Box 1

A new narrative for pastoralism

The current policy and discussions surrounding pastoralism are full of myths and misconceptions. Such misconceptions apply as much to environmental management debates in Africa as they do to the reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy in the UK and more broadly across Europe. A new narrative could help us to better understand who pastoralists are, where and how they live, and what their needs are.

The PASTRES (Pastoralism, Uncertainty and Resilience) programme has worked to create a new narrative about pastoralism, identifying the core principles that form the basis of successful pastoralism. This narrative emphasises the importance of flexible mobility in adapting to variability and environmental changes. Furthermore, extensive, mobile livestock systems are not necessarily detrimental to the environment and provide an essential source of protein and nutrients. Pastoralists are highly engaged in local, embedded, networked markets. Their local systems of early warning and disaster prevention are highly reliable but require support. Finally, pastoralism does not increase conflict—it is the long-term neglect of pastoral areas that drives it.

Thus, we can define pastoralism as modern, mobile and productive, and an “asset to the world”, with pastoralists as “reliability professionals” who form part of a global “critical infrastructure” of pastoralist systems.

For more info, check the PASTRES programme. This article is based on this content.

Box 2

Pastoralists and climate change

Livestock are a major contributor to greenhouse gases and, consequently, climate change. However, not all livestock systems are the same. PASTRES research distinguishes between industrial and extensive mobile systems, such as pastoralism. Without this distinction, pastoralists are unfairly blamed for environmental destruction, which distorts the policy debate and results in injustices.

Pastoralism can be a low-impact system and can even contribute to carbon sequestration. Pastoralists produce animal products with a low environmental impact for millions of people, using extensive rangelands which cannot be used for other food production without significant investment.

Living with and from variability is central to pastoral livelihoods, however, climate change still affects them. All too often, resilience programmes argue that pastoralists should seek alternative, ‘diversified’ livelihoods. However, these programmes usually imply external interventions, risk modelling and tracking, and early warning systems that rarely work. The information generated is not used, the systems are not trusted, they are poorly directed, and the proposed interventions do not support pastoralists’ own capacities to respond to shocks and stresses.

Nevertheless, major investments are required to support pastoralists in the context of climate change. A processual resilience approach should be implemented that encompasses flexible, mobile livelihoods and is aligned with the resilience-building strategies of pastoralists themselves. This approach requires building on the networks, relationships and social fabric on which pastoralism is based, as well as considering the practices of local reliability professionals. In this way, resilience emerges from the continuous reconfiguration of relationships, both human and non-human, and between people, labour, rangelands, herds, and flocks.

For more info check the PASTRES Project. This article is based on this content.