4, 4." '1 ,I‘.‘ . ' ~T“..4_ 4, l3 .4‘4', 3 “3}4'4‘ .744‘44'2, "3 3"1' . :4, ,3' ‘~ .."" W3: "1i; .. ,.’,' "‘4" -,., i ‘4Jl,41344 l4 . I." '.' 3,4,4, _ ”25w “1,“:13,“,m“434h.,}'j'é'i:,, 3%,!3' m 1,11. ‘7 4 "44 '2” 2.' ' H (Kg: “WWW. Mal $1“-{4344—44331342'4425,3* 434,. ; 4..;:-.4 4.3?‘43 “333‘. 3 343 3 ’ ,, Ml slsri'm % ”4*4zl‘rri"" """“‘i 1" 3" ' ' '6'"? " r 34,34 .343. .- .33 ,4“ 43'. 4:“33: _ "ts |,.. ‘333'3'3 . .‘.= '; "'1 ‘4,”4%“44 ..,.“h . .~l 4. i"";'4‘:,'|‘ _ 4,.3» . '2‘. I," ' U‘ [2.1: h- “‘1: “,c’ 14“!" 82“" 1" I" ‘EWV" H? ‘41‘;‘:’ ' "' """W",I1\4_H"{ 49‘4‘2‘ . , .'_"."4%“‘.' . .444, "'3‘ ‘ 13‘152g“ “‘l'f'ii "" " "‘14 43"‘434172432‘ 9,3,, '3'". 1m" 4 23%;, 'in‘ . A 7'5? ._-}r=‘:. . "SA-:51- awn-4m 4 ,— o.- ‘ ' "‘4 4.7-0. .. : {1‘4“ .. :«4 «. . ’ 4.. 33‘ 433433.34 44W . 44,444 L'LW'M 5“ 4,31,. J‘s‘xfit‘. 4'” :- 4 "4‘ ~1,3144'4L"3::1.. 3342‘s" :1, 3:41; . 2 ‘r "i ‘Y 3'9 “‘1'" ' V. 4 3" ‘1‘“ 45, ,3“"'4!4;‘,‘=-" 3““: 3 43.51.34.” ' 3‘33 .4. ‘4‘.“32‘4‘3423-"4‘3 2 >.' ‘{ "l V ' ' 2. Tfi“: “‘v‘h’ ..- 3:.- 4- '11.:— 4 . 3 3i", ‘4‘ .4434”? ~‘ .‘f', “'4’?! 343%» ,":l‘.' ..,44 .1: 3,321431‘3 ’ , 1"‘2'4‘ 4‘ ,4 . “‘1 “34,2; ‘1 41%;! .' 'j . 4“?!" ““4“ ‘K 1;; til" r, ' Li‘r . , ' bpa, “ 12-2; : ' 4'" Q '4 4 3'4 " ‘ U 1'” i!" .44, 1'23" "'| ‘ . I 4 I 4 , , 4 1“: ‘,~. ‘224'45'4'4‘14 ,431},.,,.,,,.:,4,,. .3577 Li;. .H - ¢. .- ""‘:‘2‘. L" writ: 3358' “.l 24“ '-' - $43313 . 1,3,. ,. -3.sz 43 . ,, I: 44.,4,4{‘ _ ,4!" $4,"; [‘1 V " fl”, ‘ .J'! "i‘ 4,,‘2 r233; 1.2.4.4: .4 ‘ 4 , "" 54"‘44'43‘9 '2', 53:14 4421‘, . .23. 4 4144 :- ' :w-Ifx‘ ‘1 , .‘t '1‘?" 0,43." 14‘3' ~ 1'4“" 4‘ . 32331,} x i a, o. .44”, ‘4‘ - ‘44:: 3 :,_;'i'.' 1‘ wit" 1 f 3":3” - 2:.5; "1"! , 1!"“’“ g “‘4 . 145?: '31-3.- 5‘,“ 3 444,321, 31'; " 4.- ' 13.44,; "2 I"-i' " 4:" ‘ .- . *1? 44,4 * "gun “1“,: 4"."‘2 ‘4‘3' 1r4.,“.,.».,.4 3,3315”; 2 3:34,, 51‘?- J 4.5 0‘ l 2 I at} 4', 34. \1 , , 1,13% -v M. Wm: , -- I-l' '," 3 ‘31,, ‘3 443'. J" [-4"- '.‘,"»"‘“"4"",'.: ‘43:" '."'}.434‘ "3"" z'.'.’24""r "" 3‘“ “"f i‘"‘" ‘43! 44‘4“: ‘ . I I"; ‘. 22..., . 4 , J‘ti ‘.' Li' "1"‘ :t", ,8 2“II"A{:%4 1:42}, .3, - 44;.» iv 4 , a ..... {‘4 ,»,,, ”3:: ,4, . . ,1, . 4344,. ',:"""' “$4123“: ’4 5,, 2,4,2}?! ‘4'4'5‘ .,. '43'3i“414‘4'%""1‘"r‘u:"“'\‘""2;? 1,, “i; . 'z , 1,4 " ' " '"'"""r"" ‘3""' ""3" 5“; 5 'fi '1'4‘344‘ ‘45 V" ""3494“? """"4"". 314.. It ‘. ,',4‘ ,.' '- :1 . I ,4 _ __ L . I, “I . . ‘7 4 2,. . ,.» ”'4“? "‘ 1-" ,4' IR‘ '“'5"“‘5'13"?fi'i'?1“‘49“",“‘i'4" , 2 ‘r‘, .4124. .3' “1%,: h" {J j. 4;: ' ‘ ""'“ {‘2423'22‘133i'4‘4:44"’ii'4§2"" s‘p . :1 < ""'4 ",,4444 ".':'3','1I",,"_ ,'4,,",,.,.., ' "4 .244. 4434' , 43.4.3 4'4..|4" ""2‘442’1 . I . 3 l‘ , ‘ "i". ;.;3,‘,‘,4,I3;4'-,4.L 3' ' 44.. 2:2: «474* ‘ “ J41: g}? 34". ":"LIW :3 43531") +5.44“ {‘{3 , [#3445224 . .,4 5,‘ 4; vuflf, ' ' 2.42: 42' ‘2‘ 3 4:‘, ,M, 5‘ "' "'4‘: ""C14‘»‘|"*'i"'i .44 “,1" 3'4 “A '2444"‘.,"4 fizzy". 44' 4‘“ 4 ,3 r "4 ‘ . """" ' “""4'" 334': 3'14": '44,.44 '44‘44'4 ‘3. ‘" '”- E ' 24% .3, 4: 4 44 .4 ' . -,4 ‘1.. 4"1‘ .;,, '4",',,,4 ‘l"""' 244i..4.,444'4'444 44,1” ‘3" my‘,,,3,,,,4,,,',, _._; "' "4444‘." '4' 4‘4"" '44“'"".3""44‘94421.i'4""4““.4“2’4"" 3"- " "‘3'2“. ‘444 '1934 " ' ' ' i"4“3"" """"”" ' II ‘4 ."'""‘ ”44:4 5 kid 44 4y 24‘3‘ ' I .. f‘ < _ .fr _ . 7.; ._ — _"".. h «- 1 r," ”a ._...o- 4 4r—- Fig} 41 .l J h 9? '4 If "4', w, li‘pn' ". \‘,'."""'('":""?'r'.-' ' '¢ ‘ M '4 ‘4. ‘ .C:. 5"": 4’4""- " I Jvfi'hi‘vsr m i" . "EL-7;. :- I LII 293 01691 4206 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF PASTORALISM IN THE INLAND NIGER DELTA OF MALI presented by Donald Zhang Osborn has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in RESOUI'CE Development W Major professor \ (2116:1627 V MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 LIBRARY Michigan State Unlversity PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. k DATE DUE MTE DUE DATE DUE I‘JhKGIU 5 AA A ‘. HI 1“ WM“ A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF PASTORALISM IN THE INLAND NIGER DELTA OF MALI By Donald Zhang Osborn A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1997 ABSTRACT A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF PASTORALISM IN THE INLAND NIGER DELTA OF MALI By Donald Zhang Osborn In the light of what is widely agreed to be a crisis of African pastoralism, this dissertation examines the specific case of pastoralism in the inland Niger delta (IND) and vicinity in Mali. It considers the evolution and inertia of Western dominated approaches to understanding African pastoralism, and elaborates a political ecological model for analyzing the crisis in the IND. The situation of pastoralism in the IND since the early l9th century is surveyed, from the Islamic-inspired Fulani pastoralist-dominated Diina through periods of Tukulor and French rule to the current Republic of Mali. Pastoral studies are then examined first with reference to the context of Western images of Africa in general. A way of categorizing approaches to explaining the crisis of pastoralism is introduced, and then several approaches are explored. The persistence of several themes in pastoral studies is considered along with their influence on policy. A political ecology model is elaborated with reference to political ecology’s genesis, relationship to other “ecological” models, and place with relationship to the “new science.” Several concepts are applied in this model from the local to the global level, including an actor-oriented approach, action spaces, discourse, and noosphere. These permit accounting for power, ways of knowing, and diverse motivations and interactions. The situation in the IND is shown to involve a shift in action spaces of pastoralists due to lower average flood levels, which leads to interactions unforseen by the Diina system. What is not as apparent are disjunctures between action spaces, hegemony of some over others, and the role of outsiders in constraining action spaces. The result is a situation favoring the powerful but with unpredictable outcomes. This study concludes with discussion of implications for African pastoralism and approaches to development more generally. Four key conclusions are: the importance of ways of knowing in development, the importance of widening consideration of human action and social interaction beyond interests and conflict, the usefulness of the concepts of space and discourse in society-environment interactions, and the imperative of shifiing the initiative in development—not just participation—to the rural poor. Copyright by Donald Zhang Osborn 1997 To Lixing and Nabil. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank several people for their help in this project. My academic advisor Professor R. James Bingen for his rigor and understanding, the members of my dissertation committee, Professors Patricia Bames-McConnell, David J. Campbell, and John Staatz for their insights and encouragement. David Wiley, although not on my academic committee has encouraged my efforts. This effort has benefitted from help on specific topics by several others. Professor David Robinson and Dr. Matthew Turner helped with responses on specialized questions relating to history and society in the inland Niger delta. Two individuals, Paul Samson and Hugo Witter, responded from Europe with especially helpful information to different questions I posted on Usenet. I have also communicated with John Aron Grayzel and Trond Vedeld by electronic mail. Thanks to Diana Rivera and Frank Krist of the Michigan State University Map Library for their help. Needless to say, I alone am responsible for the viewpoints and information presented in this dissertation. To Prof. David Wiley and the African Studies Center, Michigan State University I owe a special debt of gratitude for the opportunity to work in a collegial atmosphere and temporarily occupy a comer of the office. Although I did not work quite as long for the Center for Advanced Study of International Development (CASID), Michigan State University, similar thanks are due to Dr. Tom Carroll and CASID. During the long season of my graduate studies, during which I completed two degrees and one major publication, a number of others have been of particular help. Among them I owe thanks to my parents for their continued encouragement. vi My wife, Lixing, deserves special thanks for her support and patience in the long degree process. During the writing of this dissertation, our first child, Nabil, was born, and he has contributed in his own way to keeping my perspectives fresh. My mother-in- law, Er-Tian Wang helped us with Nabil during his first months, which were also a critically important time in completion of the dissertation. vii PREFACE This dissertation reflects a number of personal interests, including Mali, Fulani culture and language, relations between farmers and pastoralists, African rural development, the role of the West in African development, and the intersections of social and environmental change. Over the last decade, as the “crisis of pastoralism” has become a commonplace in the discourses of development in and of research on Africa, I have had the opportunity to study various aspects of social and economic development, natural resource management, agricultural development, and cultures and languages' of West Africa. All of this academic work has contributed to enriching perspectives on rural development and pastoralism in Africa that I gained during several years’ Peace Corps service in Togo, Mali, and Guinea. I have had two guiding concerns in harnessing and driving my interests2 through the process of writing this dissertation: finding the right vantage point(s) on the problem and not overstepping my bounds as a non-African in interpreting Africa and prescribing for it. In other words, what is the problem and what is an appropriate role for an outside academic and development specialist in addressing this problem? ‘ Including compilation of a Fulfulde lexicon (Osborn, Dwyer, and Donohoe 1993) and a Foreign Language and Area Studies fellowship in Barnbara for three years (1989-92). 