19

Chapter 2
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-
dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa

R.S. Reid, S. Serneels, M. Nyabenge and J. Hanson

SUMMARY
All eastern Africa is in the tropics, but its grasslands cover a very wide range of
altitudes. Extensive grasslands are mostly in arid and semi-arid zones. The area
is subject to droughts and a high degree of pastoral risk. Potential vegetation is
largely desert and semi-desert, bush and woodland, with only a small area of
pure grassland, but the grass-dominated herbaceous layer of the other forma-
tions is very important for wildlife and livestock; 75 percent of eastern Africa is
dominated by grasslands, often with a varying amount of woody vegetation. The
grasslands have been grazed by livestock and game for millennia. Eastern Africa
is a centre of genetic diversity for grasses. Six to eleven main grassland zones
have been described. Grasslands are either under government control, are open
access or are common property resources. Access to resources are under national
laws but frequently traditional land use rights are granted by local communities.
National land tenure systems are unrelated to traditional ones. Governments sup-
ported cropping and reduction of communal grazing land; contraction of pastoral
systems reduces the scale of resource use by pastoral peoples. The population is
very varied – pastoral groups tend to be of different ethnicities from agricultural or
agropastoral groups. Most pastoral systems are in the semi-arid areas, with small
areas in hyper-arid and subhumid zones. Traditionally, livestock and their prod-
ucts were for subsistence and wealth, but now many are marketed. Grasslands are
increasingly being integrated into farming as pastoral systems evolve. Sown forages
are widely used in agricultural areas. Cattle, like people, are mostly in the non-pas-
toral areas (70 percent), except in countries with little high-potential land. Cattle,
camels, sheep, goats and donkeys are the main livestock kept by the pastoralists for
subsistence; most herds are mixed. Indigenous breeds are the majority, although
exotic cattle are kept for dairying in high altitude zones. Wildlife are widespread in
the grazing lands and are important for tourism. Agricultural development along
watercourses limits access by wildlife and pastoral stock.

SCOPE
This chapter focuses on the grazing lands or rangelands of Burundi, Eritrea,
Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, the Sudan, the United Republic of
Tanzania (Tanzania) and Uganda (Figure 2.1). These comprise extensive semi-
20 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab Egypt

Jamahiriya

Chad

Central African
Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola

Zambia Mozambique

Figure 2.1
Countries in eastern Africa as defined for this chapter.

arid to arid grasslands, savannah, bushlands and woodlands, and also cover the
natural grazing areas of the extensive highland areas of the region. These are
also the pastoral rangelands that Holechek, Pieper and Herbel (1989) defined as
“uncultivated land that will support grazing or browsing animals”.
Pastoral management systems in eastern Africa have developed over
the last three to four thousand years by the indigenous groups of pastoral
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 21

peoples living in the region, whose livelihoods depend on livestock. These

traditional and often sustainable ways are now being threatened by agricultural
development, the need to produce more food from marginal lands, population
growth and global climate change. Fluctuations in rainfall and drought are
recurring problems in the rangelands of the region and 70 million people in
the Horn of Africa, many of whom are pastoralists, suffer from long-term
chronic food insecurity (FAO, 2000). Poverty levels are high, with more than
half of the people in the region surviving on less than US$ 1 per day (Thornton
et al., 2002). The population of the region has doubled since 1974, and it is
predicted to increase another 40 percent by 2015 (FAO, 2000). Against this
background, the traditional ways of pastoralists continue to change, and many
are settling (or are settled) and diversifying their income-generating activities
into crop production, wage labour and other activities, while other family
members continue to herd the family stock and move to follow the availability
of forage.
This chapter examines the changes in pastoral rangeland systems in eastern
Africa over recent years and estimates future changes in the rangelands of the
region due to global climate change, human population growth and market
opportunities.

Mapping rangelands, livestock and pastoral peoples

The productive potential of the eastern African region varies enormously from
place to place, as shown by the differences in the growing season across the
region (Figure 2.2; Fischer, Velthuizen and Nachtergaele, 2000). On this map,
areas coloured brown and yellow have less than 60 growing days1 and thus
rarely support crops (= arid, according to White, 1998); areas adequate for short-
season crops with 60–120 growing days are shown in light green (= semi-arid);
areas with 121–180 days, shaded in medium green, can support longer-season
crops (= dry subhumid); and areas with >180 growing days are in dark green,
and have few production constraints (= wet subhumid). Over the region, about
37 percent of the land surface (or 2.3×106 km2) is only agriculturally suitable for
grazing by wildlife and livestock (= arid and semi-arid areas), while the other
63 percent (3.9×106 km2) is additionally suitable for crop cultivation, forestry
and other types of land use. Of these arid and semi-arid areas principally suitable
for grazing, about 1.6×106 km2 (or about 70 percent of the grazing land) is arid
and completely unsuitable for crop production (zero growing days) and thus is
probably only available for grazing during the rare high rainfall years or during a

1 Growing days are defined as “the period (in days) during the year when precipitation (P)
exceeds half the potential evapotranspiration (PET) plus a period required to evapotranspire
up to 100 mm of water from excess precipitation assumed stored in the soil profile” (FAO,
1978). The mean daily temperature during the growing period has to exceed 5°C (Fischer,
Velthuizen and Nachtergaele, 2000).
22 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya Egypt

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key
Number of days
0
1 - 60
60 - 120
Tanzania 120 - 180
> 180
Missing data
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Zambia Mozambique

Figure 2.2
Length of growing period (days) with sufficient soils and water to grow crops. Re-
classified from Fischer, Velthuizen and Nachtergaele, 2000.

few weeks or months in normal or low rainfall years. Significant drylands cover
northern Sudan, eastern Ethiopia, much of Eritrea and Somalia and northern
Kenya, while most of Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda are relatively
wet. These four high-rainfall countries and southern Kenya, the highlands of
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 23

Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya Egypt

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key

Afro-montane
Mangrove and halophytic vegetation
Bushland, thicket and mosaics
Desert
Forest and forest transitions
Grassland and grassland mosaics
Semi-desert vegetation
Woodland and woodland transitions
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique
Zambia

Figure 2.3
Potential vegetation in eastern Africa. Re-classified from White, 1983.

Ethiopia and southern Sudan have the highest potential for intensive crop-
livestock production. Much of this is now already under cropland, with the
exception of southern Sudan (for cropland, see Figure 2.7).
The potential vegetation of eastern Africa is largely desert and semi-
desert (26 percent of the land surface), bushland (33 percent) and woodland
24 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab
Egypt
Jamahiriya

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo

Key
No. of species/km2
0
1 - 10
11 - 30
31 - 50
51 - 70
71 -n 83
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique
Zambia

Figure 2.4
Density of large mammal species in eastern Africa, based on data from IEA, 1998.

(21 percent) (from Figure 2.3; White, 1983). Only 12 percent of the region is
naturally forested, and even less is pure grassland (7 percent). Afromontane
vegetation, much of it potential grazing land, is rare (0.5 percent) and mostly
restricted to Ethiopia, with very small amounts on volcanic mountains in Kenya,
Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania. Although pure grassland is found only in central
 The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 25
J.M. SUTTIE

Plate 2.1
Predator harvesting game. Cheetah among Harpachne schimperi – Athi plains,
Kenya.

and south-eastern Sudan, northern and western Tanzania and northwest Kenya,
the herbaceous layer of semi-deserts, bushlands and woodlands are dominated
by grasses, so they are included here as part of the “grass-dominated areas”
of eastern Africa because of their importance for livestock and wildlife. This
means that 75 percent of eastern Africa is dominated by either pure grasslands
or grasslands with varying amounts of woody vegetation within or above the
grass layer. Significant woodlands exist only in southern Sudan, Tanzania and
Eritrea, and in northern Uganda and western Ethiopia.
Eastern Africa is renowned for the diversity and number of its large grazing
and browsing wildlife (Plates 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3). A map of the density (number
per km2) of species of medium and large mammals in eastern Africa was devel-
oped by a simultaneous overlay of 281 individual species distribution maps (see
Figure 2.4, developed by Reid et al. (1998) based on analysis of databases from
IEA (1998)). The highest diversity of medium to large mammal species is found
in two large, contiguous patches: one in the Rift Valley of south-central Kenya
and central Tanzania, and the other in and east of the Ruwenzori Mountains
in southwestern Uganda and northern Rwanda. This is the richest diversity of
mammals of this size in all of Africa (Reid et al., 1998) and probably the world.
Most of Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda support diverse
groups of large mammals, with fewer in most of Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia and
Somalia. This map does not account for the rarity or endemism of large mam-
mals, which can be distributed quite differently from overall diversity.
26 Grasslands of the world

J.M. SUTTIE
Plate 2.2
Large non-ruminant herbivores – zebra herd – Athi plains, Kenya.

J.M. SUTTIE

Plate 2.3
Gerenuk - dry area browsers – Tsavo East, Kenya.

