Model for Paulshoek

The other teams (especially South Africa and Lesotho) outlined their progress so far:

7.1 Data Modelling in Paulshoek (Presented by Simon Todd, NBI)

The South African team has developed a Paulshoek frame-based model. The Paulshoek frame-based model provides links to several small models that make up one large model.

The modelling process:

1. Identify the objectives of the model
2. Identify the driving variables
3. Choose the frames
4. Identify key variables and processes which are internal to each frame
5. Determine pathways and rules for switching between frames
6. Build a dynamic model for each frame.

Objectives:

To pool our ecological understanding of Paulshoek vegetation dynamics in order to assess the effects of vegetation change on livestock production and people's livelihoods under commercial and communal land tenure systems. The modelling process was found to be a useful exercise for the delegates to organise their thoughts.

Driving Variables:

• Rainfall
• Water supply
• Temperature
• Forage supplement
• Off-take strategy
• Stocking rate
• etc.

There followed a description of how the frames can be used, which is not easily reproduced here. They anticipate being able to include aerial photos/satellite imagery to the model and fit Ashia's map into it as well. This is site specific to Paulshoek and the team have benefited from devoting at least 2 hours per week to critical though and group dynamics.

7.2 Ecological/Climate Modelling in Lesotho

(Presented by Juan Pablo Martinez Rica, IPE) (See Annex 4)

There are great differences between Lesotho on the one hand, and South Africa and Botswana on the other. Topography is very important in Lesotho. Altitude is most important; it is not fixed, and is a distributed variable across the whole country.

Juan Pablo has been experimenting with a model which 'describes' the general distribution of ecological/biophysical variables, e.g., Figure 12.

Figure 12: A Dynamic Model

Now very modest institutions can afford mapping tools. This, in addition to that mentioned on Monday, is IPE's contribution to the Rangelands Project.

There are plans to prepare:

2 sets of maps: regional and whole country

2 sets of study areas in the Pelaneng-Bokong RMA.

The first set of maps will describe the basic scenario, and the second will attempt to guess estimates 50 years from now after subsequent climatic and land use changes have been input.

There will be 100 maps in each set. The number is too high to be completed in the framework of the project. More funds will be needed to continue this exercise.

On Monday, differences in the 3 sites were noted. On Tuesday, Botswana and Lesotho delegates witnessed the differences during the field visit and again, on Wednesday morning, the differences have been highlighted. These will be dealt with later.

Successful Sustainable Rangeland Management (SRM) is a result of a balance between environmental sustainability, equity and efficiency, and the objective is to maximise sustainable land productivity whilst, at the same time, spreading the benefits as much as possible.

Figure 13: Sustainable Rangeland Management

This session includes:

1. Country presentation of Project Figures 1 and 2
2. Identify where similar, where different
3. Standardisation, completion, exchange of methods, welfare
4. Modelling.

7.4 Lesotho's Comments on Project Figures 1 and 2

Project Fig 1 is fairly representative of their situation. However, some things are absent.

The group could not agree whether stock theft is an indicator of socio-economic status or not.

N.B. Irregular access to the range either to damage it or for personal gain is a feature.

7.5 Botswana's Comments on Project Figure 1

(Presented by Moffat Setshogo, UB)

From the Botswana perspective, water, specifically quantity and spacial distribution, is important and Project Figure 1 does not give sufficient weight to water, crops, wildlife or veld products. External income sources are also very important.

7.6 South Africa's Comments on Project Figure 1

(Presented by Timm Hoffman, NBI)

In their view, the top part of Project Figure 1 relates to biophysical issues, and the bottom part to social issues. Policy is either misplaced or the arrows do not fit. Cash income needs to be elaborated on here as well. Where is it coming from?

How much marketing goes on and how much trade in kind?

This model is only a conceptual framework for the work to hang on. Modification of this model will give outputs.

7.7 A Project Figure 3 was suggested, which includes water and wildlife/veld products, which were previously not represented (Annex 5).

7.8 Similarities and Dissimilarities between the Sites

The aim of this exercise is to determine whether our study is site specific or whether generalisations can be made. Table 6 gives a summary. In conclusion we can say that:

3. Questions:

To what extent do sites represent rural population?

To what extent must the findings included in it be national policy given the percentage of people involved compared to the total population? This is an important for funding bodies.