2 This is an allusion to the metaphor in the Upanishads of the senses as horses drawing a chariot: If one cannot control and direct the horses, one cannot get anywhere. In a similar way, academic writing in my experience is a matter of focusing a set of interests on acquiring sufficient information and concepts to make a coherent set of statements about a particular problem or issue. viii As a longtime “interdisciplinarian” and evolving “scholar-practitioner,” I have drawn part of my inspiration from Lewis Mumford’s (1967:16) description of the role of generalists: “the generalist has a special office, that of bringing together widely separated fields, prudently fenced in by specialists, into a larger common area, visible only from the air. Only by forfeiting the detail can the overall pattern be seen, though once that pattern is visible new details, unseen even by most thorough and competent field workers may become visible.” The vocation of bringing different understandings together to address particular problems, while it sometimes involves methodological problems, also Offers the exciting possibility of creative breakthroughs stemming from connecting “previously unconnected matrices of experience” or thought (Koestler 1978[1964]:45, 94). In my thinking, I have modified Mumford’s metaphorical placement of the generalist “above” the terrain of study by referring to a series of observations made by the French geographer Jean Gallais (1967) about perspectives of the inland or interior Niger delta (IND)—a region of Mali in which I have had a long-term personal interest. Gallais noted that while looking at this rather flat region from the air gives one an impression of monotony, and viewing it from ground level gives one immediate detail but little perspective, the most interesting view of the countryside is from horseback. From that vantage point, according to Gallais, one can appreciate the delta’s relief and features better than one can from the air, and one can get a better feeling for the lay of the land than is possible while on foot. In effect, through interaction with the object of study, the relative value of different perspectives becomes apparent, one gathers information from each of them, and an especially useful vantage point can be identified. ix In a similar way, many subjects of study may have their own optimal vantage points somewhere in between those of the specialized disciplines proposing to study them on the one hand and the lofty station of the generalist proposed by Mumford on the other. Much of my own work I see as falling in this middle range and part of the task I have faced in this dissertation, as in my other work, is finding the “best” vantage point(s)—one that works in that it reveals something about the subject and perhaps its relations to wider events and issues that was not known before, and one that provides an optimal starting point for discussing the overall picture. My interests cover several aspects of pastoralism in Mali, and there are indeed many ways one could approach writing about each given concern. So another way of looking at the process of this dissertation is in terms of a phrase VS. Naipaul (1986) used to refer to his writing process: “finding the center.” This phrase was long in my mind as I sorted through material and ideas in several attempts to define the focus of this research. In a way, all research and writing enterprises involve such a phase, however it is termed. Moreover, as current post-structuralist understandings might have it, both the ideal “vantage point” or “center” and the subjects of study are not only not fixed, but are contingent in large measure on the worldview of the observer. My other guiding concern is the appropriateness of one not originating or living in a particular part of the world diagnosing and prescribing for that part of the world. In the case of scholarship on Africa this issue has long been of personal concern, and is captured by a statement by the Malian writer Amadou-Hampaté Ba (1972), sometimes called 1e sage d ’Afi'ique (the wise one of Africa): “It belongs, in effect, to Africans to speak of X Africa to outsiders, and not for outsiders, however knowledgeable they be, to speak of Africa to Africans.”3 This is more than just an academic exercise or a fretting over “political correctness” when one realizes that ideas, goals, and plans for development in Afi'ica are ofien a matter of Westerners speaking (with money and power) to Africans about the latter’s reality, and that the results of even the most sincere efforts have generally been far from ideal. This is not to overlook the fact that there must be some values that transcend cultures and some way for people from one part of the world to contribute to people in another, only to express a caution about speaking in others’ place. In previous work (Osborn 1993) I explored the appropriateness of Western approaches to development in Africa. Yet the issue clearly goes deeper. Over the last five centuries there has been a long slow collision between the cultures and economies of the West and those of sub-Saharan Afiica, and Africa has clearly had the worst of it: slavery, colonialism, racism, and maldevelopment (to borrow from Sidney Mintz and Vandana Shiva), although to be fair the contact between the cultures has not been without some bright spots, and one cannot lay the blame for all of Africa’s woes on the West. To explore this interaction and its implications for development in more depth, it is helpful to look at a specific topical and geographic area. That is in part what I attempt to do in this dissertation. 3 The French original reads: “Il appartient en effet aux Africains de parler dc l’Afrique aux étrangers, et non aux étrangers, si savants soient-ils, de parler de l’Afrique aux Afiicains.” (Translation by this author.) xi The contact between the West and African pastoralism, although historically more recent than the overall interaction between the West and Africa, has been particularly interesting because Afiican pastoralists have seemed the most remote from the West, and indeed from colonial and national control, and have had the least voice in the larger interaction with the West. In fact, it sometimes seems that Westerners have taken all sides in academic and policy discussions about African pastoralism—about what it is, what it should be, how it should fit in changing socio-economies, etc.—leaving little space for African authorities (who for their part have generally been influenced by Western thinking and have not had pastoralism high on their agenda of concerns anyway) and almost none at all for the pastoralists themselves. So in a very real sense, the whole discourse about African pastoralism over the last century and more seems to go against Ba’s dictum. So where do my efforts on this topic enter in this equation? I see this dissertation in major part as illuminating the process of construction Of African pastoralism among outsiders fi'om countries with the means and the will to profoundly affect life of pastoralists if not to effect changes in the way they had once imagined they could. On the local and national level, it is intended to similarly throw light on the policy dimensions of interaction between society and nature, where a significant dimension Of that interaction is the construction of nature and natural resources by outsiders. The outcome of this study is also in part to enter into the realm of prescriptions for pastoral development, and that is admittedly only a short distance from making pronouncements on what is “right” for Africa and Afi'icans. However, I am more xii concerned about prescriptions for the relations between scholars and practitioners from outside Africa and their approach to African pastoralists. It is said that a dissertation is in part a story, a story with a particular form and set of requirements to be sure, but a story nonetheless that outlines a situation, why it needs treatment, and what one brings to it that is new. In this dissertation I am tempted to say that there are three stories against a common background, and that in their coming together, there is an interesting outcome. The first story is that of the IND, a fascinating region fi'om many points of view, especially the complex solutions of the delta society to the problem Of co-use of resources. In many ways the IND defies stereotypes about Africa, pastoralists, and even broad questions about human social development.‘ The second is that of Western constructions of African pastoralism and development approaches to it. This story is one not of gradual improvement of knowledge or even of successions of paradigms, but rather one of a long discourse on recurring themes that relate at least as much to the realities of the outsiders as to the realities of pastoralists. The third is that of political ecology, the most recent family of several “ecological” approaches to understanding society-environment relations. Political ecology is emerging as a particularly useful and appropriate tool for analysis of society- environment interaction in the context of post-modernism and post-structuralism. 4 McIntosh (199?), for example, uses the model of early urbanization hypothesized for the IND based on archaeological evidence from Djenné, to challenge the dominant theory of how cities first formed. xiii These of course echo the now familiar tryptic of rural development—the “three cultures” of local people, development practitioners, and academics (Chambers 1983). My interdisciplinary vocation, as it were, not only attempts to discern “overall patterns” among disciplines, but also in the interaction of these “cultures.” In this case we can see the impact of broader forces and trends on local actors, the struggle of local actors, and the recurrent themes which inform outside-initiated development efforts. A subtext of this work, though it is admittedly not particularly novel, is the persistence’ and long-range effects of ideas. During this research I have been repeatedly struck by how many of the ideas important to the issues I have investigated have antecedents going back decades or even centuries. Without intending in the limited confines of this dissertation to explore these, I have where possible indicated citations for these antecedents. One wonders about similar processes in pastoral societies. Though at a disadvantage in terms of numbers, resources, power, ease of communication, and literate tradition (which is so important to the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge), one imagines that ideas persist and recur in pastoral societies as well. Since it is in partial fulfillment of a Doctor of Philosophy degree that I have undertaken this project, I feel it is appropriate to both raise the issue of persistence of ideas and to include these pierres d ’attentes for future learning and investigation. 5 The refrain from Ecclesiastes, of course, tells us that “there is nothing new under the sun.” xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ..................................................... xix LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................... xx ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................... xxi NOTE ON FOREIGN TERMS, ETHNONYMS, AND PLACE NAMES ......... xxii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION: PERSPECTIVES ON THE CRISIS OF AFRICAN PASTORALISM ............................................... l A. Pastoralism in Crisis ............................................. 1 1. Nature and Significance ..................................... 1 2. Causes of the Crisis of Pastoralism ............................ 3 B. Pastoralism, Pastoralists, Livestock, and Development .................. 9 1. Defining Pastoralism(s) .................................... 10 2. Historical Perspective on African Pastoralism Through Colonialism and Development ........................... 16 C. The Situation of Central Mali and the Inland Niger Delta (IND) .......... 25 1. Choice of the IND ........................................ 25 2. Description of the IND ..................................... 27 3. Population of the IND ..................................... 33 4. The Crisis of Pastoralism in the IND .......................... 35 D. Approach ..................................................... 37 E. Summary and Conclusion ........................................ 40 CHAPTER II. PASTORALIST SYSTEMS OF THE INLAND NIGER DELTA AND CENTRAL MALI ...................................................... 41 A. Introduction ................................................... 41 B. History ....................................................... 42 1. The Diina (1818-62) ...................................... 42 2. Tukulor Rule (1862-93) .................................... 