As expected, most of the people in eastern Africa live in the wetter and
highland areas (Figure 2.5; Deichmann, 1996; Thornton et al., 2002). High
population levels are found in the Ethiopian highlands, the Lake Victoria
Basin and the southern Tanzanian highlands. Significant clusters of people
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 27

Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya Egypt

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key
No. of people/km2
<1
1 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 50
61 - 100
> 100
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique
Zambia

Figure 2.5
Human population density in eastern Africa in 2001. From Deichmann, 1996; Thornton et al.,
2002.

live in areas marginally suitable for cultivation in Eritrea around Asmara, in

central Sudan and along the coasts of Kenya, Tanzania and Somalia. The only
places where many people live in drylands are along the Nile in northern
Sudan, around Mogadishu in Somalia and in western Somaliland of northern
Somalia. Few people live in most of the drylands of eastern Africa and in the
28 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab
Egypt
Jamahiriya

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key
No. of cattle/km2
<1
1-5
6 - 20
21 - 50
51 - 100
101 - 300
Missing data
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities
Angola
Mozambique
Zambia

Figure 2.6
Cattle population densities in eastern Africa in the late 1990s, from Kruska, 2002.

wetter areas of the Sudd in southern Sudan, in the tsetse belts of Tanzania and
in protected areas.
Cattle are largely distributed in a pattern similar to the human population
distribution in eastern Africa (Figure 2.6; Kruska, 2002), with high concentrations
around Lake Victoria and in the Ethiopian highlands. Few cattle are found in
the driest areas of northern Sudan, eastern and northern Ethiopia, Eritrea and
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 29

northeastern Somalia. There are also few cattle in wet, southern Sudan (the
Sudd) and northern Uganda, and in the subhumid, miombo woodland regions
of southern Tanzania. Most of the cattle are in non-pastoral areas across the
region: 70 percent are in cropland and urban areas, while 30 percent are in
pastoral lands. These proportions vary strongly from country to country,
partly because of differences in amounts of high-potential land. For example,
about 35 percent of Kenya is high potential and 80 percent of the nation’s cattle
herd resides there. In contrast, there is very little high-potential land in Somalia
and Djibouti and thus all the cattle live in drylands in those countries.
A previous global analysis of pastoral systems (from Reid et al., 2003)
has been used to estimate the extent of grass-dominated pastoral systems in
eastern Africa. This pastoral systems map (Figure 2.7) was created using four
Geographical Information System (GIS) data layers: land cover (USGS/EDC,
1999; Loveland et al., 2000), length of growing period (Fischer, Velthuizen
and Nachtergaele, 2000), rainfall (IWMI, 2001; Jones and Thornton, 2003) and
human population density for Africa (Deichmann, 1996).
Initially, land cover, length of growing period and human population maps
were used to establish the location of all cultivatable land (>60 growing days), all
land cover currently under crops in the USGS coverage (dryland cropland and
pasture; irrigated cropland and pasture; mixed dryland and irrigated cropland
and pasture; cropland and grassland mosaic; and cropland and woodland
mosaic) and any other areas with sufficient human population (>20 people/
km2) to exclude extensive rangeland use (for details, see Reid et al., 2000a;
Thornton et al., 2002). This classification thus joined all but the most extensive
agropastoral systems with cropland, and maps about 9 percent more cropland
than is in the USGS database. “Urban” included all areas with more than
450 people/km2. The remaining areas (not cultivatable, low human population
density) were discriminated into pastoral system classes by mean annual rainfall
as follows: areas receiving less than 50 mm of rainfall were classified as hyper-
arid; areas with 51–300 mm were arid; and areas with 301–600 mm were semi-
arid. Highland areas were those with temperatures of more than 5°C but less
than 20°C during the growing season, or less than 20°C for one month a year.
Most of eastern Africa’s pastoral systems are semi-arid (34 percent), with
much smaller areas of arid (12 percent), hyper-arid (8 percent), humid to sub-
humid (9 percent), and temperate and highland (1 percent) pastoral systems
(Figure 2.7). Cropland and urban areas cover 27 percent of the region. Only
Sudan has the driest (hyper-arid) pastoral systems, while eastern Eritrea,
northern Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somalia and northern Kenya support extensive
arid pastoral systems. The most common land cover type in Kenya, Somalia,
Ethiopia and Sudan is semi-arid rangeland. Tanzania, Uganda and Sudan have
the most extensive wet pastoral systems.
By comparing potential vegetation (Figure 2.3) and pastoral and cropland
systems (Figure 2.7), we can see what types of vegetation farmers have pre-
30 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya Egypt

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo

Key
Hyper-arid pastoral
Arid pastoral
Semi-arid pastoral
Humid/subhumid pastoral
Temperate/highland pastoral
Cropland or urban
Other (mostly forests)
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique
Zambia
Figure 2.7
Pastoral system areas and cropland and urban areas of eastern Africa in 2001, based on
Thornton et al. (2002) and Reid et al. (2003).

ferred to use for cropland. On average, 27 percent of the region is cropped,

but this is disproportionately found in afromontane vegetation (74 percent
converted to cropland), forest (62 percent converted), woodland (34 percent
converted) and bushland (31 percent converted). Farmers have ploughed lesser
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 31

areas of pure grassland (23 percent converted), semi-deserts (3 percent) and

deserts (1 percent). These land use choices have pushed pastoral use from the
wetter to the drier areas in eastern Africa over time.

PLANT COMMUNITIES IN GRASSLANDS AND RANGELANDS

The grasslands of eastern Africa are very diverse, with a range of dominant
species dependent on rainfall, soil type and management or grazing system.
Eastern Africa is renowned as a centre of genetic diversity of tropical grasses
and the centre of greatest diversity of cultivated grass species (Boonman, 1993).
Over 90 percent of the major cultivated forage grasses have their centre of
origin in sub-Saharan Africa and are indigenous to the extensive grasslands of
eastern Africa. There are an estimated 1 000 species of grass indigenous to the
region, with more than 600 species found in Kenya alone (Boonman, 1993). The
wide distribution and adaptability of many of these species across a range of
environments and management systems indicates the presence of considerable
genetic diversity within the region. This diversity has been exploited to select
superior ecotypes for use in many other parts of the world. Brachiaria species,
originating from eastern Africa, are the most widely planted forage grass,
with estimates of areas under Brachiaria pastures in Brazil ranging from 30 to
70 million hectares in 1996 (Fisher and Kerridge, 1996).
To aid description and study of the rangeland, many attempts have been made
to classify the vegetation into types that cover large areas of the region. Rattray
(1960) identified 12 types of grassland in eastern Africa, based on the genera of
the dominant grass in the grassland. These include Aristida, Chloris, Cenchrus,
Chrysopogon, Exotheca, Hyparrhenia, Heteropogon, Loudetia, Pennisetum,
Panicum, Setaria and Themeda. Pratt and Gwynne (1977) described six eco-
climatic zones based on climate, vegetation and land use. These are described
as the afro-alpine area of upland grasslands; the equatorial humid to dry sub-
humid area of forests and bushlands (Plates 2.4 and 2.5); the dry subhumid to
semi-arid area of savannah, shrub and woodland; the semi-arid areas of dry
woodland and savannah (such as the Acacia-Themeda association); the arid
area of Commiphora, Acacia, Cenchrus ciliaris and Chloris roxburghiana; and
the very arid area of dwarf shrub grassland of Chrysopogon. A more recent
classification, based primarily on the dominant grass, is described as vegetation
type or region by Herlocker (1999). He described eleven vegetation regions
in eastern Africa as Pennisetum mid-grass; Pennisetum giant grass; Panicum-
Hyparrhenia tall-grass; Hyparrhenia tall-grass; Hyparrhenia-Hyperthelia tall-
grass; Themeda mid-grass; Chrysopogon mid-grass; Leptothrium mid-grass;
Cenchrus-Schoenefeldia annual mid-grass; Panicum-annual; Aristida mid- and
short-grass region; and Aristida short-grass region.
Themeda triandra (Plate 2.6) is one of the most widespread grass species in
sub-Saharan Africa but it is only the dominant grassland type in central and
northern Tanzania. The species is very variable and shows wide adaptation to
32 Grasslands of the world

R.S. REID
Plate 2.4
Acacia bushlands cover much of the rich volcanic soils of eastern Africa.

R.S. REID

Plate 2.5
Farmers use many of the trees in bushlands and woodlands to manufacture
charcoal for market.
 The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 33
C.J. WILSON

Plate 2.6
Maasai sheep grazing in a Themeda grassland, southwestern Kenya.

growth in both the highland regions and the lowland savannahs. Themeda,
Bothriochloa, Digitaria and Heteropogon mixtures are common in the open
dry savannah areas of Tanzania, such as the Serengeti plains. Short tufted
ecotypes of Themeda triandra are found at high altitudes and taller more
woody types are found in the open lowland savannahs (Rattray, 1960). These
vary in palatability, but all types quickly lose palatability with age. Themeda
triandra can tolerate light to moderate grazing, and productivity can reach
400 kg/ha/day in the wet season in the Serengeti plains, making them among
the most productive grasslands in the world (Herlocker, 1999). Plant biomass,
quality and species numbers decline in the absence of grazing, are at a peak
under moderate to high grazing (McNaughton, 1976, 1979, 1984) and can
decline under very high grazing. In the Mara region in Kenya, to the north,
which is a continuation of the grassland ecosystem of the Serengeti Plains,
Themeda makes up about 50 percent of the grass cover in lightly to moderately
grazed sites, dropping to 1–5 percent cover near settlements where Maasai
corral their livestock each night (Vuorio, Muchiru and Reid, in prep.).
The dominant grass species in the drylands of eastern Africa include Aristida,
Cenchrus, Chrysopogon and Heteropogon. These are often found growing as
an association, the dominant species determined by the environment and
soil type. Aristida grassland is widely distributed in the dry pastoral areas of
Kenya, Ethiopia and the Sudan. Although many species are tough and have
34 Grasslands of the world

low palatability, they have wide adaptability to a broad range of environments.