4. Welfare indicators

Why develop comparative indices? Where does this lead? The main target is socio-economic well-being.

In a naive sense, comparative indices are very useful when writing reports. We need to be able to compare communities for donors. Basing our comparisons on money is hopeless as we are dealing with very deprived communities. We need realistic and meaningful comparison.

As the model evolves, it will lead to aspects of human development indices being altered, e.g., if lambing percentages increase or decrease, this will influence the welfare of the population, and needs to be considered.

Comparative indices will also influence policy development options. If we can make an impact through policy, we will need comparative data to convince governments and donors of the validity of our case:

• There are 2 aspects to the work, action research and development. Our work should make a difference; we are not interested in a study for the sake of it. Regional collaborative aspects of the work will make our study a model in a regional context. In a regional dimension, we must be able to defend stability as being tested in variable situations.

• The conclusion which we must draw from our comparative site list is that we need to work harder. Parameters such as altitude and rainfall are comparative but we can extend the list and ensure that we are using the same units, etc. We attempted to do this at the Gaborone Workshop but we need to be vigilant.

Table 6: Comparisons between the 3 Sites

Issue	Lesotho	South Africa	Botswana
Study Area
Size	Medium (70,000 ha.)	Small	Large (+ 10,000 km2)
Population	High (100,000)	Small (800)	Medium (+ 4,000)
Settlements	30	1	+ 10
Main Rangeland Uses	Livestock	Livestock	Livestock Hunting Gathering
Abiotic Environment	Mountains Surface Water High Rainfall	Mountains Surface & Groundwater Low Winter Rainfall	Flat Sandveld Groundwater low in summer
Biotic Environment	Montane Temperate Grassland Livestock	Karoo Montane Livestock	Tree Savanna Wildlife Livestock
Culture	Uniform Pastoralism	Uniform Pastoralism	Hunters & Pastoralism
Access to Markets	Reasonable Distance	Remote	Remote
External Influence	Large Remittances	Large (Pension, Remittances, Policies, Trusts)	Large (Pensions, Subsidies, Policies)
Technology	?	?	?
Political Stability	?	OK	OK
Key Rangeland Issues	Degradation Livelihoods	Degradation Livelihoods	Degradation Wildlife
Marginal Land	Yes	Yes	Yes

Local conditions need to be characterised. Problems such as access to water, etc, need to be identified thus making them relevant to policy. We need to develop an "action agenda", and use the indicators to measure the effectiveness of policy over time. We must make our research extremely applied and force ourselves to be relevant at all times. This can be done if we work as we are trying to, viz, with the community.

How do they perceive the problems in terms of possible indicators? What are their indicators of welfare?

A discussion ensued on the compilation of a quantitative list of welfare indicators. The most recent Human Development Reports and Indices are included in Annex 6.

The Human Development Index of UNDP uses life expectancy at birth and adult literacy as measurements. However, in all the countries, there is an official and local language. In Lesotho, for example, literacy rates are based on competency in English. To what extent is English the language of opportunity, and exclusion from competency in English based on economic wealth?

The Human Development Reports also have gender-related development indices.

It was decided to postpone the compilation of a final list. All partners should compile a list to be sent to Bangor. The CAZS team will collate the lists and produce a set with sufficient broad agreement.

8. pm Session

8.1 Three key issues have emerged:

1. Communication is essential. Hopefully, First Class will facilitate this. One person from each country will be needed to liaise with Einir Young to make this work.
2. Standardisation of data. It is noted that the biophysical aspects of the work are awesome.
3. Estimating biomass productivity is an enormous task, and the current timescale is short. Synthesis of information across the sites? We are addressing global change, climate, productivity and sustainable management so we need some handle on biomass productivity as the whole point of the project is to link rangeland state to productivity but this is not easy. Options include:

• growth/mm rain

• grams of carbon fixed ha^-1 y^-1.

We should aim to match people's perceptions to physical fact, and the ecologists will get together to come up with a common method. Each country can come up with a method and send it to CAZS to coordinate.

8.2 Modelling

(Presented by Andrew Friend, ITE, Edinburgh, U.K)

There are many things which can be modelled, e.g.:

1. Modelling can be general or site specific. It is possible to create a Paulshoek model with the information currently available. When that is complete, externalise the site specific model to form a transferable shell. The challenge will be to transfer it to another site.
2. Starting with Paulshoek will be a useful way forward. The components of the model have already been agreed. It is a reasonable expectation that a specific model of this nature can lead to a general model. Policy might well be site-specific but other elements of the process are almost universal.