44 3. Colonial Rule: French Soudan (1893-1960) .................... 44 4. Post Independence: The Republic of Mali (1960-present) ......... 45 C. Thematic Discussion of Pastoralism in the IND (1818-present) ........... 47 1. Government Policies ...................................... 47 a. The Diina ......................................... 47 b. Tukulor Rule ...................................... 48 c. French Rule ....................................... 49 (1. Republic of Mali ................................... 51 XV 2. Socio-Economic Relations .................................. 57 a. The Diina ......................................... 57 b. French Rule ....................................... 57 c. Republic of Mali ................................... 58 3. Livestock ............................................... 60 a. The Diina ......................................... 60 b. French Rule ....................................... 60 c. Republic of Mali ................................... 62 4. Pasture ................................................. 63 a. The Diina ......................................... 63 b. Tukulor Rule ...................................... 64 c. French Rule ....................................... 65 (1. Republic of Mali ................................... 66 D. Summary: The Current Situation in the IND ......................... 69 1. Summary of Trends in Four Themes .......................... 69 a. Government Policies ................................ 69 b. Socio-Economic Relations ............................ 70 c. Livestock ......................................... 72 d. Pasture ........................................... 73 2. Unsettled Issues .......................................... 76 E. Conclusion .................................................... 80 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH AND POLICY TRENDS IN LIVESTOCK AND PASTORAL DEVELOPMENT ........................................... 81 A. Introduction ................................................... 81 B. Pre-Colonial Prologue: Emerging Western Perspectives ................ 84 C. Explaining the Crisis of Pastoralism ................................ 87 1. Four Topical Foci ......................................... 87 2. Local Actions: The Problem Lies With the Pastoralists ........... 90 a. Early Core Ideas: Cattle Complex and Desertification ...... 91 b. Understanding the Numbers: Contributions of Ethnography . 93 c. Carrying Capacity .................................. 95 d. Refrarning Irrationality: Tragedy of the Commons and Aftermath ..................................... 96 3. External Forces and Trends: The Problem is with the Climate ..... 100 4. Local Forces and Trends: The Problem is Population Dynamics . . . 101 a. Population Dynamics and African Pastoralism ........... 101 b. Pastoralism’s Future as a Separate System: Integration with Cropping Systems? ............................ 103 5. Outsider’s Actions: The Problem is with Outsiders ............. 104 xvi 6. Other Outsiders: Additional Frames ......................... 106 a. Market Dynamics and Globalization ................... 106 b. Bureaucrats, Politicians, and National Policies ........... 107 D. Development Approaches to Pastoralism ........................... 108 l. Influences of the Four Frames on Livestock and Pastoral Development ....................................... 1 08 2. Research on Livestock Systems and Pastoralism ............... 109 3. A Decade of Rethinking: A Crisis of Pastoral Studies and Pastoral Development ....................................... l 12 4. New Approaches, or Old Wine in New Bottles? ................ 114 E. Recent Movements in Pastoral Studies ............................. 116 1. Construction of Pastoralists, Revisited ....................... 116 2. New Perspectives on the Range? ............................ 119 3. Other Recent Trends ..................................... 120 F. Summary .................................................... 120 G. Conclusion .................................................. 127 CHAPTER IV. POLITICAL ECOLOGY APPROACH ....................... 128 A. Introduction .................................................. 128 B. Genealogy of Political Ecology ................................... 129 1. Ecological Approaches to the Study of Environment-Society Relations .......................................... 130 2. Emergence of Political Ecology ............................. 135 3. Political Ecology and the “New Science” ..................... 141 C. Ways of Knowing in Political Ecology ............................. 147 D. Political Ecological Framework .................................. 152 1. Actor-Centered: What Kind of Actor? ........................ 152 2. Spaces, or the Geography of Perception and Action ............. 157 3. Interactions ............................................. 162 4. Discourse in the Definition of Space ......................... 164 5. Noosphere: Construction and Discourse in the Global Space ...... 167 E. Smnmary and Conclusion ....................................... 171 CHAPTER V. POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF PASTORALISM IN THE IND ....... 173 A. Introduction .................................................. 173 B. Overview .................................................... 174 1. The Organizing Role of Perceptions ......................... 174 2. Shifting Realities and the Crisis of Pastoralism in the IND ........ 176 C. Actors and Action Spaces: Pastoralists and Others .................... 177 1. The IND Pastoralists as Actors and Their Action Spaces ......... 177 2. Action Spaces and Resource Use ............................ 179 xvii 3. Outsiders as Actors in the IND ............................. 182 4. Overlapping and Disjunctures Of Pastoralists’ and Outsiders’ Action Spaces ............................................ 183 5. Pastoralist Actions in the Context of Power and Change ......... 185 D. Community Spaces: Pastoral Territories ............................ 186 1. Power in the Community Space ............................. 188 2. Outside Perceptions ...................................... 188 E. Region and Discourse: States of Mind and Power of States ............. 189 1. Restoration of the Diina System ............................ 190 2. The Diina as Pastoral Code in the Development Discourse ....... 190 F. Intersection of Spaces and Discourses: Colony and Territory ............ 192 G. Knowledge and Power: Academic Research and Development Intervention .............................................. 193 H. Conclusion: From Pastoralists to Graziers and Drovers? ............... 194 CHAPTER VI. REINVENTING PASTORALISM: WHOSE PROJECT? ......... 196 A. Introduction .................................................. 196 B. Summary .................................................... 197 C. Key Conclusions and Policy Recommendations ...................... 198 1. Ways of Knowing ....................................... 198 2. Beyond Power and Interests ................................ 199 3. Spaces, Discourse, and the Interpretation of Society-Environment Interaction ......................................... 201 4. Shifiing the Emphasis in Development Initiative ............... 202 D. Research Recommendations ..................................... 205 GLOSSARY OF FULA AND FRENCH TERMS ............................ 208 APPENDICES A. Population Diversity and Production Specialization in the IND ......... 210 B. Fulani Herd and Flock Classifications ............................. 221 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................... 223 xviii LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 - Approximate Breakdown of IND Population by Sii ................... 34 Table 1.2 - Siihiiji Associated with Different Activities ......................... 35 Table 2.1 - Major Administrative Actions in the IND ........................... 50 Table 2.2 - Periods in Post-Independence Mali ................................ 56 Table 2.3 - Pastoral Land and Rights in the IND ............................... 68 Table 3.1. Phases of World Bank-Funded Livestock Projects ................... 110 Table 3.2 - Unresolved Dialectics: Main Points in the Western Discourse on Afiican Pastoralism ............................................... 123 Table 4.1. Dominant and Alternate Scientific Premises ........................ 143 Table 4.2. Structural and Alternative Approaches to Understanding Behavior and Social Change .................................................. 145 Table 5.1 - Comparative Strategies of Resource Use .......................... 181 xix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 - Map Showing the Inland Niger Delta of Mali ....................... 28 Figure 1.2 - Example of a Transhumance Route .............................. 32 Figure 3.1 - Schematization of Assignment of Responsibility for the Crisis of Pastoralism ...................................................... 89 Figure 4.1. Alternative Value Orientations .................................. 155 Abbreviations and Acronyms AT/GT aménagement/gestion de terroir villageois CILSS Comité Interétat de Lutte contre la Sécheresse au Sahel EDF European Development Fund ESPR Etude sur les Systémes de Productions Rurales en Cinquiéme Région ILCA International Livestock Center for Africa ILRI International Livestock Research Center IND inland or interior Niger delta IRD integrated rural development NRM natural resource management ODEM Operation de Développement de I’Elevage - Moptil USAID United States Agency for International Development ‘ Curiously, almost every source I consulted gives a slightly different version of this project’s name (Henry de Frahan 1990:xxiv; Diallo 1986:442; Gallais 1984:224-5; Wilson et a1 1983:iii; Kliest et a1 1982:29; F ofana 1979:359). I use the simplest form as per Fofana. NOTE ON FOREIGN TERMS, ETHNONYMS, AND PLACE NAMES When referring to terms in other languages and or terms referring to ethnic groups, a number of possible conventions can be followed. In this dissertation I have chosen to use a mix of English borrowings and accurately rendered foreign words. Names of ethnic and other population groups are given in English where an accepted term exists (e.g., Fulani, Malian, French). Where no English word exists for a population group or concept, the term in the original (or original borrowing) language is used (e.g., Rimay ’be, bourgoutiére). Since it has become popular to refer to the Fulani by the name the people call themselves—Fa] ’be, as evidenced in some recent dissertations and publications, a comment on my choice to use the Anglicized Hausa term is indicated.