Cenchrus grassland is often found associated with Aristida, or in Somalia
with Leptothrium (Herlocker, 1999), and has higher palatability and better
adaptation to hot dry areas with high evapotranspiration. Cenchrus is one of
the few grass genera that has been characterized for agronomic attributes. Over
300 ecotypes, mostly collected from Tanzania and Kenya, were characterized
for 12 agronomic attributes (Pengelly, Hacker and Eagles, 1992). The ecotypes
showed wide variability in their agronomic traits and were clustered into six
groups (Pengelly, Hacker and Eagles, 1992). The annual C. biflorus, which
is adapted to dryland areas, is also found in eastern Africa associated with
Schoenefeldia sp. and is typical of one dry area south of the Sahara in western
Eritrea (Herlocker, 1999).
Chrysopogon plumulosus is the most widespread species found in the semi-
desert grasslands and bushlands of the Horn of Africa (Herlocker, 1999) and is
avidly grazed, especially in Somalia and Sudan, where it is burnt to stimulate
regrowth for grazing. Chrysopogon is very sensitive to grazing. Overgrazing
results in elimination of the species and a change in species composition to
annuals such as Aristida spp. (Herlocker, 1999). This harsh management
regime in low rainfall areas has resulted in reduced stands of this grassland
in recent years (IBPGR, 1984). Herlocker (1999) recognized three zones in
the Chrysopogon region according to the associated woody vegetation. These
include Commiphora-Acacia bushland and Acacia etbaica open woodland,
which occur across the region, and the Acacia bussei open woodland in Somalia
and Ethiopia. He also recognized two subregions: the Cenchrus-Chloris subre-
gion in the wetter areas and the Sporobolus subregion in the drier areas. Rattray
(1960) recognized the Chloris areas as a vegetation type in its own right, and
included the Sporobolus as an associated grass in a Chrysopogon vegetation type
in very dry semi-desert areas of Somalia and Ethiopia.
Although not a vegetation type recognized by Herlocker (1999), Heteropogon
grassland is found in open woodland or grassland in the semi-arid and arid
rangelands in Somalia (Box, 1968), Kenya and Ethiopia. It is represented
mostly by H. contortus, which is commonly called spear grass due to its awns
and needle-sharp tips on the grass florets. It is a persistent species, which is
indigenous to the region, spreads rapidly through seed and grows in lowland
or middle altitudes with poor, stony, well drained soils. It is commonly found
with annual species of Aristida and Digitaria (Rattray, 1960). The species does
not have good palatability and is only useful when young.
Chloris roxburghiana is a dominant species in dryland areas of Kenya,
Ethiopia, Tanzania, Somalia and Uganda, and is usually found growing in
association with Chrysopogon aucheri and Cenchrus ciliaris in Commiphora
and Acacia woodland (Rattray, 1960). Despite its wide distribution, Herlocker
(1999) treats this vegetation type as a subtype of the Chrysopogon mid-grass
region. Chloris roxburghiana is widespread throughout the entire region and
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 35

is an important species for livestock and wildlife. This species contributes up

to 50 percent of the diet of wild herbivores in eastern Kenya (IBPGR, 1984)
but is in danger of disappearing due to overgrazing and land degradation2. The
species is very variable. A recent study using random amplified polymorphic
DNA (RAPD) markers to study diversity among four populations from eco-
logically distinct sites in eastern Kenya showed significant variation among the
populations (W.N. Mnene, KARI, Nairobi, pers. comm.).
Chloris gayana is an important native species and a component of the
Hyparrhenia type of grassland (Rattray, 1960) in open steppe and wooded
grassland vegetation or flooded valleys in the higher rainfall areas of Kenya,
Ethiopia, Tanzania, Somalia and Uganda. Herlocker (1999) considers this veg-
etation type part of the Hyparrhenia-Hyperthelia tall-grass region of miombo
woodland. The miombo woodland is an important vegetation type covering
the southern two thirds of Tanzania. Chloris gayana, or Rhodes grass, is not
an important grass ecologically in the vegetation of the region, but is important
commercially as a forage grass. It shows wide adaptability with high palatabil-
ity, and is a fast-growing, persistent, frost- and drought-tolerant species valued
for grazing (Skerman and Riveros, 1990). Commercial cultivars of Rhodes
grass have been developed from genotypes collected in Kenya and grown in
the region since the 1930s (Boonman, 1997). An analysis of genetic diversity
in Chloris gayana using amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs)
revealed considerable variation between the diploid and tetraploid cultivars,
with genetic similarity ranging between 66 and 89 percent in the diploids and
63 and 87 percent in the tetraploids (Ubi, Komatsu and Fujimori, 2000).
Hyparrhenia is one of the most widespread grassland types in eastern
Africa, and this grassland region, which is characterized by woodlands and
wooded grasslands dominated by H. rufa, covers parts of Uganda, Kenya
and Ethiopia (Herlocker, 1999). Several other species of Hyparrhenia are
found in the region, of which the most important are H. hirta, H. diplandra
and H. filipendula. These tough perennial grasses are usually found growing
in combination with other grasses in woodland or open grassland, from the
lowland to mid-altitude areas. They are fast growing, and grazed while young,
but become tough and unpalatable as they mature and lose nutritive value
(Skerman and Riveros, 1990). Crude protein levels of H. dissoluta in Kenya can
decrease from over 14 percent to less than 3 percent after flowering (Dougall,
1960). After flowering, these grasses are much valued and used as thatching for
traditional rural housing, and mature grasses have commercial value, being sold
as standing grass to be cut for roofing in some rural areas. This and burning
ensure young regrowth with higher value for grazing in many areas. Grazing

2 In this chapter, we consider degraded land to be land that due to natural processes or human
activity is no longer able to sustain an economic function or the original ecological function,
or both (GLASOD, 1990).
36 Grasslands of the world

is important to encourage growth of other more palatable and valuable forage

grasses, such as Cynodon dactylon, Panicum maximum and Setaria sphacelata
(Herlocker, 1999).
Loudetia species are often found mixed with Hyparrhenia spp. and
Themeda triandra in open grassland on shallow, rocky, sandy soils. They pro-
vide late-season grazing for livestock (Rattray, 1960) but have low palatability
(Skerman and Riveros, 1990). Although Herlocker (1999) did not consider this
a vegetation type per se, and Rattray (1960) only considered this as a grassland
type for Uganda, Loudetia is widely distributed in rangeland ecosystems in
Tanzania, Kenya and Ethiopia, but is never the dominant species. The most
common species in the region is Loudetia simplex, which shows considerable
variability in morphology in Ethiopia (Phillips, 1995). However, the genus has
not been widely studied due to its low economic importance.
The highland areas of eastern Africa cover about 80 million hectares of
Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda. Exotheca abyssinica grassland is common on
poor waterlogged soils in high altitude areas of eastern Africa, especially on
the seasonally waterlogged vertisols, of which there are 12.6 million hectares
alone in Ethiopia (Srivastava et al., 1993). This species is closely related to
Hyparrhenia and is often found growing in association with Themeda trian-
dra. E. abyssinica has tough leaves and low nutritive value (Dougall, 1960),
providing good grazing while young but quickly becoming tough and unpal-
atable. Setaria incrassata and S. sphacelata are also common grassland species
found in Acacia woodland up to 2 600 m altitude on the vertisols of Uganda,
Sudan and Ethiopia (Rattray, 1960). S. incrassata is a very variable species, with
morphotypes varying in plant robustness, bristles, and number and density of
spikelets (Phillips, 1995). It is closely related to S. sphacelata, which is also a
very variable species, allowing selection of a range of cultivars from Kenyan
ecotypes that vary in frost tolerance, maturity, pigmentation and nutritive value
(Skerman and Riveros, 1990). Both S. sphacelata and S. incrassata are palatable
grasses that withstand heavy grazing.
Pennisetum grassland areas can be classified as two types: high altitude
grasslands of P. clandestinum and savannah grassland of P. purpureum (Rattray,
1960; Herlocker, 1999). Although belonging to the same genus, these species
are morphologically and ecotypically very distinct, and have very different dis-
tribution and ecological niches. Both species are indigenous to eastern Africa,
with high economic importance, and are cultivated in many other parts of the
world.
P. clandestinum is a prostrate stoloniferous perennial that is widely dis-
tributed in areas from 1 400 m to over 3 000 m in Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania
and Uganda. Its common name, Kikuyu grass, derives from the highlands
of Kenya, where it is abundant, being named after the Kikuyu ethnic group
of central Kenya. It shows wide adaptability to drought, waterlogging and
occasional frosts (Skerman and Riveros, 1990). It is highly digestible, palatable,
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 37

persistent and withstands severe defoliation and grazing. It is the dominant

species in natural pastures in many parts of the eastern African highlands. It
is an invasive secondary species, which can quickly colonize disturbed soil in
cropping areas and fallow land, spreading by seeds or stolons, and may become
a serious weed in cropland (Boonman, 1993). It shows wide variability, with
three distinct ecotypes classified on leaf width and length, stolon size and floral
structure (Skerman and Riveros, 1990). Several ecotypes have been selected
as commercial cultivars, which have been widely introduced into tropical
highland and subtropical areas. It is now widely grown outside its native
distribution and is commonly cultivated in the Americas. Studies in the USA
using starch gel electrophoresis to describe the distribution of genetic variation
within and among introduced populations found a relatively high proportion
of polymorphic loci across populations, indicating fixed heterozygosity due to
polyploidy (Wilen et al., 1995). The highland grazing areas of P. clandestinum
are often mixed with P. sphacelatum and Eleusine floccifolia. These two grasses
are frequent in overgrazed pastures in the highlands and mid-altitudes in the
Rift Valley, but are not palatable (Sisay and Baars, 2002) and are important for
traditional basket making. Cattle avoid these grasses, which have the potential
to become major weeds on upland pastures unless collected for basket making.
Basket making is an important activity and source of income for rural women
and collection of these weedy grasses also maintains the quality of the com-
munal grazing areas and grasslands in the highlands.
Pennisetum purpureum is a tall, erect, vigorous perennial species that grows
in damp grasslands and forest areas up to 2 400 m in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda
and Sudan. Herlocker (1999) recognized this as a vegetation region in Kenya
and Uganda, around the shores of Lake Victoria. Pennisetum purpureum
is widely distributed through sub-Saharan Africa and is commonly called
elephant grass or Napier grass, named after Colonel Napier of Bulawayo in
Zimbabwe, who promoted its use at the start of the century. It is now widely
used for cut-and-carry (where grass is collected by hand and carried to stall-
fed cattle) for the smallholder dairy industry in eastern Africa and frequently
produces up to 10–12 t/ha dry matter in rainfed conditions (Boonman, 1993).
Elephant grass is palatable when young and leafy. It is fast growing and should
be cut often to avoid its becoming tough and unpalatable with a high propor-
tion of stem. Due to its importance in the region, considerable research has been
done on elephant grass, including studies on its diversity. Tcacenco and Lance
(1992) studied 89 morphological characters on 9 genotypes of elephant grass to
determine which characters were most useful for description of the variation
in the species, and concluded that variation existed from plant to plant, even
within the same accession. A larger collection of 53 accessions was character-
ized for 20 morphological and 8 agronomic characters (Van de Wouw, Hanson
and Leuthi, 1999). Again the germplasm was found to be very variable, but
accessions could be clustered into six groups with similar morphology. More
38 Grasslands of the world

recently, molecular techniques using RAPD markers were applied to study the
genetic diversity in the same collection, and also among farm clones in Kenya
(Lowe et al., 2003). This technique was able to separate out hybrids between
P. purpureum and P. glaucum from pure elephant grass accessions. Despite being
clonally propagated, genetic diversity (Magguran, 1988) across all accessions
was found to be fairly high, with a Shannon’s diversity index of 0.306.
Panicum maximum is another tall, fast growing species that is often found
associated with Pennisetum in eastern African grasslands or associated with
Cenchrus and Bothriochloa in Acacia woodland in the dry savannah areas
(Rattray, 1960). Herlocker (1999) recognized the Panicum-Hyparrhenia region
along the coast northwards from Tanzania, through Kenya into Somalia.
Panicum maximum is more widely distributed in Kenya, Ethiopia and Tanzania
and is typical of shady places in the foothills of mountain ranges up to 2 000 m.
P. maximum is a pioneer grass that comes in after clearing and cultivation of
the lowland forest. There is a wide variation in plant habit, robustness of culms
and pubescence (Phillips, 1995), and ecotypes with good agronomic characters
have been selected as commercial cultivars. P. maximum is fast growing and
palatable, and its wide adaptation and variability make it an excellent grazing
species in the savannahs. A collection of 426 ecotypes of P. maximum collected
from Tanzania and Kenya were evaluated for morphological and agronomic
traits in Brazil (Jank et al., 1997). Twenty-one morphological descriptors were
found to discriminate among accessions and were used to cluster the collec-
tion. Considerable variation was found among the ecotypes and some with
wide adaptation were selected for establishment of a breeding programme.
Other locally well-adapted ecotypes are also being developed for use within
the region of adaptation.