There is a good case for looking for additional research funds to buy more of Deena Mobbs' time.

Model validation will be a challenge, and data limitation will play a part.

The question of transferability will also need to be addressed. How replicable will it be as a decision support tool? Ideally, the eventual model should be completely transferable but at this stage it is not wise to commit ourselves. The first product of the modelling exercise should be kept within this group.

Thursday, 11 March

9. Policy Analysis

9.1 General Introduction

9.1.1 Lesotho (Presented by Moeketsi Majoro, NUL)

The objective of this session was to:

• Share ideas as to how we are going to approach policy analysis in rangeland projects

• Review what has happened in Work Package 5, viz:

- activities

- results

- 'problems' arising.

A. Policy Theory

Problem Identification:

• What is the problem?
• For whom is it a problem?
• Is the problem a priority? And for whom?
• Who should do something?
• Who can do something?

Evaluation of Policy Objectives

• Objectives must be clear
• Avoid conflicting objectives
• If conflicts in objectives are unavoidable then make conscious trade-offs between objectives
• Policies must have measurable targets and realistic time frames?

We are trying to balance policy objectives. However, when we try to be holistic, this clashes with the traditional civil service approach, e.g., in Lesotho, government recommends crops to be changed to high value vegetable and tree crops. Each year, government gives a subsidy for maize and no incentives for crops recommended by experts.

Who is the policy targeted at? Objectives must be achievable or reasonable.

B. Policy Performance

Are there measurable indicators?

Is there a monitoring process?

Who participated in policy generation (inclusiveness of all stakeholders is a key to successful policy generation)?

If stakeholders participated in policy generation, what was their capacity or role? Were they:

• Drivers of policy (initiator, implementor, destination known and chosen)
• Passengers (those being carried along, destination known chosen)
• Kidnap victims (dragged along, destination unknown).

What is the degree of recognition of the policy?

What is the degree of compliance with policy stipulations?

Was policy perceived fair?

Was policy perceived equitable?

Were policy targets met?

Were targets realistic?

Choice of Policy Instruments:

• Were the instruments chosen appropriate?
• Were the chosen instruments acceptable to policy partners? If not, implementation will be half-hearted at best.
• Were instruments cost effective?
• Were alternative instruments considered?

Did policy explicitly recognise each of the following policy levels:

• Local (community, district and provincial)
• National
• Regional (OAV, SADC)
• Global, e.g.:

- EU beef exports

- EU/Lesotho mohair

- EU v. US banana war.

N.B. External support may vanish.

Was there recognition of all policy partners:

• Households
• Civil Society (Local)
• Civil Society (Global)
• Government (Sectors)
• Government (Macro)?

The following need also be considered:

• Traditional institutions

• Gender differences

• Marketing boards.

Many people parade their success but they have in fact press-ganged the people.

Communities rank their needs differently to those perceived by visiting "experts".

N.B. Policy options must be framed within our limits, e.g., Paulshoek's priority, viz, electricity, is outside our remit.

9.1.2 Botswana (Presented by Jaap Arntzen, UB)

The Botswana team has evaluated policy on a limited number of criteria:

• effectiveness
• equity
• cost efficiency
• acceptability - implementers
• flexibility
• how they adjust to changing circumstances.

They have tried to classify policies as this helps to see where in the conceptual model the policy has impact:

• general (macro economics, exchange rate)
• social welfare (pensions, drought relief)
• resource policies (land and water)
• sectoral policy on:

- agriculture

- wildlife

- tourism

- veld products.

They have looked at traditional v. modern policy, formal and informal; this aids understanding.

They have included a policy question in their socio-economic survey, and designed special, semi-structured interviews for policy-makers at central, district and traditional levels. A general policy review was their starting point. Specific activities include looking at how successful policies are, and this includes consulting "top people" as well as the grass roots.

There is an 'urban myth' that Gaborone is empty on Friday as everyone leaves for their farm but it is unknown to what extent subsidies, etc, are accessed by 'in the know' civil servants, and this is an aspect being considered by the Botswana team.