‘ As an English word, Fulani is more adapted to use in English expression. That is, it is a noun but can be used as an adjective; F ul ’be on the other hand is a plural noun, with the singular being Pullo, and adjectives in the language would take different endings on the root firl-. I also follow Amott (1970) and others in using the Anglicized Manding term, Fula, to refer to the language, which is called by the Fulani and other F ulaphones Pulaar or Pular in western West Afiica, and F ulfulde from Mali eastward. Terms in languages other than English are usually given in italics, with the exception of place names. City names are given in the official form—that is in Mali they are given in French, the official language of the country (this even extends, for ‘ A few English language publications on Mali or Francophone Afiica use the Frenchized Wolof term, Peul, to refer to the Fulani. xxii convenience’s sake, to cities of historical prominence that have English spellings, e.g., Djenné and Segou rather than Jenne and Segu). I have also chosen to use the French spelling for the Arabic word adopted for the colonial territory that later became (with some modifications to borders) the Republic of Mali—Soudan instead of Sudan. On the other hand, names of traditional regions and pastoral territories are given in F ula where possible and appropriate. I have chosen to use terms from the languages of the peoples in question, notably the Fulani herders, when there are no equivalents in English. For Fula, I try to give as accurate a spelling as possible, relying on my previous lexical work in the language (including Osborn, Dwyer, and Donohoe 1993) as well as on some other publications that either appeared later or were unavailable too me at the time of compilation of the lexicon (e.g., Fay 1995; Turner 1992). Although the Fula language has somewhat complex plural forms involving initial consonant changes for certain consonants and several different plural endings, I have chosen to use the appropriate F ula plurals. The alternative of making plurals of the Fula ‘6 ,9 S singular by adding an as in English does not make up in simplicity what it would sacrifice in authenticity. Fula orthography includes several characters for sounds that do not exist in English, of which two appear in the Fula vocabulary used in this dissertation: implosive /b/ and /d/ (which are separate and meaningfully different consonants than /b/ and /d/). Since these characters are not available among those provided by a standard word processor software, one has three basic options. One can simply use fb/ and /d/ for these xxiii characters (as did Grayzel [197 7, 1990]), one can adapt Greek characters 43/ and /O/ (as did Fischer [1994]), or one can use a combination of characters, usually involving an apostrophe /’/. Use of characters in unconventional ways can have an unfortunate results—for instance Turner’s (1992) dissertation title uses “FulBe,” which library databases have read as “Fulsse” rather than “Fulbe” or “Ful’be” (since /13/ is in standard German use for /ss/). I have chosen to use a combination of characters, specifically placing an apostrophe before the standard Roman characters: /’b/ and /’d/.2 Some sources (including some early linguistic ones) have placed the apostrophe after these letters, but I find that placing it before has the virtue of providing the reader unfamiliar with F ula an approximate idea of the pronunciation of the term (the /’/ representing a glottal stop).3 2 Although Turner (1992) used /13/ for the “implosive b,” he also used /’d/ for the “implosive d.” 11’ Another combination adopted for Fula in Guinea uses /bh/ and MN. I did not choose this solution as it does not give the non-Fula speaker any help as to pronunciation, and in any event it is associated exclusively with the F uuta Jalon dialect Of the language. xxiv Chapter I INTRODUCTION: PERSPECTIVES ON THE CRISIS OF AFRICAN PASTORALISM “When a goat is present, one doesn’t bleat in its place.” - Malian proverb' A. Pastoralism in Crisis 1. Nature and Significance For at least a decade there has been widespread recognition that African pastoralism is in crisis (Dietz 1987:13; Oxby 1989; Galaty and Bonte 1991 :xiii; Brown 199321; Hiemaux 1996; inter alia).2 Due to a combination of factors—climatic, demographic, economic, political—pastoralists are (1) increasingly limited in their mobility and ability to use traditional pastures, (2) unable to provide effectively for subsistence through livestock production and husbandry, and (3) experiencing socio- economic changes such as increased social inequality and the need to resort to herding other people’s animals. The repercussions of this include suffering, land degradation, migration, and violent conflict. The fundamental and persistent nature of the crisis of pastoralism has given rise to the pessimistic view that it defines an increasingly prevalent ' Ba (1972) introduced this proverb in French: “Quand une chevre est présente, on ne doit pas béler a sa place.” All translations to English are my own unless otherwise noted. 2 When did the crisis Of African pastoralism begin? Hiernaux (1996:1) says it has been “in deep crisis for decades.” On the other hand, following the major period of drought in the early 19708, Sandford (1976) refers to it only as being “under pressure.” Clearly, one can contend that many of the factors that have given rise to the crisis have been many years in the making, though “crisis” appears to have become prominent in discussions only in the 19803. 2 “new pastoralism” (Hogg 1985) and has even led some observers to predict the disappearance of pastoralism altogether (Roth, Fratkin, and Galvin 1994:231). In recent years, the crisis of pastoralism has taken on new dimensions, as some pastoral groups have turned to armed conflict to express grievances—notably the Tware g insurrection in Mali in the early 19905, but also Twareg and Fulani in Niger more recently—which has significant implications for regional peace. Also, pastoralists have moved in increasing numbers into sub-humid areas beyond their historic herding zones, bringing them into contact with farming peoples with whom they have no established tradition Of cooperation. This also sometimes results in violent conflict. Afiican pastoralists’ success in negotiating these challenges is important for several reasons. First, they number 20 million to possibly as many as 30 million (Galaty 1994; Ellis 1994), and their condition has implications not only for their own survival, but also for countries in the regions with rainfall between 250 and 750 mm (notably in East Africa and the Sahel) in which they are concentrated. Indeed, they have the potential to contribute significantly to social and economic development or to cause significant problems for social stability. Second, pastoralism is the only food production system that can extract value from vast arid and semi-arid zones of the continent not suited to crop production (Smith 1992z6). Third, pastoralism has a significant impact on the environment of those zones, as well as more humid zones used during the dry season, and this impact has both beneficial and deleterious aspects. Fourth, pastoralism’s traditional interaction with and potential to contribute to crop production systems in semi-arid and semi-humid zones make pastoral livestock systems a significant factor in agricultural 3 development. Finally, one may consider that preserving the foundations of pastoral societies is a benefit to humankind as a whole (Rigby 1985:175). Yet as real as the changes and even suffering faced by pastoralists is, the “crisis of pastoralism” is a term or a construct which, like many others used to describe African pastoralists, originates from outside Africa in the West. So, at the same time one considers the problems faced by herders in Africa, it is necessary to keep in mind the role of outsiders in defining those problems and even pastoralism itself, and how those definitions (constructs) in turn affect pastoralists. What is needed is a new analytic framework to situate outsiders’ roles in relation to pastoralist systems and understand the effect of their ideas on policies. This would provide another way of understanding the crisis of pastoralism, one raising new questions perhaps leading ultimately to different policy recommendations. 2. Causes of the Crisis of Pastoralism The crisis of African pastoralism involves the interaction of several factors. It can be seen as emerging in the wake of a period of drought starting at the end of the 19603 which devastated the Sahel and Horn of Africa in the mid-19703 and ushered in a prolonged period of droughts and generally below-average rainfall. A range of other factors supposedly contributing to the crisis have been discussed over the years, some of which hark back to notions proposed in the early years of the colonial period. These factors include excessive accumulation of animals, overgrazing, limitations on traditional adaptive strategies imposed by borders, effects of colonial and development policies, population growth, and occupation of pasture land by farmers. 4 In addition, market forces and changing economics have altered the nature of livestock production. Although selling of livestock has long been common among many pastoral peoples (Kerven 1992), its marketing has become more of a necessity for pastoralists. In addition, non-pastoralists including merchants, bureaucrats, and farmers have begun investing in cattle, leading to situations where pastoralists are increasingly herding animals that belong to others. Although many Observers of African pastoralists recognize the latter’s resilience in adapting to the crisis they face, it is clear that their resources and will are being tested to the limit. For instance, in a study of the traditionally pastoralist Fulani in part of the inland or interior Niger delta (IND) of Mali, Turner (1992:410) noted herders and their families repeatedly stating they were “tired” after years of struggle with drought and other obstacles to successful livestock production. Moreover, the crisis in pastoralism has brought about subtle but culturally, politically, environmentally, and economically significant changes in the pastoral socio-economy. For instance, the changes in ownership composition of livestock have implications for the care herders take to protect natural resources, and have important cultural ramifications in societies that value cattle ownership. Conflict involving pastoralists as well as migration of pastoral groups into semi-humid zones also reflect the crisis conditions faced by pastoralists. As complex as the crisis of pastoralism is already, it has been made even more so by the effects of development interventions. The importance of pastoralists in Afiica has long been noted somewhat obliquely in the development community, which has focused on developing livestock production and which, especially after the drought of the early 5 19703, responded in humanitarian ways to pastoralists’ distress as a result of droughts. Yet these development efforts—efforts generally inspired by Western3 models and supported by Western donors—have not by and large helped much and have even contributed to the erosion of pastoralist customs and institutions, leaving pastoralists worse Off than before development intervention. Development programs such as ranching projects, stratified animal production schemes, well digging projects, and plans to “better integrate” animal production and crop farming, have tended to fail to achieve objectives and/or produce effects other than those intended. In fact, livestock development projects have the highest failure rate of any type of project in Afiica (Cemea 1985:155; Scoones 199423). In addition, projects intended to increase agricultural production in or near pasture areas, although not addressing livestock or pastoralists directly, have often had immediate and generally negative impacts on herd movements and pasture availability. Recognizing the high failure rate of livestock development projects and unintended negative side-effects, many development agencies have been increasingly reluctant to invest in that sector. One analyst further suggested that traditional livestock systems are “without development potential” (Jahnke 1982:223). As a consequence of such reactions, pastoralism is further disadvantaged in development planning and resource allocation. 