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS IN PASTORAL LANDS OF EASTERN

AFRICA
Most dry grasslands of eastern Africa are characterized by frequent droughts
and high levels of risk of production for pastoral peoples (Little, [2000]).
Livestock are one of the few ways to convert sunlight into nutritious food in
these drylands (wildlife are also important). Pastoralists traditionally manage
risk by moving their livestock on a daily and seasonal basis to follow changes in
the quality and quantity of pasture (IFAD, 1995). Cattle, camels, sheep, goats
and donkeys are the main livestock species and are kept by the pastoralists for
subsistence for their milk, meat and traction. Most herds are mixed as a means
of adaptation to a changing environment, to supply food for the family and to
act as a cash reserve in times of shortage, during droughts or disease-pandemics
(Niamir, 1991).
Although sale of livestock is a major source of income for pastoralists today,
widespread sale (or commoditization) of livestock only became common in the
last century, with colonialism (Hodgson, 2000). Settled crop-livestock farmers
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 39

are particularly oriented toward marketing: selling animals, milk and hides reg-
ularly. Herds are managed in a way that minimizes sales because of the tradi-
tional social and economic functions of livestock other than income generation
(Coppock, 1994). In most pastoral areas, livestock are used as a social “safety
net”, with livestock exchange cementing mutual obligations to help each other
in times of need. Like many other pastoral areas, cattle are also of particular
significance in the Borana area of Ethiopia as a symbol of wealth and prestige,
and owners are reluctant to sell. Sheep and goats are usually sold to raise cash
for household needs. Although marketing of livestock products (milk, meat,
hides) in pastoral systems is a relatively new phenomenon, pastoral peoples
who live near markets and roads are increasingly selling products.
Traditionally, herders consume a large part of the milk produced; any sur-
plus is shared with neighbours, exchanged in barter or sold in urban areas. In
Somalia, a commercial milk chain through a cooperative has been established
by the pastoralists for marketing camel milk in Mogadishu as a source of
income to buy sugar, clothes and medicines (Herren, 1990). An EU-funded
project, Strengthening food security through decentralized cooperation, active
from 1996 to 2002, also supported establishment of a small processing plant for
pasteurizing camel milk and marketing the resulting products in suitable pack-
aging for the Somali market (EC, 2000). The 2001–2 drought had a considerable
effect on camel calving intervals and milk sales. In some parts of Somalia, there
was virtually no income from milk sales following the drought. Milk formerly
provided approximately 40 percent of a household’s income and the return on
livestock sales, which typically provide an additional 40 percent of income, was
halved after the drought (FSAU, 2003). Maasai in Kenya and Tanzania living
close to main roads or towns sell fresh milk, butter or fermented milk. The
Borana in southern Ethiopia sour cow’s milk and process it into butter for sale
in local markets or for transport to large cities (Holden and Coppock, 1992).
Distance to market, season and wealth of the household (which is directly
related to the number of livestock owned) influence marketing of dairy prod-
ucts in the southern rangelands of Ethiopia (Coppock, 1994).
Most of the extensive grasslands in the region are either under the control of
the government and designated as wildlife and conservation areas for national
parks (about 10 percent of the land area) or are open access or common prop-
erty resources. Access to these resources and the conditions under which they
can be used are under national laws, but frequently traditional land use rights
are granted by local communities. Traditionally, long-term sustainability of
these rangelands has been ensured by agreed management norms, but these
are increasingly breaking down as lands privatize, crop farmers migrate to
pastoral areas and human needs grow. Governments are also reducing sup-
port to pastoral peoples, who are often marginalized in national affairs (IFAD,
1995). Options for income generation and alternative land uses for extensive
grasslands for pastoralists are limited and can lead to overutilization and land
40 Grasslands of the world

degradation if none of the users take responsibility for the management and
sustainability of the system.
Common property and traditional access regimes with sustainable range
management institutions and resource sharing arrangements were practiced in
the region until the colonial era (IFAD, 1995) and continue in some areas today.
These were and are based on a transhumance grazing system developed over
many years to exploit the ecological heterogeneity and make optimal use of the
scarce resources of grazing and water throughout the year. These traditional
management practices include grazing rotation strategies and establishment
of grazing preserves for the dry season. Drought is the most serious challenge
facing pastoralists in the region and access to land and water are often the cause
of conflict between pastoralists, ranchers and crop-livestock farmers (Mkutu,
2001). Traditional systems of access to water are common in most countries
in the region. The pastoralists of northern Somalia and southern Ethiopia also
have a complex and well-regulated system of well management to regulate
water use, as well as traditional informal and formal social controls on use of
common property and open property resources to ensure sustainable use of
the grassland and water resources (Niamir, 1991). This is exemplified by herder
response to drought and conflict in southern Somalia, where herders move
camels and cattle great distances to good pastures in times of drought, while
they graze small stock closer to home (Little, [2000]).
Over the last century, these indigenous range management institutions have
been weakened by demographic, political and social change in the region.
The greatest threat to the traditional pastoralist system comes from the rapid
population growth of the last twenty years and conversion of communal
grassland to open access state property or private land, which has led to more
grassland being used for smallholder crop-livestock farming. Policies have
constrained the movement of pastoralists and promoted sedentarization and
many permanent settlements have been established in the rangelands; with
many pastoralists choosing to shift their production systems to include crop-
livestock farming (Galaty, 1994; Campbell et al., 2000). In S.E. Kajiado District,
Kenya, land use conflict reflects ongoing competition over access to scarce land
and water resources between herders, farmers and wildlife – competition that
has intensified strongly over the last 40 years, after the district became open to
outside migrants.
Today, farming extends into the wetter margins of the rangelands, along riv-
ers and around swamps. This has reduced the area available for grazing and the
ease of access to water for both domestic stock and wildlife. Political alliances
have emerged among land managers to gain or maintain control of critical land
and water resources and to influence policy on agriculture, wildlife and tour-
ism and land tenure (Campbell et al., 2000). Another well-documented exam-
ple of this is from the Beja pastoralists in northeastern Sudan, who, as a result
of drought, are changing their nomadic way of life as camel and smallstock
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 41

herders to more settled, smallholder farming and rearing of small ruminants.

Like other pastoralists in the region, they find that small ruminants are easy
to manage near the homestead, cost less, are more easily sold and breed more
quickly than camels (Pantuliano, 2002). Government policies have supported
cropping and reduction of communal grazing land and, more recently, mobility
patterns and access to key resources have been constrained by conflict and civil
insecurity. Many Beja now move very little or not at all, reducing their capac-
ity to make effective use of the rangeland from the perspective of livestock
production. As Beja settle, vegetation around settlements has changed, with
the disappearance of seven palatable species and an increase in unpalatable spe-
cies (Pantuliano, 2002). These changes are typical of those faced by pastoralists
across the region. Even so, many families (or parts of families) still send the
younger family members for transhumance in the dry season while the women
and older family members remain on the farm to take care of the crops and
smallstock.
The national land tenure systems of the region are unrelated to the traditional
land tenure and access regimes of the pastoralist groups. In Ethiopia, the Sudan
and Somalia, all land is state owned and cropping land can be leased from or
allocated by the government. In Somalia, land tenure is under a mixture of tra-
ditional and modern legal systems (Amadi, 1997). The 1975 Land Reform Act
of Somalia gave land for state enterprises and mechanized agriculture (Unruh,
1995); pastoralists only had rights as part of government-sponsored coopera-
tives and associations, and were forced to move from their traditional lands to
more marginal lands with open access. All land belonged to the state and 50-
year leases were provided to users, although many enclosures were not legally
leased and ownership was respected by local communities under traditional
systems (Amadi, 1997). Following the conflict and the absence of a central
government, the deregulation of land tenure and unauthorized enclosure of
pastoral land for grass production by entrepreneurs for export livestock pro-
duction to Kenya left poor herders and agropastoralists with little livelihood
security (de Waal, 1996). For the Sudan, the government recognizes rights of
possession over land but also reserves the right to acquire land from local own-
ers for the state (Amadi, 1997). In Ethiopia, land is allocated through the land
administration, and redistribution occurs, so people do not have secure rights
over their land (EEA/EEPRI, 2002), resulting in inter-ethnic and inter-com-
munal conflict over resources. In neighbouring Eritrea, land is owned by the
community, and land tenure is governed by traditional laws and administered
under traditional village administrative bodies (Amadi, 1997).
Land tenure in Uganda is very complex, reflecting the rich history of the
country. Mailo tenure is particular to the Buganda area of the country and
dates back to 1900 when the king (kabaka) of the Buganda people shared land
among the chiefs to own in perpetuity. In 1975, the Land Reform Decree made
all land public with title vested in the Uganda Land Commission, and allowed
42 Grasslands of the world