Comments

Whilst we emphasise policy, there are no policy-dependent trends, e.g.:

• urbanisation
• mobility in society
• change in aspiration
• technical change driving other changes.

The above form a canvas on which policy is placed, and it is important for us to be looking at this.

A Kenyan study was cited as an example where population growth led to environmental improvement not by direct intervention but by creating an enabling environment.

International/Global policies are very important, especially the World Trade Agreement and preferential access to the EU,

9.1.3 Lesotho (Presented by None Mokitimi, NUL)

Lesotho is a kingdom made up of:

• king
• 22 principal chiefs
• 10 districts
• > 1,000 chiefs and head men.

In the past, traditional grazing dominated. Chiefs controlled access in the past through the 'Moebella' system. The Chief kept livestock off the range for 2-3 months and then moved it elsewhere.

Transhumance is still practised in Lesotho. For people to move to the highlands in summer requires grazing permits, and the Principal Chief issues these. The Chief to whom you have allegiance will issue a letter for you to take to the Principal Chief. The highlands are not inhabited by people; they are used solely for grazing and the grazing permits are free.

The Range Management Areas depart from traditional grazing. Features of the RMAs include:

• Exclusive rights to those who are members
• Chiefs are no longer issuing permits for RMAs
• Chiefs are not happy with this loss of power.

The government is thinking of doing away with the practice of transhumance.

9.1.3.1 Village Development Committees

The government thought that chiefs are not democratic enough. Therefore they created Village Development Committees (VDCs). They are elected every 3 years. The chief is the chairperson. This has caused a lot of problems as some believe that the chief should also be elected. VDCs now control the 'Moebella' grazing system. If livestock stray into the Moebella, the livestock is impounded and the money is used for development, not given to the chiefs as previously.

9.1.3.2 The Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP)

Some people get compensation: 2,000 households in the whole area, which is exclusively not RMAs. There has been loss of houses due to construction of the dam and access road, loss of arable land and loss of trees (wood, fuel and fruit). 1,000 households out of the RMAs have been compensated.

The LHWP revenue fund is R6 million per month. Some of this money should be used for development and for the people at grass roots in the whole of Lesotho. However, it is distributed in a haphazard way for building roads and dams.

STABEX (Stabilisation of Export Earnings)

• wool and mohair exports
• 5-year moving average.

This is used for maintaining shearing sheds

Livestock improvement

Purchase of trucks for transport of livestock for export and other livestock-related matters.

"Election Goodies" provided by the government include subsidies on:

• tractor services
• fertiliser
• seeds

for the 1998 winter cropping (wheat and peas)

1998/99 summer cropping.

There is some rivalry between the lowlands and the highlands due to different cropping patterns. It could be said that there has been a total failure of the system because the subsidies did not filter down to farmers.

The Lesotho team hopes to expand the study.

Other Observations

1. Policy impact, e.g., prior to 1993 elections, the military government were about to go into policing grazing fees. Incoming politicians did not introduce grazing fees. This caused a split with US AID.
2. Damming of the river has drowned village grazing, forest, houses, etc. Compensation has been paid for these losses. The compensation would be reinvested in livestock but it is too risky due to theft. The impact of policies from the dam needs to be clarified.
3. The Lesotho Highlands Fund should be funding what the people want. Some needs listed in the PRA should be funded by the LHF. The money is channelled via constituencies but communities are not aware that they can use this money.
4. Stabex - incorporated into ASIP. The wool and mohair farmers in the mountains lose out. Again, they did not recognise that it was available. Shearing sheds and dip tanks are far way; Stabex should have advanced this.

9.2 Comparison between the 3 Countries

The governments are throwing money at communities but we need to answer the question, "Are they successful"? What is the best type of intervention?

What about retrenchment?

Lesotho supplies the highest labour figure to South Africa and has been hit hard - 150,000 men used to work in the mines; this figure has dropped to 100,000.

Remittances make up 50% of GNP of the country. The Lesotho team will study the impact of this in the RMAs.

Migrant labour money used to go into livestock. Now the risks are too great and there is less income anyway which should make an interesting study.

There should have been a research component attached to the LHWP revenue but, when politicians saw cash, it led to chaos and fights at village level. Reform of funding is necessary. The World Bank has pushed them towards transparency but they seem to revert to the freestyle system!