3 By the “West” is meant primarily the nations of Western Europe and North America. 6 At the same time, scholarship on pastoralism—generally situated physically and ideologically in the West—has attempted to make sense of pastoral activity and of livestock and pastoral development programs. Although these efforts, especially some ethnographies, have provided useful information and insights about pastoralist activities and reasoning, they too have shortcomings. According to Bonte and Galaty (1991 :5) “myths, misconceptions, simplifications, and overgeneralizations about pastoralists pervade our popular and academic vision.” The influence of some of these, such as “cattle complex” (Herskovits 1926) and “tragedy Of the commons” (Hardin 1968) on scholarship and policy have been profound and enduring. Even more significantly, policy in African countries—often informed by analyses from Western aid agencies and academics—has tended to disfavor pastoralists (Boutrais 1992: 122; Raynaut and Lavigne Delville 1997:119). Shanmugaratnam et a1. (1992:1) point out that “[m]ost governments and international donors not only assign higher priority to agriculture than to pastoralism, but often do so at the expense of millions of pastoralists.” Although pastoralists are in part producers of livestock, the focus on livestock production in colonial or national development plans has not built on that role. That is, although the goal of implementing livestock development implicates pastoralists, as they are the traditional society’s livestock specialists, it also marginalizes them, since the development of livestock production is often premised explicitly or implicitly on the notion that pastoralist systems have no future. Moreover, livestock development policies tend, as shall be seen below, to be driven by goals far from those of pastoralist societies. 7 Outside perceptions are also affected by the crisis of pastoralism, sometimes in ways that can contribute further to the crisis. Development agencies, discouraged by the failure of livestock projects have reduced the amount of their attention to livestock and pastoral development. Some scholars have speculated on the disappearance of pastoralism, or more precisely, on its eventual integration with crop agriculture—a point of view whose influence on policy and the direction of limited resources intended for pastoral development would not seem to be favorable to pastoralism. In the interaction of society and environment as one witnesses it in the case of African pastoralists, the role of outsiders—development specialists, scholars, and government officials—looms large. These outsiders must, therefore, be considered part of the system for any comprehensive analysis of the crisis of pastoralism. Including outsiders in the system requires accounting for different interests and ways of knowing, as well as issues of power” differential between outsiders and insiders, in addition to factors directly conceming pastoral practice and economy and the environmental condition. However, to address the crisis of pastoralism—the effect of all these factors on pastoralists and their production systems—it is helpful to center the analysis on the “ Following Boulding (1978:233-252), power is considered the ability to effect decisions that change the future. In social situations, power is commonly described as the ability of an individual to have his or her way or “the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rests” (Weber 1957:152, as cited in Villareal 1992:266, note 7). As Boulding (1978) also points out, there are several kinds of power: threat (force), economic, moral, etc. Yet power “is constituted in action” (V erschoor 1992:177) rather than being a quality in and of itself. For purposes of this analysis, power in whatever form will be considered in relation to productive activities and associated decisions. 8 position of the pastoralist. Such focus on the rural producer is the essence of political ecology, from the landmark work of Blaikie and Brookfield (1987) to recent discussions focusing on use of discourse analysis (Escobar 1996a&b; Feet and Watts 1996). Yet that is but the starting point. The failures of pastoral and livestock development efforts have been well documented, as have limitations or flaws in many influential theories about pastoralism, but there is not as yet a view of the unfolding process by which outside (Western) conceptualizations of pastoralism have ultimately resulted in inappropriate and deleterious efforts in the field and aggravated the crisis of pastoralism. There are both problems with ideas about pastoralism and a need to understand this process of knowing in the context of issues of power in the crisis of pastoralism. The role of ideas in defining the crisis of pastoralism is highlighted by Galaty (1 98 1 : 16): “The problem in assessing just what has changed in the pastoral state-of-affairs during the last 20-30 years, or even the last ten years, is that the social scientific fields on the basis of which such judgements have been made have themselves changed, with old issues and concepts being pushed aside as new ones emerge.” Although there is some question as to how effectively new ideas have replaced Old ones (or even how new the new ones really are), ideas about pastoralism have themselves inevitably become a subject of scrutiny in studies of the evolution of pastoralism. What is needed is an approach to the study of pastoralism addressing ways of knowing and using an actor-centered approach. Previous work has tended not to deal with the process of knowing of people who do not participate directly in, but whose ideas 9 have significant indirect impacts on, pastoral systems. Effectively, the society-nature interaction of pastoralist livestock production in Afiica includes actors and ideas far removed from pastoralist societies and the environments in which they exist. In order to capture this complex interaction, therefore, this dissertation uses an ecological—and specifically a political ecological—approach for examining the crisis of pastoralism, taking into account the abovementioned factors. This approach will draw on the experience and insights of other approaches to the analysis of interaction of society and the environment. I will examine the situation in one region, central Mali and in particular the IND, and how ideas, policies, the pastoral systems, and other factors such as climate have interacted in the unfolding of the crisis of pastoralism there (see below, section C). This dissertation will conclude with a discussion of implications for policy and research concerning pastoralism and livestock development with particular attention to West Africa. Part of the crisis of pastoralism is that outside-inspired and sponsored research define the problems and solutions, often inadequately or inappropriately. One must of course include consideration of how pastoralists themselves need to be a more integrally involved in research and policy making processes dealing with livestock production in Africa. Yet how will this help? B. Pastoralism, Pastoralists, Livestock, and Development Although much of this dissertation (especially Chapter III) will deal with how the many dimensions of pastoralism have been perceived, constructed, and acted upon, and what is the relationship of livestock production and development to pastoralist societies, 10 it is important to briefly discuss terms such as pastoralism, pastoralists, and pastoral and livestock development as well as the relationships among them. 1. Defining Pastoralism(s) Some basic characteristics of pastoralism are widely accepted. Pastoralism is both an economic activity and a cultural practice (Awogbade 1991). As the former it is a subsistence/production strategy centered on raising and managing livestock. As the latter it is an idea and a set of customs and knowledge regarding animal husbandry and herding —a way of life of a specialized group of people. Beyond this, there are many definitions of pastoralism (see for instance the discussion by Smith [1992: 16-18]). Sandford’s (1983:1) broad description will serve as a starting point for this inquiry: “Pastoralists are people who derive most of their income or sustenance from keeping domestic livestock in conditions where most of the feed that their livestock eat is natural forage rather than cultivated fodders and pastures. In most cases, also, pastoralists devote the bulk of their own, and their families,’ working time and energy to looking after their livestock rather than to other economic activities.” Because of the reliance on natural forage and often scarce water, pastoral systems tend to have some degree of mobility—from nomadic to transhumant to semi-sedentary. Hence pastoralist strategies involve “herding,” or driving herds to pasture and watering points, sometimes over long distances. In pastoralism, then, two basic concepts go together—“raising of livestock and movement of livestock and people” (McCabe 1994: 70)—but degrees of their reliance on livestock (vis-a-vis crops) and mobility vary.5 So it 5 Gallais (1975a) disaggregated herding groups in the Gourma region of Mali according to these two factors. 11 is important to “avoid the usual amalgamation between pastoralist and nomad” (Raynaut and Lavigne Delville 1997:113). In any event, herding is the central activity in the pastoralist economy. Also, due to the limitations tse-tse borne bovine sleeping sickness (trypanosomiasis) has historically placed on cattle husbandry in the humid zones of Africa, pastoralism is a feature mainly of the arid and semi-arid regions,‘S though there has been some movement south to semi-humid areas in recent years. Pastoralists do not engage in a single type Of enterprise, as there are variations depending on regional or local environmental, economic, and socio-cultural conditions.7 These include: Types of animals herded Herding practice (large or small orbit, degree of mobility) Herd organization (size of and divisions within herd) Herd ownership (pastoralists do not always own the animals) Ethnic groups & other population groups Social structure Biophysical factors Socio-economic and political factors Pastoralists may also engage in some agricultural activities, depending on a number of factors. 6 Livestock are also a feature of highland regions. Smaller trypanotolerant breeds of cattle such as the Ndama are also raised in limited numbers often as part of mixed systems in some semi-humid areas. 7 In the case of Mali, Gallais (1975a), Lewis (1980), and Wilson (1986) (among others) have discussed different types of herding systems. 