leasehold tenure (Busingye, 2002). Although the mailo system was officially
abolished, it continued until the late 1990s, when the 1995 Constitution and
the Land Act of 1998 were implemented. Freehold tenure was also granted by
the state and later by the Land Commission, mostly to institutions for religious
and educational purposes (Busingye, 2002). The 1995 Constitution and 1998
Land Act also identified a new land tenure system called customary tenure.
The land is held, used and disposed of following the customary regulation of
the community, and people using the land have some rights. Customary tenure
is the most common system in the rangelands (Amadi, 1997). The emphasis is
on use, which is controlled by the family, who distribute land to male family
members for their use rather than ownership. Customary tenure also includes
the communal land, where users have rights to grazing, farming, fuelwood,
access to water and land for traditional uses and burial grounds (Busingye,
2002). Ownership is through the family or community, and there are no indi-
vidual ownership rights. Traditional authorities allocate the land and resolve
disputes. In addition some land was declared Crown Lands in 1900, and areas
are still held by the state under the Uganda Land Commission as protected
areas, some of which are now open access.
The land tenure system in the United Republic of Tanzania is a legacy
of colonial rule, with all lands being public land and remain vested in the
President as a trustee for and on behalf of all citizens of Tanzania (Nyongeza,
1995; Shivji, 1999). The state grants rights of occupancy and tolerates custom-
ary occupation and use of land. All public land is categorized under three types:
General, Reserved or Village land, which are each managed and administered
by ministry officials. The Commissioner for Lands has the power to allocate
land on the general, and even reserved, lands. When a village registers its land,
the title deeds are held in trust for the whole village by the Village Chairman
and Council. Numerous land-related conflicts exist in Tanzania, partly caused
by conflicting land use policies. The Villagization Programme (1974–76)
concentrated people together, displacing some and allocating them land that
was taken from others. Some of the villages were relocated into reserved
land, thus creating pockets of habitation and cultivation in protected areas.
With the economic liberalization in the mid 1980s, large-scale land alienation
occurred, in particularly in the Arusha region, where vast parts of rangelands
were leased out to large-scale farmers (Igoe and Brockington, 1999). Village
land can also be allocated by the government, if it is not registered or its use
can not be demonstrated. To secure their title deeds, many pastoralists started
cultivating. Much of the rangeland areas in Tanzania have been categorized as
reserved lands, having been set aside as national parks, game reserves or game
controlled areas, thus making them inaccessible for herders and their livestock
(Brockington, 2002).
Land tenure in Kenyan pastoral systems has evolved rapidly over the last half
century. About the 1940s, Kenyan colonial authorities introduced an entirely
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 43

new type of land use to rangeland ecosystems: wildlife-only protected land. In

subsequent years, the Kenya Game Department transferred the management
of game reserves in Maasailand to local District Councils. After independence
in 1963, these reserves were designated “County Council Reserves”3 (Lamprey
and Waller, 1990). Most of these conservation areas were established in the dry
season grazing reserve for pastoral people, livestock and wildlife. This change
in land tenure appropriated these critical resources for use by wildlife alone for
the first time.
Also in the mid-1960s, the Kenya Government gave pastoral groups title
deeds to large tracts of grazing land that they had used traditionally over a
long period (Lawrance Report, 1966). Each member shared ownership of the
entire ranch under the Group Representatives Act, 1968, but the livestock were
owned by individual members (Lamprey and Waller, 1990). Although these
ranches were large (Koyake Group Ranch in the Mara area is 971 km2) and
group ranch boundaries were relatively porous to livestock and wildlife move-
ment, these group ranches started to circumscribe who could live where in the
ecosystem. The group ranch system was instituted more strongly in the wetter
rangelands in the south and just north of Mt. Kenya; arid rangelands further
northwest and northeast were largely unaffected by this change in tenure.
Since the early 1980s, group ranches have been adjudicated and are becom-
ing privatized (Galaty, 1994). Areas near towns and roads were the first to be
privatized. For example, the rangeland nearest to Nairobi was privatized in the
early 1980s, while other group ranches in drier areas are currently undergoing
subdivision. Pastoral land owners are struggling to balance the trade-offs of
private tenure: even though secure ownership is a boon, lack of access to wider
grazing lands and loss of wildlife are not. Groups and families are trying to
address these problems with reciprocal grazing arrangements and establish-
ment of community wildlife reserves. This process has partly been driven by
pastoral peoples throughout Kenya beginning to settle permanently to have
access to schools, health care and other business opportunities in the higher
potential areas. At the same time, pastoral people want to secure their owner-
ship rights as they see large tracts of communal land leased to outsiders for
mechanized agriculture.
Privatization of land in pastoral areas robs pastoral peoples of one of their
greatest assets: communal access to land. In the 1960s, Hardin (1968) decried
communal access to land, describing it as the “tragedy of the commons”,
assuming that communal access meant free and unregulated access leading
to overuse. This has been used as an argument in favour of privatization.

3 Intitially established in the late 1940s as ‘National Reserves’ under Kenya Royal National
Parks, these areas were once again redesignated as national reserves under the 1976 Wildlife
(Conservation and Management) Act. However, they continued to be managed by county
councils.
44 Grasslands of the world

However, most communal access to pastoral land and water is not unregulated,
rather it is governed by traditional rules of access controlling who uses the land
and water, where and when. These rules were designed to sustain grassland
productivity for the use of all in communally shared lands. Privatization of
land is now causing the “tragedy of privatization”, where pastoral people are
impoverished because land holdings are too small to support their livelihoods
in dry grazing lands. This is what Rutten (1992) nicely coined as “selling land
to buy poverty”. The overgrazing issue is discussed below, applicable to both
communal and privatized land.

INTEGRATION OF GRASSLANDS INTO SMALLHOLDER FARMING

SYSTEMS
As pastoral systems evolve and herders avoid drought and disasters through
diversification and risk management, sedentarization and settlement to improve
income-earning capacity is occurring in northern Kenya and southern Ethiopia
(Little et al., 2001). There continues to be an expansion of cropping in areas
where agriculture is feasible, to allow herders to better manage risk and respond
to drought (Little et al., 2001). As cropping expands into the rangelands of the
region, grasslands have become an integral part of crop-livestock systems.
Nearly all grassland areas in developing countries are grazed (CAST, 1999).
One viable alternative for settled crop-livestock farmers in the region is to use
cultivated forage grasses to support livestock production and reduce the pres-
sure on the natural grassland. Cultivated forages have received less attention
from breeders than other crops (CAST, 1999). However, recent expansion in
dairying, especially around urban areas in eastern Africa, and the anticipated
increased demand for livestock production proposed by Delgado et al. (1999)
has led smallholder farmers to pay more attention to increased use of cultivated
grasses. Inclusion of grasses into a crop-livestock system can also have positive
environmental benefits. Vegetation cover can be improved through transfer of
seeds and trampling and breaking soil crusts and fertility improved by manure
deposited during grazing (Steinfeld, de Haan and Blackburn, 1997). Fallow
and grassland rotations improve soil fertility and minimize soil erosion, while
reduced nutrient losses from manure from livestock fed on grasses in a cut-
and-carry system double the effective availability of nitrogen and phosphorus
and can be put back into the system to maintain nutrient balances (de Haan,
Steinfeld and Blackburn, 1997).
Rhodes grass and elephant grass are among the earliest tropical grasses
grown in eastern Africa, since the start of the twentieth century. They have
been widely planted for livestock production in Kenya and Uganda since the
1930s (Boonman, 1993) and are an important part of crop-livestock systems in
higher-potential areas. Grass rotations and fallowing of crop lands were com-
mon practices to provide soil cover and restore organic matter some 50 years
ago, but this practice has reduced due to increasing population pressure and
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 45

demand for crop land (Boonman, 1993). Due to scarcity of land, most dairy
farmers in the heavily populated highlands of eastern Africa now practice a cut-
and-carry zero grazing system. Currently, elephant grass is the most important
forage crop in dairy systems in the Central Kenya Highlands (Staal et al., 1997)
and has been shown to constitute between 40 to 80 percent of the forage for
the smallholder dairy farms. In Kenya alone, more than 0.3 million smallholder
dairy producers (53 percent) rely on elephant grass as a major source of feed.
The demand is so high that landless farmers plant along highway verges and on
communal land to cut and sell to stock owners.
Rhodes grass has also been widely used for improved pastures due to its
wide adaptation and vigorous root system, which confers reasonable tolerance
to drought and persistence under grazing and makes it suitable for erosion
control, and of value for hay making (Boonman, 1993). It shows some cold
tolerance, and several commercial varieties have been developed in Kenya. It
ranks second only to elephant grass in yield and drought tolerance, producing
up to 18 t DM/ha in suitable environments (Boonman, 1993).
Another cultivated grass with wide adaptability that is being grown in
eastern Africa is setaria (Setaria sphacelata). Herbage yield can equal Rhodes
grass and it is more persistent at higher altitudes, up to about 3 000 m above
sea level, and can tolerate frost and seasonal waterlogging (Boonman, 1993).
However, it is not as drought tolerant as Rhodes grass and has a tendency
to invade agricultural land, and can become weedy and difficult to eradicate.
Although its use reduced in Kenya during the 1980s, it is still a useful grass in
wetter and higher-altitude areas, and it is now gaining importance for use in soil
stabilization and erosion control along bunds in Tanzania and central Kenya
(Boonman, 1993). Unfortunately, none of these options for improved forage
production are available to settled pastoralists across the vast dryland areas of
the region.