9.2.1 South Africa

Some policies which influence what happens in Paulshoek:

General:

• Macro-economic policies
• Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR)
• Exchange Rate/Monetary Policy (mines, agricultural extension)
• Post-apartheid "flavour of the month" status
• SA/EU agreements.

Social/Welfare:

• RDP - housing, electricity, etc
• Child welfare
• Pensions
• ALEXCOR, AEC, DIAMANTFONDS, IDT.

Resource Policy:

• RDP - water provision
• Land Reform Programme.

Sectoral Policy:

• Agriculture - emphasis on communal areas (LANDCARE, BATAT)
• Tourism (talk, mostly): economic units and withdrawal of subsidies
• Agroforestry.

All we can do in terms of the project is to have three-country analysis. We can draw common threads. First look - there are a lot of differences.

Focus on SACU (South African Customs Union) and SADC (Southern African Development Community):

SACU

About two-thirds of South Africa's African export trade takes place within the long-established SACU, comprising South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia. The bulk of the five countries' imports is supplied by South Africa.

Allowing for the unrestricted flow of goods and services between its members, the Customs Union collects the levies on member states' imports from the rest of the world and apportions the amounts, together with excise duties collected, among the member states according to an agreed formula.

Earnings from the customs and excise pool contribute substantially to the government revenues of Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia.

SADC

The Southern African Development Community (SADC), formerly known as the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) was formed on 17th July 1992 in Windhoek, Namibia.

The SADC consists of 12 member states, namely, Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The SADC Headquarters are in Gaborone, Botswana. The working languages of SADC are English and Portuguese.

It was felt that the Work Packages had provided good guidelines for each team to proceed. Some activities, e.g., Hayley/Rick's photography have been included as extras and Nicky's work is also added value and open to discussion.

There is a feeling also that Work Package 2 is very large and, although everyone has a good handle on all the work packages, we must prepare now lest we stumble at the integration stage.

9.2.2 Lesotho

Lesotho experienced some uncertainty in their programme due to the lack of certain skills, e.g., those of an ecologist. They are trying to recruit from within southern Africa to assist with gathering resources especially related to the RMAs. Data is available and they are analysing it to identify what is missing. There is an uncertainty regarding the off-RMA data and they will need more money for recording from October 1999 to September 2000.

It must be noted that there is more going on in Lesotho than that which is outlined in the Technical Annex.

9.2.3 Botswana

Reporting back is important, and the team has had meetings with the communities to take data.

They are vigilant to see if changes on range, e.g., more goats, are related to global change.

The Botswana team have a weak link with the DfID-funded B.R.I.M.P. (Botswana Range Inventory & Monitoring Project). This project is entering its second phase but it is not clear what they will do.

The EU Country Representative is more interested in 'development' but there is scope for more links to other EU projects.

To what extent is each team to get involved in climate change? The feeling is that we

can do no more than comment.

Water supply is crucial, and there is a relationship between high temperature and stocking density according to analyses made by Simon Todd, NBI.

LESOTHO

Global change includes climate change and socio-economic changes. The Lesotho team feel that they can address the latter if not the former. Economic reform and structural readjustment are issues to be addressed.

There was some scepticism towards global models that describe all three sites as being in the middle of grassland.

Global change is much worse, e.g.:

• World trade
• marketing
• increased emphasis on conservation.

Detailed work plans were produced (Annex 7).

Gareth Wyn Jones and Einir Young should compile action points and exchange them, e.g., regarding:

• modelling in general
• finding an ecologist for Lesotho
• targeting, etc.

10. p.m. Coordination Session

First Class was deemed to be a good idea but there are technical problems, such as "fire walls" at various institutions, to be sorted out.

A discussion took place on the document circulated by the Botswana Team, viz: "Note on Integrative Data Analysis and Reporting" (see Annex 8).

Work programmes were exchanged (see Annex 7). Livestock recording methodologies were also exchanged (see Annex 3).

Reports and publications are circulated, and it was emphasised that:

• when relevant publications come out, everyone should have a copy
• abstracts to conferences should be circulated to all project partners so that everyone knows what is going on
• the EC should be mentioned and acknowledged.

10.1 Publishing

There is no editorial policy in terms of papers; it would be impracticable, and flexibility is much valued by all partners. The title page and abstract of all publications should be sent to Bangor.