12 Resource tenure for pastoralists generally involves some kind of common property management of less or more controlled access (e.g., less in the case of Sahelo- Saharan plains, more in the case of reserved pastures near a village or wells). In many areas the key resource is water, and access to wells is the critical factor in limiting use of nearby pasture lands (Kintz 1982:44; Raynaut 1997c:245). Pastoralists also generally do not have the entire rangeland to themselves, as farming communities may depend on areas within or on the edges of potential pastures. Throughout much of semi-arid and arid areas of Afiica, there is extensive interaction of pastoralists and farmers, and indeed this interaction has become an increasingly important feature of the rural sector in the last several decades as crop production has been pushed northward and pastoralists have moved southward (Landais and Lhoste 1990:217). Raynaut and Lavigne Delville (1997: 124) write of a “zone of competition” in the Sahel north of the zone of traditional “cohabitation” between pastoralists and farmers in areas previously dominated by pastoralists.8 On a macro level, pastoral systems in Afiica have some broad similarities within regions and differences among regions relating to climate and environment, history and culture, and government policies. To begin with, McIntire and Gryseels (1987) divide 3 Expansion of pastoral activity south of this latter zone is the subject of a different literature (e.g., Bassett 1988; 1994; Blench 1994; Waters-Bayer and Bayer 1994). One might suggest that this movement has created a Sudanian counterpart to the Sahelian “zone of competition” south of the zone of traditional “cohabitation” discussed by Raynaut and Lavigne Delville (1997). In this very different physical context—for instance in northern COte d'Ivoire and central Nigeria—similar dynamics of conflict and cooperation have been observed. 13 Afiican livestock systems into three categories: 1) arid and semi-arid zones, characterized by segregation of crops and livestock with livestock, especially large ruminants, being the province of pastoralists; 2) humid zones, where there are relatively few large ruminants; and 3) highland zones, where livestock and crop production are integrated, and livestock is not raised in a pastoral system. This paper is concerned with the first category, which is found in a band from west to east across Afiica just to the south of the Sahara, and in various locations in East and Southern Afiica. Livestock and crop agriculture systems in arid and semi-arid Afiica have historically been characterized by (1) a high degree Of segregation of these activities into separate systems (McCown et al. 1979; McIntire and Gryseels 1987; McIntire, Bourzat, and Pingali 1992), (2) a high degree of association of specific ethnic groups with separate rural production systems, and (3) significant interaction on several levels (economic, agronomic) between the systems and the cultures associated with them. Pastoralists are in effect the traditional specialists in animal husbandry and livestock production (especially of large ruminants, and most importantly cattle). Across the arid and semi-arid expanses of Africa, there are similarities and differences in the social and physical environments in which pastoralists operate. For instance, West Afiica is characterized by a relatively flat terrain, gradually increasing rainfall as one moves south from the Sahara to the coast, and a single rainy season. Isohyets marking the changes in annual rainfall levels run east to west in a parallel manner. Across the West Afiican Sahel, a handful of ethnic groups dominate herding, notably the Fulani, Twareg, and Moors, and among them Islam is the dominant religion. 14 Cattle raiding has traditionally been more important in Eastern African pastoralist societies than among pastoralists in West Africa. Transhumance movements9 in the West African Sahel are therefore characterized generally by a northward movement during the rainy season and a southward movement during the dry season. For instance, cattle herds from the IND traditionally move north during the rainy season into areas used as dry season pasture by other Fulani whose cattle are less tolerant of humid conditions (Helland 1980:44; see also Wagenaar et al 1986). The latter move further north to dry season pastures of Moors who in turn take their cattle yet further north.'0 This process is reversed as the rains retreat. In East Africa, on the other hand, geographical relief is often pronounced, the patterns of annual rainfall are irregular, and there are generally two rainy seasons. So, unlike in the West African Sahel, there is no broad annual north-south movement of herds. Numerous ethnic groups traditionally specialize in pastoralist livestock systems in East Africa. 9 Mobility Of herding groups is a factor different than, though related to, the movement of herds. Except in the case of pure nomadism, the mobility of a herding group by and large seems to involve a sub-group of herding specialists moving with the herds while most of the population is sedentary. In the context of the IND, mobility is a factor mainly in the sense of in-migration of some Fulani herders with their families from the Seeno as a response to drought (personal Observation in Mali 1984). '° A similar process has been observed in the Dilly pastoral zone near Nara to the west of the IND, three different transhumance orbits were observed: one originating in the pastoral zone and moving north with the rains, one originating in the south and moving into the zone with the rains, and one originating in the south which moved through the zone on its way to and from rainy season pastures to the north (Chemonics 1981). 15 In East and Southern Africa herd movements are more complex than in West Africa. In East Africa factors such as relief and altitude affect weather patterns and rainfall. Hence pasture availability is affected by varying rainfall patterns and varies also between the two rainy seasons. The factor of movement therefore, may involve several features: 1) a kind of “relay” effect in which herds may move in overlapping orbits (more northerly or southerly orbits in the Sahel), preceding and following each other with the rains; 2) varying transhumance distances, with some animals being moved ftuther from their home bases than others; and 3) extremely complex herd division and movement on a micro level affected by many factors. Yet all of these patterns are under pressure from a range of natural and social forces. A critical aspect of pastoral systems in West Africa is that, except in the driest areas, they exist alongside other systems, primarily cropping systems. Even those herds taken far north during the rainy seasons must return to proximity with farmed areas in the dry season. Therefore any complete discussion of pastoralism must take into consideration its relations with crop agriculture (Smith 1992:11). Landais and Lhoste (1990:217) go as far as to say that the fiiture of pastoral societies depends on the evolution of relations between agriculture and herding. Such juxtaposition of separate activities historically has had the potential for creation of productive agro-pastoral arrangements and complex resource tenure rules for use and management of resources (Franke 1987:259). This juxtaposition also often 16 involves constant potential for conflicts, and with demographic changes, this potential has increased (see Raynaut and Lavigne Delville 1997). 2. Historical Perspective on Afiican Pastoralism Through Colonialism and Development Historically, the relative wealth and power of pastoralists in all parts of the continent has declined over the last century. Before colonization Afiican pastoralists were generally in powerful positions relative to neighboring peoples, either controlling territory and/or occupying advantageous economic situations in the society. In West Africa, a series of Islamic-inspired Fulani revolutions had put the mainly pastoralist Fulani in control of states from Fuuta Jalon and Fuuta Tooro in the west to Aadamawa in the east. In East Africa, “pastoralists were at the center of regional networks of exchange” (Waller and Sobania 1994:45). Part of the advantage of pastoralists in precolonial African societies was that livestock represented a widely accepted store of wealth, and terms of trade for livestock favored its producers (Waller and Sobania 1994:45).” Although pastoralists were often at the top of the multi-ethnic socio-economies of which they were a part,‘2 their situations varied from region to region on the eve of colonial occupation. ” In the Sudano-Sahelian region of West Afiica, cattle essentially replaced gold as the store of wealth following the decline of the trans-Saharan trade and the fall of the Sonrai empire at the end of the 16th century (Cissé 1986). ‘2 In a study based in Doukoloma, Mali (south of the IND), Grayzel (1977) analyzed the position of Fulani in terms of class, with the pastoralist Fulani occupying a higher socio-economic status than their non-Fulani agriculturalist neighbors. I explore the issue of ethnicity and metaethnicity in the IND in Appendix A. 17 Colonization as seen from the point of view of the colonized rural African imposed control, expropriated wealth, and undertook works. For the African pastoralist, the view might have been somewhat attenuated in that 1) colonial governments were generally more occupied with crop agriculture than livestock, and 2) the reach of colonial governments into the regions where pastoralists dominated was Often not very well established. Nevertheless the same three themes are present in colonial era approaches to pastoralism, along with a gradual reduction in the power of pastoralists. Indeed, early colonial approaches were characterized by a general lack of direct colonial involvement in pastoralism but a clear focus on territorial control, while later on there was increasing colonial intervention in the livestock and pastoral systems. Colonial administration in Africa tended to leave pastoralists largely to themselves (Adamu and Kirk-Greene 1986zxiii) aside from imposition of cattle taxes, confiscations of cattle, and inoculation campaigns for cattle. Various colonial edicts and policies clearly affected pastoral practice (see below), but there was little or no concerted effort to alter pastoral techniques.” Colonial concern with control of territory, and concomitant interest in fixing borders and extending eminent domain, interrupted pastoral systems of movement and pasture management.” On the other hand, the peace imposed '3 An early large private ranching enterprise in Nigeria, African Ranches Ltd., actually ran into difficulty with the colonial administration because of its occupation of so much traditional pastoral territory (Gallais 1979:131; Dunbar 1970). "‘ In Kenya, for instance, the Maasai were restricted to reserves from very early in the colonial period (Campbell 1993:260). Burger (1987:170) mentions the restrictions borders place on movements of nomadic herders. 