CASE STUDIES OF THE EVOLUTION OF EXTENSIVE RANGE SYSTEMS

OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS
General
Expansion of cropland, intensification of livestock production and changes
in land tenure are common forces for change in pastoral systems around the
world (Niamir-Fuller, 1999; Blench, 2000). Across Africa, colonial and post-
colonial policies favoured crop cultivation over livestock production, thus
giving agriculturalists the economic “upper hand” compared to pastoralists
(Niamir-Fuller, 1999). As described earlier, pastoralists are thus either pushed
onto more marginal lands for grazing or they begin to take up crop agriculture
themselves, becoming agropastoralists (vide Campbell et al., 2000). In most
cases, customary political and management systems are becoming weaker
(Niamir-Fuller, 1999). Livestock development projects are also driving change
in pastoral lands by opening up remote pastures with the spread of borehole
46 Grasslands of the world

technology and fragmentation of rangelands by veterinary cordon fences; this

is true in eastern Africa, but particularly in southern Africa. Conflicts have
resulted in changes in land tenure, with restricted access to traditional grazing
lands as well as reduced mobility of pastoralists in insecure areas (Mkutu,
2001).
This “contraction” of pastoral grazing systems reduces the scale of resource
use by pastoral peoples. Pastoral success depends largely on tracking patchy
resources through time. In most traditional systems, this requires an opportun-
istic strategy of movement from daily and weekly changes in grazing orbits, to
seasonal migrations over large landscapes. Many of the forces driving change
in pastoral systems curtail the ability of pastoralists to move: sedentarization
limits the maximal grazing distance achievable from a fixed homestead; privati-
zation of land tenure limits access to many pastures; and gazetting of protected
areas prevents pastoralists from reaching some pastures.

Evolution of land use changes in the semi-arid rangelands

surrounding the Serengeti-Mara Ecosystem, straddling the Kenyan–
Tanzanian border
Maasailand in southern Kenya and northern Tanzania has been subject to
considerable vegetation changes since the beginning of the twentieth century.
Over the past century, the area has passed through successive stages of
transformation as the result of the interaction between four distinct, and
probably cyclical, processes of change: change in vegetation; climate; tsetse
and tick infection; and pastoral occupation and management. At the end of
the nineteenth century, Maasai pastoralists had access to extensive grasslands
(Waller, 1990). During and following the great rinderpest epidemic of 1890,
cattle populations in eastern Africa succumbed rapidly: by 1892, 95 percent
had died. Famine and epidemics of endemic diseases such as smallpox reduced
human populations to negligible numbers in Maasailand. Wild ruminants also
died in great numbers due to rinderpest, but gradually developed immunity.
By 1910, wildlife numbers rose, with the exception of wildebeest and buffalo,
whose numbers were kept low from yearling mortality. These natural disasters
disrupted the grazing patterns and reduced intensity. Dense woodlands and
thickets established in the Mara Plains and northern Serengeti (Dublin, 1995)
because fires were less frequent, since population decreased with the famine
and there were fewer people to light fires, so fuel loads grew with less grazing
offtake. This dense, woody vegetation was a habitat for tsetse flies, which fed
on the abundant wildlife and prevented significant human re-settlement. Until
the 1950s, Maasai chose to settle and graze away from the Mara Plains (Waller,
1990). At that time, the human population in the area was rapidly increasing
and Maasai herdsmen used fire to improve grazing pastures (Plate 2.7) and to
clear tsetse-infested bush. Increased elephant densities further maintained the
woodland decline in the Maasai Mara and Serengeti as the animals moved to the
 The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 47
R.S. REID

Plate 2.7
Large areas of eastern African grasslands burn every year, providing short green
regrowth for many species of livestock and wildlife in these ecosystems.

protected areas from the surrounding, more densely inhabited areas. Between
1957 and 1973, woodlands in the Mara decreased from about 30 percent to
about 5 percent cover (Lamprey and Waller, 1990). By the mid-1970s the
wildebeest population had increased to about 1.5 million, and currently
fluctuates around 1 million (Dublin, 1995).
Over the past 25 years, considerable changes in land cover and land use have
taken place in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem and in the rangelands surround-
ing the protected core of the ecosystem (Serneels, Said and Lambin, 2001). The
ecosystem is made up of protected land (Serengeti National Park, Ngorongoro
Conservation Area (NCA) and several Game Controlled Areas in Tanzania,
and Maasai Mara National Reserve in Kenya), surrounded by semi-arid
rangelands that are largely inhabited by Maasai agropastoralists. Land cover
changes leading to a contraction of the rangelands were most pronounced
in the Kenyan part of the ecosystem, surrounding the Maasai Mara. About
45 000 ha of rangelands were converted to large-scale mechanized farming after
1975. Expansion of the wheat farms reached a maximum extent in 1997–8, at
60 000 ha. By 2000, about half of the wheat fields had been abandoned, mostly
because the yields in the drier areas were too uncertain to make cultivation
viable. The abandoned areas once more became available to livestock and wild-
life. Permanent settlements have spread from the north to the south in the last
50 years, with significant settlement areas now on the northern border of the
Mara Reserve (Lamprey and Waller, 1990). In the rangelands, most attempts at
48 Grasslands of the world

subsistence cultivation were abandoned after a few years, due to crop destruc-
tion by wildlife and highly variable yields linked with climate variability. In
the Tanzanian part of the ecosystem, land cover changes were less pronounced.
No conversion for large-scale farming occurred; most land cover changes were
either expansion of smallholder cultivation or natural succession in rangelands.
Extensive areas of cultivated land (subsistence to medium-scale agriculture)
were found in the unprotected lands, right up to the border with the protected
areas west of Serengeti and southeast of NCA. In the NCA and the Loliondo
Game Controlled Area, about 2 percent of land cover changes were attributed
to smallholder impact over the past 20 years. In the NCA, cultivation is regu-
lated: only hand-hoe cultivation is allowed and fields are small and scattered. In
the Loliondo, no such restrictions are in place, but the area is very inaccessible,
so the lack of opportunities to export the crops outside the area effectively
controls the extent of cultivation.
The conversion of rangelands to agriculture has had a serious impact on the
wildebeest population in the Kenyan part of the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem.
The population declined drastically over the past twenty years and is currently
fluctuating around an estimated population of 31 300 animals, which is about
25 percent of the population size at the end of the 1970s. Fluctuations in the
wildebeest population in the Kenyan part of the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem,
over the last decades, have been correlated strongly with the availability
of forage during the dry and the wet seasons (Serneels and Lambin, 2001).
Expansion of large-scale mechanized wheat farming in Kenya since the early
1980s has drastically reduced the wildebeest wet-season range, forcing the
wildebeest population to use drier rangelands or to move to areas where
competition with cattle is greater. The expansion of the farming area has not
influenced the size of the total cattle population in the Kenyan part of the
study area, nor its spatial distribution. The much larger migratory wildebeest
population of the Serengeti, in Tanzania, did not decline at the same time as
the Kenyan population but is also regulated by food supply in the dry season
(Mduma, Sinclair and Hilborn, 1999). Around the Serengeti, in Tanzania, land
use changes are much less widespread, occur at a lower rate and affect a much
smaller area compared with the Kenyan part of the ecosystem. Moreover,
land use changes around the Serengeti have taken place away from the main
migration routes of wildebeest.

Protected areas and local land use: source of conflict in Tanzania

Savannah ecosystems are well represented in African protected area networks
(Davis, Heywood and Hamilton, 1994). In Tanzania, very large tracts of
savannah have been set aside for conservation, partly because these rangelands
support the most diverse assemblage of migrating ungulates on earth (Sinclair,
1995). However, there are few resources to manage these conservation areas
effectively and the rural populations surrounding them are among the poorest
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 49

in the world. Thus, conflict and complementarity between conservation and

development have become major issues in Ngorongoro (Homewood and
Rodgers, 1991), Mkomazi (Rogers et al., 1999), Selous (Neumann, 1997) and
Tarangire (Igoe and Brockington, 1999).
Mkomazi Game Reserve in Northern Tanzania is a 3 200 km2 savannah
area stretching from the Kenya-Tanzania border to the northeastern slopes of
the Pare and Usambara mountains. Mkomazi lies within the Somali-Maasai
regional centre of endemism (RCE) (White, 1983), where the dominant vegeta-
tion is Acacia-Commiphora bush, woodland and wooded grassland. Mkomazi
borders the Afromontane RCE, with the lowland and montane forests of the
Usambaras recognized as an outstanding centre of plant diversity (Davis et al.,
1994), an endemic bird area (Stattersfield et al., 1998) and a centre of endemism
for many other taxa (Rodgers and Homewood, 1982). This “dry border” eco-
tone position means that Mkomazi species richness may be enhanced not only
by the presence of species primarily associated with the adjacent ecosystems,
but also by divergent selection driving the evolution of new forms (cf. Smith
et al., 1997). This diversity makes Mkomazi particularly valuable to oppor-
tunistic land users like pastoralists, but also for conservation of its rich species
and landscape diversity. Based on the perceived species richness and concerns
by the conservationists about the impacts on Mkomazi’s vegetation of large
numbers of cattle grazing in the western part of the reserve and large mammal
populations, the resident pastoralists were evicted from the park in 1988 and
use of its resources by the neighbouring communities was prohibited.
Mkomazi has been widely presented as undergoing ecological degradation
prior to the 1988 evictions and recovery since then (e.g. Mangubuli, 1991;
Watson, 1991). Data to confirm or refute that claim are as yet unavailable
(Homewood and Brockington, 1999), but eviction was viewed as a risk-averse
decision from a conservation point of view. However, from a pastoral point
of view, the eviction did have serious impacts on the livelihoods of those who
were evicted. Besides pastoral people, a large number of non-pastoral people
also depended on the reserve for their livelihoods and used the reserve for
beekeeping, collection of wild foods to supplement their diets or for sale at
the local markets, and collection of fuelwood. Since the eviction, an estimated
25 percent of the livestock population have been restricted to a narrow and
insufficient grazing area between Mkomazi reserve and the mountains border-
ing it to the south. Others have moved away from the reserve onto the increas-
ingly crowded rangelands. Options for long-distance migration were greatly
reduced, as the evictions occurred three years after the proliferation of large-
scale commercial agriculture in northeastern Tanzania (Igoe and Brockington,
1999).
The impact of the evictions from Tarangire National Park, north-central
Tanzania, shortly after its creation in 1968 was not felt immediately. There
was no large-scale farming in the region at that time and pastoral Maasai were
50 Grasslands of the world

able to develop alternative, if less optimal, subsistence strategies. The effects

became visible more than 20 years later, during the 1993/4 drought. By this
time, some of the best wet-season pastures in Simanjiro District had been lost
to large-scale commercial agriculture and more livestock were forced onto the
dry-season grazing grounds in the early grazing season, depleting the season’s
grass growth sooner. The Maasai of Simanjiro found previous drought-coping
strategies precluded by loss of access to drought reserve areas which had been
enclosed inside the Tarangire National Park or allocated to large-scale com-
mercial farms (Igoe and Brockington, 1999).
The examples of Mkomazi and Tarangire clearly point to costs and benefits
in conservation decisions, with conflicts likely to intensify as human needs
grow.