10.2 Reporting back to the EC

The guidelines prepared by Botswana developed those discussed in Gaborone. Additionally, the evolution of the 'toy' model will assist in coherent reporting. Integration is likely to be at a more descriptive level, concentrating on local policy and southern African global/continental policy levels.

10.3 Discussion on the possible production of a book

Timm and Rick want to co-edit a book and work to their strength in Paulshoek. There is also potential for a local book covering all 3 sites.

The following format was discussed:

Introduction

Chapter 1 - South Africa

Chapter 2 - Lesotho

Chapter 3 - Botswana

Chapter 4 - Modelling

Chapter 5 - Synthesis

- similarities, local and global

- implications of the findings

- lessons learnt.

The Lesotho team appreciate flexibility and will produce when ready. They feel a greater dependence on and reinterpretation of existing data.

10.4 Tying up loose ends - Coordination

• It would be desirable, from a coordination point of view to get started with First Class as soon as possible.
• Inputs from European collaborators:

• June-August is the best time for a field trip to Botswana.

• The South African team plan to visit Paulshoek early each month, and visits from Europe should be scheduled accordingly.
• Gareth Wyn Jones plans a short visit to Lesotho at the end of September, 1999.

• Ian Robinson will visit all 3 sites.

• Agronomy - enhanced germination, testing other cultivars, etc, will take place with input from Gareth Wyn Jones and Einir Young.

• Lesotho/Spanish axis - need to look for funds.

• Christina Skarpe/Botswana - this link is well-developed and ongoing.

• Institution capacity building - to be addressed by CAZS in collaboration with Dr Ger Schultink, Michigan State University.

11. International Links

See Gareth Wyn Jones' opening remarks (p. 2).

The Botswana team have contacts with the Kalahari Transect Project and with IHDP, (International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change). Contacts from IHDP were met in Barcelona, and a Canadian will be visiting Botswana soon. Identifying interested partners is important.

NATO is focusing on independent Eastern European states so far but becoming global in their interest.

Ger to ask FAO if they are interested in food security.

CAZS has contacted Gerard Szejwach. He has spent time and money in Botswana and South Africa - this needs to be followed up. Botswana are to contact him through Otlogetswe Totolo. N.B.: His budget is quite slim.

We have established good links with Will Steffen, Executive Director, IHDP, and Marie Kholo, IHDP, linking physical resources to socio-economic.

 /P>

12. Publications

N.B.: Always acknowledge the support of the EC.

13. Finance

The next tranche of money is due to be released by the EC in April, 1999. It is allowable to move money between budget headings.

14. Beyond 2001 - Comments

All the partners are keen to see the work continuing into a second phase. We must all consider what sources of funding exist and what are the priorities of funders in each area. We must consider the continuation of the research but also development options in Namaqualand, the Lesotho Highlands and the Kalahari.

Research is most likely to be funded under INCO-DEV.

CAZS will take responsibility for coordinating calls and proposals.

There is a serious problem with timing. It seems that the next relevant call will be made in September 2000. If we succeed with our proposal, we will know by January, 2001 but funding will not commence until October, 2001. Our current project money runs out in Sept 2000 but, with writing-up time until the end of January, 2001. Thus, there is an interregnum of 9 months between projects if we go for second call.

We should aim to collectively put our heads together using First Class as a means of communicating.

Other non-EC sources of funding should be targeted, e.g.:

• the Rockerfeller Foundation - the new Director is interested in sustainable agriculture. In fact, Rockerfeller and Kellogg have developed an interest in southern Africa and are interested in action research.

• NORAD have been generous in Botswana, and may be willing to support other countries.

• 'Development' needs to be targeted to site-specific issues.

• NGOs and the international donor community can be approached when we find useful interventions.

• Ian Robinson/CAZS has links with small donor organisations which could be useful.

The main step now is to go forward with the modelling; even if we only have a crude 'toy' model, it is a step that people want to see made. It should be available by May/June, 1999.

15. Concluding Remarks

• The South African hosts were thanked for their amazing work producing such a fascinating 4-day workshop.

• All the participants have learned a lot, and it has been worthwhile for everyone.

• Mervyn Cloete was asked to thank the Paulshoek community on behalf of the Workshop delegates, who are very grateful for the assistance rendered to them.

• All were encouraged by the thought that it could be infinitely worse and not much better.

Dr E M Young/mlp

June 1999