18 by colonial rule also permitted pastoralists to move herds beyond traditional areas of transhumance (Swift 19772471; Horowitz 1977:224). At the same time, looking more broadly at Western contact with African pastoralists, one can see an effort to understand and define pastoralism, notably by colonial administrators and scholars. These ideas grew out of the pre-colonial images, and ultimately they infonned—and provided rationales for—evolving colonial approaches to dealing with pastoralists and the livestock sector. These ideas have had a continuing legacy, as will be explored below (Chapter III). By the end of the colonial period, the colonial administrations were tending to pursue more active policies towards pastoralism. Colonial governments were interested in maximizing animal production (see Gallais 1979:126) and to this end expressed concern with “ameliorating” and “rationalizing” the livestock sector (see for instance E. Louveau, Governor of French Soudan, in Doutressoulle 1952:8-9), and there were some efforts in this direction. An early manifestation of this interest were efforts to vaccinate cattle against rinderpest beginning in the 19303 (Gallais 1979:126).ls In the course of this effort, colonial livestock services organized a network of posts which afforded opportunities to observe the numbers and organization of herds (ibid.). Colonial authorities also tried to facilitate herd growth by drilling borehole wells in dry pastoral ‘5 Rinderpest decimated cattle herds across Africa at various times, beginning just before the continent was occupied by European powers. In the Sahel, major epidemics occurred in 1891, 1915-17, and 1919-20 (Gallais 19722303). Efforts to combat rinderpest, culminating in a joint effort among African states in 1963-67, were quite successful (though some laxity and lack of financing and organization have resulted in later outbreaks of this disease) (Gallais 1979:126-7). 19 regions, for instance in Senegal, Niger, (Anglo-Egyptian) Sudan, and Bechuanaland (Botswana) (Gallais 1979:127; Peters 1994). There were also significant efforts to find ways to encourage pastoralists to sell more of their animals (Schneider 1981 :27). Such efforts, along with others to assist marketing of livestock, were aimed mainly at supplying demand in urban centers. Some later colonial policies in one way or another promoted the combining of livestock and cropping systems. Doutressoulle (1952:371) noted that many had the idea that pastoralists must sedentarize and agricultural production must increase to provide fodder for improved animal production. Majok and Schwabe (1996:89-90) cite a source strongly recommending “absorption” of pastoralists into agriculture in pre-independence Nigeria. When most colonized nations of Africa gained independence around 1960, a new set of policy dynamics was set in motion. Although politically independent, African nations’ development policies were still influenced by outside (generally Western) governments and donor agencies. However, a new group of outsiders replaced the colonial administrators—development experts, who were often more technically specialized but less aware of broader contexts than their predecessors. Also, independent African states were generally controlled by Westernized elite of sedentary populations. The proliferation of rural development programs undertaken by new African governments in collaboration with donor governments, international agencies, and non- governmental organizations (N GOs) generally did not place pastoralists’ interests or livestock development high on the agenda (Monod 1975: 175-6; Gallais 1979: 125; 20 Horowitz 1977:224). Some attention was given to tapping livestock resources for taxes and to developing “modern” livestock sectors, but not until the droughts beginning at the end of the 19603, which decimated livestock herds, raised concern about the environment, and caused much suffering and migration in many countries, was there a concerted effort to address the needs and potential of pastoralists and the livestock sector. At this point it becomes important to distinguish between livestock development, which focuses on improved livestock production, and pastoral development, which includes programs directed at assisting pastoralists and improving the conditions with which they have to deal. Some argue that the livestock and pastoral development have tended to be confused (Sandford 1983; Gefu 1991; Salih 1991; Butcher l994:4), and that up until relatively recently most of what went under the name of pastoral development was actually livestock development (with a focus on ameliorating production through application of technical approaches). Ranches, as an early approach to livestock development using pasture rotation and processed feeds, date from the colonial period (especially in Kenya), but became more important in the development strategies of some independent African nations. It is important to distinguish between commercially-owned and state ranches on one hand, which are modelled somewhat on the ranches of North America and Australia and had as their primary purpose the production of meat for urban markets, and group ranches, “a demarcated area of rangeland to which a group of pastoralists, who graze their 21 individually owned herds on it, have Official land rights” (Oxby 1982:12).l6 As such, pastoralist communities are directly involved only in group ranches. Group ranches have the longest history in Kenya, but they have also been established with mixed results in Botswana, Burkina F aso, Rwanda, Senegal, and Tanzania (Oxby 1982). The importance of the major droughts (1969-74, 1984 in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa) and overall lower rainfall levels in the recent history of this region cannot be overestimated. Obviously drought has had a dramatic impact on pastoralists, farmers and other rural folk, with localized famine and death, loss of livestock, migration of people, and changing of livelihoods being major observable effects. In addition, government policies, relations with donors, development programs, and a dialogue among scholars and others about the causes and consequences of the drought, focused attention on issues like desertification and land degradation. A large number of development projects, including many directed at pastoralists and the livestock sectors, were initiated in arid and semi-arid regions of Africa in response to the droughts. Ellis (1994:178) estimates that the drought in the Sahel actually began with declines in rainfall levels as early as the 19503, and that although there has been drought in other parts of the continent, it lasted longer in the Sahel. In response to recurrent droughts and sociO-economic change, pastoralists have increased their reliance on crop farming as farmers have invested more time in livestock. By the early 19803, researchers were noting the transformation of many herders and '6 Gallais (1979:131-2) notes that most West African nations had state-owned ranches. 22 farmers into agrO-pastoralists (Cissé 1981; Little 1982223; Toulmin 1983a; inter alia). This trend has continued and is noted by others throughout the Sahelian region, e.g., in Cameroon (Boutrais 1994), Chad (Bonfiglioli 1993), Nigeria (Waters-Bayer 1989; Waters-Bayer and Bayer 1994). However there remains discemable difference between the two groups in the relative degrees to which they rely on livestock and creps. Many development projects directed at agriculture following the droughts were of the “integrated rural development” (IRD) type intended to improve rainfed crop productivity through replacement of indigenous agriculture with technical packages (Ruttan 1984; Painter, Sumberg, and Price 1994). Many livestock projects in the Sahel focused on approaches such as new ways of managing the range and on “stratification”— reflecting perhaps the emergence of systems thinking in the new IRD emphasis—but there was also an increase in creation of borehole wells in arid areas to improve water availability for livestock. Range projects and rotational grazing schemes generally sought to improve use of pasture resources. The World Bank, for instance, funded projects focusing on infrastructure with involvement in grazing and land rights adjudication (de Haan 1994: l ). In the 19703, the concept of regional specialization in livestock production became the “quasi-official doctrine” in all West African states (Gallais 19792134). The idea was that young animals born in the Sahel would be sold either to farmers or ranches in the more humid zones for fattening and sale to market. This was supposed to lessen pressure on Sahelian pastures and permit farmers in humid zones to benefit by being able to put some farm by-products (e. g., peanut hay) to use as forage and from manure for 23 fields. However, such a system has disadvantages for herders, who would prefer to keep animals longer to get a better sale price, and for many farmers, for whom adding cattle to their farming system would not be easy (ibid.). A number of projects for stratified production were launched during the 19703.‘7 Scholarship on pastoralism, particularly in anthropology, expanded during the post-independence period. The failure of development policies and the impact of the droughts also prompted an increased number of studies. However, pastoralism also has not received as much attention in development literature as its importance would seem to demand. Institutional responses to the drought in the early 19703 focused on desertification and included some increased attention to the role of pastoralists. These included the establishment of the International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA), as well as various programs, networks, and journals.‘8 Each of these, as well as programs adopted by major aid donors, responded to different ideas and objectives regarding pastoralism. Greater attention to issues of access to resources, resource tenure, and local management was one of the outcomes of the drought period and disillusionment with many of the development responses to it. This focus has involved on the one hand an emphasis on clarifying land and resource tenure and on the other hand a focus on '7 Bocoum (1990) describes the operation of a stratified production program in Mali from the point of view of marketing. ‘3 For instance the Overseas Development Institute’s Pastoral Development Network. 24 community management Of the resources identified as essential to its production system (ame'nagement/gestion de terroir villageois19 [AT/GT]). The AT/GT approach derived from the concept of terroir in French geography and social sciences and was applied to African rural development (Painter, Sumberg, and Price 1994:449-50). From the mid-19803, as a response to the shortcomings of IRD approaches in the Sahel and Africa, the AT/GT approach has become important in rural development approaches in Francophone West Africa, and particularly significant in Mali, Burkina F aso, and Niger (Painter 199321). It has been adopted by CILSS and a number of donors. The main idea of the AT/GT approach was to identify areas used by rural communities and develop systems giving those communities control over the resources, but applied it has what has been described as an “anti-pastoralist bias” (Painter 1993:33; see also Marty 1993) conforming more closely to sedentary agriculturalists’ patterns of resource use. Pastoralists during this period increasingly entered market economies, but a combination of circumstances have led to their increased marginalization. In West Africa, there has in effect been an expansion of pastoralism, as pastoralists have moved into sub-humid zones in response to both opportunities and drought. In East Africa, on '9 Management of a village terroir. Terroir translates literally as “soil” or “country” (in the sense of rural space), but in this context terroir villageois might best be understood as “village agrarian space” (Painter, Sumberg, and Price 1994:449n). Painter, Sumberg, and Price (19942450-1) treat AT/GT as one concept, as they note most of the literature treats the two interchangeably, but point out that gestion des terroirs refers to the activities of community members using resources, while aménagement des terroirs refers to “efforts to protect and improve the natural resource base of the terroir.” 