Control of the tsetse fly and evolution of a subhumid-grassland in

southwestern Ethiopia: Ghibe Valley
Wetter grasslands and woodlands have also evolved rapidly in the last century.
One cause of that change is the control of trypanosomiasis, the disease
transmitted to livestock and people by the tsetse fly, which allowed farmers to
use animal traction more extensively (greater numbers and more healthy oxen)
and thus to expand the amount of land they cultivated at the household level
(Jordan, 1986). Despite the logic of this progression, Ghibe Valley in Ethiopia
is one of the few places in Africa where these changes have been seen clearly
(Reid, 1999; Bourn et al., 2001)
Ghibe Valley is located about 180 km to the southwest of Addis Ababa,
where the main road to Jimma descends from the Ethiopian highland massif.
Tsetse flies were first controlled in this area in 1991, using pesticide-drenched tar-
gets and pesticide poured on the cattle themselves. Within this landscape in 1993,
just after the control, the majority of the arable land was wooded grassland used
by wildlife and the few livestock herded by agropastoral peoples. Smallholder
farms covered about a quarter of the arable land, while large-holder farms cov-
ered less than 1 percent (Reid et al., 1997). About 90 percent of this landscape
supports soils that are moderately to highly suitable for agriculture. Smallholder
farmers grow a diversity of crop types, including maize, sorghum, tef, noug or
niger seed (Guizotia abyssinica), false banana (Ensete ventricosum), groundnuts,
wheat, beans and hot peppers, while large-holders grow a number of crops for
market (citrus, onions, maize, spices). People use the large uncultivated tracts
of grassland and woodland for settlements, hunting, wild plant gathering, bee-
keeping, livestock grazing, firewood collection, charcoal making and woodlot
cultivation.
Rapid land use and land cover change was caused by the combined effects
of drought and migration, changes in settlement and land tenure policy, and
changes in the severity of trypanosomiasis (Reid et al., 2000b; Reid, Thornton
and Kruska, 2001). Each cause affected the location and pattern of land use
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 51

and land cover in different ways. Previous to the control, a strong increase in
the severity of the trypanosomiasis caused massive loss of livestock, farmers
were unable to plough as effectively and the area of cropland contracted by
25 percent. Changes after tsetse control were slow to appear on the land itself,
with nearly a five-year delay in impact on land use, although there was a more
immediate impact on livestock health and populations. Changes were bi-direc-
tional and varied in speed, with both intensification and dis-intensification
(Conelly, 1994; Snyder, 1996) occurring within the same landscape, sometimes
slowly and sometimes rapidly.
These changes in land use caused profound changes in ecological properties
and the structure of the valley’s ecosystems (Reid et al., 2000b). When land use
expanded, large areas of woodland were cleared for cultivation and firewood
became more scarce. As human populations grew, plants with medicinal value
became more rare and the large herds of grazing herbivores were decimated.
Most of the biodiversity in the valley is limited to the narrow ribbons of wood-
land along the rivers; it is these rich woodlands that farmers began to clear after
successful tsetse control (Reid et al., 1997; Wilson et al., 1997).

CURRENT RESEARCH IN PASTORAL SYSTEMS OF EASTERN AFRICA

Management of grasslands
Management regimes for the grasslands of eastern Africa generally fall into
three types: (1) state-managed for tourism and ranching; (2) commercial use
for livestock or crop production; or (3) traditional management by pastoral
and agropastoral groups. Livestock production, particularly cattle, is the major
use for rangelands, with over 100 million head of livestock in the rangelands
of eastern Africa (Herlocker, 1999). There is also a growing market for meat
from wildlife, which is being met through commercial ranching and culling in
the region. Grassland management is linked to use by livestock and wildlife,
and there is often conflict between their exploitation for commercial income
generation and the more sustainable management regimes of traditional groups.
Wildlife-based tourism is of particular importance for generation of state, private
and community income in the rangelands of Kenya (Plate 2.8) and Tanzania
(Myers, 1972) and to a lesser extent in Uganda and Ethiopia. Recent efforts to
privatize land and introduce more livestock are also changing the way people
interact with wildlife.
Government development projects have focused on improving the pro-
ductivity of the rangelands and increased livestock production from common
property resources. The World Bank has sponsored several projects on range-
land management, including in Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia. Earlier projects
focused on increasing the productivity of rangelands for livestock production
and several included formation of pastoral associations, which dealt with graz-
ing rights and policies. These projects had disappointing results due to the
parastatal organizational form, inappropriate technologies and poor apprecia-
52 Grasslands of the world

C.J. WILSON
Plate 2.8
Acacia bushland near Nakuru, Kenya, supports endangered Rothchild’s giraffe.

tion of traditional systems and people. Only recently have issues of integrated
natural resource management and full involvement of stakeholders been given
attention, although there remain problems in reaching the local people through
public sector organizations (de Haan and Gilles, 1994).
Traditional management systems by pastoralists recognized the need for
controlled access to conserve the biodiversity and allow the rangeland to recov-
er. Traditional grazing systems are more effective for sustainable resource use
and maintenance of rangeland condition (Pratt and Gwynne, 1977). However,
the traditional systems are under threat from increased livestock populations
and decreased grazing lands, resulting in increased grazing pressure. This is
already being recognized by Boran pastoralists in Ethiopia, who perceive
that the condition of the rangelands is poor compared to 30 to 40 years ago
(Angassa and Beyene, 2003) and consider the rangelands degraded and their
livestock production declining.
Annual variation in amount and distribution of rainfall, together with graz-
ing, fire and human activities, results in wide variation in grassland productiv-
ity (Walker, 1993). Rangeland ecosystems are very resilient and recover well
when there is sufficient rainfall and controlled use of the resources. Range
condition is dependent on both the grazing system, considered as timing and
frequency of grazing, and grazing intensity, defined as the cumulative effects
grazing animals have on rangelands during a particular period (Holechek et
al., 1998). Grazing intensity is closely associated with livestock productivity,
trends in ecological conditions, forage production, catchment status and soil
 The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 53
C.J. WILSON

Plate 2.9
Heavily grazed grassland in the highlands near Bule, Ethiopia.

stability. It is considered as a primary tool in range management, and flexibility

of grazing intensity is critical to rangeland ecosystem health. Grazing intensity
has a major impact on range condition (Plate 2.9). In a recent study in Ethiopia,
range condition, based on the herbaceous layer, basal cover, litter cover, relative
number of seedlings, age distribution of grasses, soil erosion and soil compac-
tion, was higher in lightly grazed areas in the Rift Valley than in the heavily
grazed communal lands (Sisay and Baars, 2002). In Serengeti and Maasai Mara,
grazing was found to stimulate net primary productivity at most locations,
with maximum stimulation at intermediate grazing intensities and declines at
high levels of grazing. Stimulation was dependent upon soil moisture status at
the time of grazing (McNaughton, 1985).
There are many examples in the literature of the impact of management on
species composition and diversity (Herlocker, 1999). In a study in the range-
lands of southern Ethiopia, perennial grasses were relatively resilient in terms
of cover and productivity in response to grazing, while continuous grazing
encouraged forbs with lower grazing value for cattle (Coppock, 1994). Grazing
affects species diversity and richness in grasslands (Oba, Vetaas and Stenseth,
2001). Optimal conservation of plant species richness was found at intermedi-
ate levels of biomass production and was found to decline if biomass increased
in ungrazed areas of arid-zone grazing lands in northern Kenya. These inter-
mediate levels can be achieved by manipulating management and grazing
pressure, although there will be seasonal fluctuations due to environment. In
the Serengeti Plains in Tanzania, elimination of grazing led to dominance by
54 Grasslands of the world

tall vegetatively propagated grass species, while the short sexually reproduced
species disappeared (Belsky, 1986). This implies that even though the greatest
number of species are found at intermediate grazing intensities, some species
are always lost when ungrazed pastures are grazed. Although there are more
species at intermediate levels of grazing, it is possible that any grazing nega-
tively affects rare plant species that are sensitive to grazing.

Desertification: driven by climate or overgrazing by livestock?

One of the most controversial and debated aspects of research about pastoral
systems is the existence and extent of overgrazing, desertification and land
degradation4 in pastoral lands, particularly in Africa. Global assessments of
drylands maintain that much of the earth’s land surface is degraded (GLASOD,
1990) and that livestock are the principal global cause of desertification
(Mabbutt, 1984). Analysts suggest that African pastures are 50 percent more
degraded than those in Asia or Latin America (GLASOD, 1990). However,
other analyses show that livestock numbers only exceed likely carrying
capacities of arid and semi-arid rangelands in about 3–19 percent5 of Africa
(Ellis et al., 1999). In addition, there is no sustained evidence for a reduction
in productivity, as measured by no change in the water-use efficiency of the
Sahelian vegetation over 16 years, suggesting that the extent of the Sahara
is more strongly influenced by drought than grazing (Tucker, Dregne and
Newcomb, 1991; Nicholson, Tucker and Ba, 1998).
However, these broad assessments are only correlative and can not assess
cause and effect rigorously, and can not measure the relative impacts of dif-
ferent causative agents. Certainly, at more local scales, livestock impacts are
highly visible and persistent around towns, water points and along cattle
tracks (e.g. Georgiadis, 1987; Hiernaux, 1996). More illuminating – but much
more difficult to acquire – are two types of evidence: (1) remote sensing stud-
ies at the landscape scale, tracking the extent of degradation or desertification
and of sufficient duration to cover drought and non-drought periods; and