25 the other hand, there have in some areas been a trend of “dismantling the commons” (Ensminger and Rutten 1993) and movement in other areas to commercial and group ranches. By the 19803 there was recognition of the value of promoting local level organizations of pastoralists (see for instance the report on a USAID workshop by Little 1982). A number of Sahelian countries have made local institutions a “core element” of development policies. The World Bank also has put an emphasis in this area (see Sihm 1989; Shanmugaratnam et a1 1992; Vedeld 1993; de Haan 1994). A new direction in pastoral development has been focus on natural resource management. This has elements of earlier development foci such as tenure, AT/GT, and local organizations. C. The Situation of Central Mali and the Inland Niger Delta (IND) 1. Choice of the [ND Since much of political ecology must focus on the micro level (Blaikie 1994:8), selection of a location in which to begin analysis is necessary. Central Mali, and in particular the IND, is for several reasons an interesting section of the Sahel in which to consider the crisis of pastoralism and various actions relating to it. Although the IND as an enormous seasonal wetland is unique in some respects, pastoralists there face the same basic problems as those elsewhere in the Sahel and semi-arid Afiica: drought, constraints on mobility, alienation of former pasture lands, competition for diminishing resources, and unfavorable policies. In addition, when one also takes into consideration the areas surrounding the IND, one is looking at a variety of pastoral systems. 26 What is particularly interesting about the IND for this dissertation is the historical perspective which goes back to the pre-colonial period. The 19th century Diina state in the IND, with its notable introduction of a pastoral code, presents a useful starting point to examine the role of different forces and ideas in a political ecological analysis of the crisis in pastoralism. Since political ecology emphasizes the role of the state (Blaikie 1994:9), it is significant to have a nearly 180 year long record (with an interruption of thirty years at the end of the 19th century) of state policies to consider. Moreover, this gives one an indigenous policy comparison to colonial and post-independence approaches to pastoral development—something hard to find outside of certain parts of the Sahel. And, perhaps unique in the Sahel, the Diina’s pastoral code retains much influence among herders even more than a century after the Diina itself fell.20 However, that influence is clearly waning, and there is no coherent or comprehensive replacement. As a consequence, the condition of the environment seems to be stuck in a slow decline. From a practical viewpoint, the pastoral systems of the IND and vicinity have been discussed in a substantial body of literature across several disciplines, as have other 2° Although McCabe (1994273) sees the Diina’s herd management system resembling more Middle Eastern than African pastoralism, Lewis (1980) relates it clearly to the wider Fulani culture beyond the delta, and Schmitz (1986) compares Fulani organization of pastoral territory in the IND and the Senegal River valley. It may be more accurate to contrast West African and East African pastoralism. In a survey of nomadic pastoralism, Barfield (1993) actually overlooks West Africa entirely, discussing societies in East Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia. In effect, one can find similarities and differences across pastoral societies, depending on the criteria chosen. 27 aspects of the region and its society and history. This permits analysis of the situation of pastoralists there in historical context and with respect to various related factors. 2. Description of the IND The IND is a complex mosaic of interlacing waterways, plains, basins, levees, and elevated sandy areas, which is subject to annual flooding. Located about a third Of the way through the 4170 kilometer course of the Niger river, the delta is a broad, flat region, whose slight slope“ effectively obliges the Niger and its major tributary the Bani to spread out and split up. The inland delta, considered in its largest sense, covers some 50,000 square kilometers (Thom and Wells 19872328) between Segou and Tombouctou and includes areas which are not new subject to natural flooding but which are similar in terms of soil and physiography (see Figure 1.1). This study focuses on the areas receiving seasonal flooding: the “active delta” (or delta vif in French), which is the floodable zone of about 20,000 square kilometers, and the area to the north known as the “lacustrine zone” (about 10,000 km?) which includes lakes in which some of the waters from the active delta collect except in the driest years.22 Administratively, the IND lies 2' An average slope of 0.5 percent over 200 kilometers or five cm./km. (Gallais 196729). 22 The area to the west and, according to Thom and Wells (1987) to the south, is called the “inactive delta” (or delta mort in French). The area to the west, sometimes referred to as the “fossil delta,” was formed around an ancient defluent of the Niger. The French used this channel as the main canal to bring water to the Office du Niger irrigation scheme which still functions in that zone (see below). The area south of the active delta used to be annually inundated in the more recent past. 28 Figure 1.1 - Map Showing the Inland Niger Delta of Mali ALGERIA MALI MAURITANIA Tombouctou :SENEGAL GUIN COTE D'IVOIRE FQ \I»\¥ flu 29 mostly in Mali’s 5th region (which has Mopti as its capital), with much of the lacustrine zone being in the 6th region. Within the active delta are the rivers and seasonal waterways, land which may be flooded, and land which is not subject to flooding. Annual surges of water towards the end of each rainy season in the Niger and Bani rivers inundate the delta, irrigating plains used for rice, and uncultivated areas in which fish spawn and feed and which ultimately provide dry-season pasture for livestock. The delta’s water regime and topography support a variety of economic activities, notably herding, agriculture, and fishing.23 The IND region receives on the average about 600 mm. of rainfall in the south and 200 mm. in the north (Thom and Wells 19872335). Non-inundated areas within the delta and on its borders are the domain of rain-fed crops such as millet and also serve as pasture areas (with the consent of farmers, whose freshly harvested fields benefit in more than one way from the presence of the cattle) for herds returning from the Sahelian plains and waiting for the flood waters in the delta to recede. The unique conditions of the IND have long been attractive to livestock herders?" The recession of the annual floods early in the dry season exposes rich pastures on which 2” A Malian report in the early 19703 characterized the IND as richest zone in the country, with 6.2 percent of the rural population producing 12.3 percent of the gross domestic product of the traditional sector (Mali 1973219). Franke (1987:271-2) refers to it as “one of Africa’s most important potential food-producing regions.” 2“ Archaeological evidence indicates that cattle were part of the delta economy perhaps as early as the 3rd century BC. (McIntosh and McIntosh 19792237). The Fulani gradually came to dominate the raising and herding of livestock in the region following their arrival between the 11th and 17th centuries (Moorehead 1988232). 30 livestock can graze during the dry season. Over one million and perhaps as many as 1.5 million cattle use the delta, as well as 2-2.5 million sheep and goats (Moorehead 1988:29; Thom and Wells 19872341). The livestock production system of the IND accounts for 25 percent of the cattle and 18 percent of the small ruminants in Mali (Wagenaar 1986:ix)25 and has always been one of the primary areas for livestock production in the region (France 1961225; Coulibaly 1993). The grasses which grow in flooded areas and make the delta’s pastures so rich are collectively called burgu (pl. burguuji) in Fula and include Echinochloa stagnina, E. pyramidalis, and Polygonum Ianigerum (Gallais 1975b2355; Bonis Charancle 1994:427). The same word is applied to pastures in which these grasses are predominant (sometimes also referred to by the F renchized term, bourgoutiére), and in its broadest sense it refers to the inundated plains where these pastures are found. The livestock production system of which the burgu pastures are the focal point relies on an area much larger than the IND. It extends beyond, especially to the northwest and east, to areas where livestock are pastured when the burguuji and rice fields are flooded. In general, the pastoral system of the IND is characterized by the movement of herds of cattle (and some small ruminants) out of the delta to the Sahelian plains beyond with the onset Of the rains and return as the floods recede (an example is 2’ A 1992 national census of livestock in Mali showed that the 5th region, which includes most of the IND as well as the Bandiagara plateau and the Seeno plains to the east, accounted for 22.3, 23.5, and 24.3 percent respectively of the cattle, sheep, and goats in the country (Coulibaly 1993224). On the other hand, RIM (1987, cited in Veeneklaas 1991279) counted only 846,000 cattle, 228,000 small ruminants, and 49,000 camels and donkeys in the 5th region. 31 illustrated in Figure 1.2). This is what Gallais (1967; 1984) refers to as the annual “cycle d ’herbe” (“cycle of grass”). The delta is also linked with pastoral systems outside in that during times of severe drought, pastoralists from outside the IND bring their herds to the dry season burgu pastures of the delta.26 Small ruminant herds, as one would expect, transhume over shorter distances than cattle. Many sheep and goats, however, are kept in the vicinity of their owners’ villages and are not herded. Livestock are important to the society and economy of the IND in several ways. First, they represents the most effective way of converting some of the region’s resources (i.e., burgu and the grasses and vegetation of the nearby Sahelian plains) into forms useable by humans. Second, as is the case in a number of lower income countries, livestock represent a form of savings and can be sold for cash. Third, trade in and export of livestock production of the IND and vicinity is significant in the economy of Mali (Coulibaly 1993).27 Fourth, associated with agriculture in agrO-pastoral or agro-sylvo- pastoral interactions, pastoralism can make important indirect contributions to crop production.28 And fifth, especially in the case of the Fulani, the dominant herding group 26 In this way, among others, the IND serves as a “safety net” for victims of drought in surrounding dryland areas (Davies 19962109). 27 A study by CABO and ESPR in the 5th region concluded that of all the rural production systems, livestock production offered the greatest potential returns (Cissé and Gosseye, eds. 1990; van Duivenbooden, Gosseye, and van Keulen, eds. 1991; Veeneklaas, et al, eds., 1991). 2‘ Mainly through the production of manure. Some cattle also provide important draft power for cultivation and rural transport. 32 Q acne-o. 0.. Nil .. @633 £28m use .239 genome? ”830m ‘00. On 0 25.8. =23. . . . . . . \ <_z