4 Definitions of desertification, overgrazing and degradation are controversial and

problematic. We use the term desertification here to refer to the concepts used by the cited
global assessment (GLASOD, 1990). We use degradation to mean an irreversible change in
ecosystem state or function. We agree with de Queiroz (1993) that “degradation” has been
defined relative to human management objectives and thus is relative; for example, a change
from grassland to bushland is “degradation” to a cattle-keeper but may be “aggradation”
from the perspective of carbon sequestration. We would prefer a set of quantitative measures
that can assess the state of a particular piece of land and be used by land managers to assess
the desirability of different changes from the context of their own management objectives.
We define overgrazing here as any level of herbivore grazing that induces either temporary
or permanent changes in the species composition or function of a grassland.
5 Carrying capacity is exceeded in 19% of areas receiving 0–200 mm rainfall per annum, 15%

of the 200–400 mm zone, 3% of the 400–600 mm zone and 8.5% of the 600–800 mm zone
(Ellis et al., 1999).
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 55

(2) either long-term experiments or observational studies at the pasture scale

that assess the relative impacts of drought, livestock and other agents on eco-
system dynamics. Most of the research on land degradation and desertification
in Africa has been focused on the Sahel, which has been intensively studied
since the first droughts in the 1970s. Some landscape-scale studies based on
a combination of fine-resolution satellite data and field measurements have
been carried out in different parts of Africa and demonstrated the existence
of local-scale degradation of rangelands in Ferlo, Senegal (Diouf and Lambin,
2001) and Turkana, Kenya, where highly affected areas covered only 5 percent
of the land surface (Reid and Ellis, 1995). The importance of studying land
degradation and desertification problems over a sufficiently long period is
illustrated by studies conducted in Burkina Faso by Lindqvist and Tengberg
(1993) and later by Rasmussen, Fog and Madsen (2001). The first group of
scientists studied the amount of woody vegetation cover in three sites in
northern Burkina Faso (1955–89). They found that important loss in woody
vegetation cover occurred during the first of a series of droughts that started
in the late 1960s, when large areas of bare soil developed. The authors found
little evidence of vegetation recovery until 1989, despite increasing rainfall since
1985. Rasmussen, Fog and Madsen (2001) revisited the area, adding 10 years of
satellite data. They found a decrease in albedo and thus increase in vegetation
cover over the period 1986–1996, which was confirmed by fieldwork, thus
showing the recovery of vegetation after drought. Interviews with local people
indicated that the species composition of the regenerating herbaceous vegeta-
tion has changed considerably since the late 1970s. Land degradation caused by
heavy grazing pressure was mostly found in the proximity of important water
resources, which probably cover only a small proportion of the landscape in
total. Schlesinger and Gramenopoulos (1996) also used the amount of woody
vegetation cover as an indicator of desertification in western Sudan, but studied
sites that were devoid of human use over the period 1943–1994. They analysed
a time series of aerial photographs and Corona satellite images and did not find
a significant decline in woody vegetation for the study period, despite several
droughts having occurred during that period. Thus, at least in this area, they
showed that the Sahara is not expanding and that drought had little effect on
woody vegetation. In another part of the Sudan, the concentration of livestock
around water points and settlements led to local loss of vegetative cover and
accelerated erosion (Ayoub, 1998). In contrast, others have found that heavy
livestock grazing around pastoral settlements in arid areas had minor impacts
on woody vegetation and biodiversity, with impacts confined within the set-
tlements themselves (Sullivan, 1999). Woody vegetation can replace palatable
grass species in heavily grazed areas, caused by grazing pressure rather than
climate (Skarpe, 1990; Perkins, 1991).
At the pasture or field level, the picture is more complex. Generally, live-
stock grazing, browsing and trampling causes loss of vegetation, competition
56 Grasslands of the world

with wildlife and sometimes a change in soils when use is prolonged and heavy.
The impacts depend to some degree on the level and variability of rainfall
(Ellis and Swift, 1988). In areas of southern Ethiopia with more and reliable
rainfall supporting perennial vegetation (an equilibrium grazing system), the
impacts of grazing in one season can reduce vegetative cover and production
in the next (Coppock, 1994). In systems on the edge of perennial grass pro-
duction, heavy grazing, especially in combination with drought, can reduce
vegetative cover and production, even during subsequent wet years when more
lightly grazed areas recover fully (de Queiroz, 1993). In systems with low and
erratic rainfall (non-equilibrium systems), heavy grazing may (Milchunas and
Laurenroth, 1993) or may not (Hiernaux, 1996) strongly influence production
in subsequent seasons. Heavy grazing in annual grasslands changes the species
composition of grassland vegetation, with more species in areas protected from
grazing and fewer in heavily grazed areas (Hiernaux, 1998).
The nature of interrelationships and thresholds between biophysical,
socio-economic, institutional and policy factors at different spatial scales and
temporal dimensions influencing land degradation and desertification are
still poorly understood. A recent initiative on land degradation assessment
in drylands (LADA project), executed by FAO, responds to the need for an
accurate assessment of land degradation in drylands at a flexible scale and to
strengthen support to plan actions and investments to reverse land degradation,
improve socio-economic livelihoods, conserve dryland ecosystems and their
unique biological diversity (see: http:/www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/lada/home.
stm). Besides developing a set of tools and methods to assess and quantify
the nature, extent, severity and impacts of land degradation on ecosystems,
catchments, river basins and carbon storage in drylands at a range of spatial
and temporal scales, the project also aims to build national, regional and global
assessment capacities to enable the design and planning of interventions to
mitigate land degradation and establish sustainable land use and management
practices (Nachtergaele, 2002).
Another useful livestock evaluation tool to enhance early warning systems
to detect changes in livestock condition is being developed under the USAID
Global Livestock Collaborative Research Support Program (CRSP) by Texas
A&M University (Corbett et al., 1998). The Livestock Early Warning System
(LEWS) integrates advanced crop and grazing models, based on empirical
relationships between weather, vegetation, regrowth potential, soil and climate
dynamics, with near infra-red spectroscopy (NIRS) for faecal analysis to detect
changes in diet of free ranging livestock. These changes are linked to changes
in vegetation patterns and can be used to predict drought and feed shortages
for livestock some 6 to 8 weeks before pastoralists begin to see changes in the
condition of the rangelands and their livestock. This allows them to better pre-
pare for the coming feed shortages and nutritional crises in a timely manner by
transhumance, as well as avoiding overgrazing of the rangeland resources.
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 57

HOW HAVE PASTORAL ECOSYSTEMS CHANGED IN RESPONSE TO

LIVESTOCK AND HUMAN-USE CHANGES?
Overgrazing
A discussion of the impacts of grazing is provided in the preceding section and
will not be considered further here, but grazing is without doubt one of the
major forces effecting change in pastoral systems.

Competition between livestock and wildlife

Livestock can and do compete with several species of wildlife for forage in
eastern Africa, but this may vary according to rainfall. Wildlife appear to avoid
heavily grazed areas completely in arid northern Kenya (De Leeuw et al.,
2001), but mix more closely with livestock in semi-arid rangelands in southern
Kenya (Waweru and Reid, unpub. data).
Wildlife probably avoid areas close to settlements because livestock remove
most of the forage. Around Samburu pastoral settlements in northern Kenya,
Grevy’s zebra graze away from the settlements during the day, but move close
to them during the night (Williams, 1998). Samburu build their settlements
along riverine areas, within walking distance of streambeds where Samburu dig
wells. After livestock are put into their corrals for the night, zebra come down
to the streambeds to drink and leave by the next morning. They may also come
close to the settlements at night for better predator protection as well.
In the group ranches around the Maasai Mara game reserve, wildlife avoid
areas very close to settlements, but cluster at intermediate distances from set-
tlements (Reid et al., 2001). Wildlife may cluster around settlements to have
access to moderately grazed grasslands, where their access to energy and nutri-
ents is very high. They may also graze close by for protection from predators.
Current settlements tend to be built on areas that have been settled for a long
time and contain numerous old settlement scars where nutrient enrichment in
the soils below old livestock corrals can last for a century or more (Muchiru,
Western and Reid, submitted).

Changes in rangeland burning regimes

Livestock grazing and less frequent rangeland burning can strongly affect the
state of the vegetation in rangeland systems. Wildlife and livestock systems, when
side-by-side, often are of two different vegetative states: wildlife systems remain
grasslands if elephants and fire are present (e.g. Dublin, 1995), while neighbouring
livestock systems are much more woody (Western, 1989). Traditional rangeland
burning is an essential practice to maintain the grassland state critical to grazers,
but may reduce the amount of carbon sequestered in these ecosystems.

Rangeland fragmentation and loss of wildlife habitat

Fragmentation can also occur when fence lines are built to prevent the spread
of disease or to prevent wildlife from foraging in enclosed pastures. This
58 Grasslands of the world

fragmentation prevents both livestock and wildlife from reaching parts of

the landscape; often the fenced parts contain key resources like swamps and
riverine areas. Impacts on wildlife are not entirely known, but decreases in
population sizes and viability can be expected. Eventually, fragmentation can
completely exclude species from an area.

Impacts of expansion of cultivation and settlement

Recent evidence suggests that the impact of cultivation on vegetation, wildlife
and soils in pastoral ecosystems is greater than that of livestock. Expansion of
cultivation fragments rangeland landscapes when farmers convert rangeland into
cropland (Hiernaux, 2000). Land degradation through crop cultivation has been
documented (Niamir-Fuller, 1999), but the impacts of livestock use and crop
cultivation (or any other land uses) has rarely been compared. The conversion
of savannah to cultivation in parts of the Mara ecosystem of Kenya, along
with poaching and drought, has caused more than a 60 percent loss in resident
wildlife populations in the Mara ecosystem in the last 20 years (Ottichilo et al.,
2000; Homewood et al., 2001; Serneels, Said and Lambin, 2001).
In non-cultivated areas, mixed livestock-wildlife systems may be more
productive than either wildlife-only or livestock-only systems (Western,
1989). These mixed systems, when maintained at moderate livestock grazing
levels, coupled with pastoral rangeland burning, may support higher levels of
plant and animal biodiversity than livestock-only or wildlife-only systems,
analogous to the increase in plant diversity seen at the edge of wildlife reserves
frequented by pastoralists and their livestock (Western and Gichohi, 1993).
Further, it is hypothesized that when livestock populations are moderate in
size or mobile, pastoralism produces significant global benefits in the form
of biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, soil retention, soil fertility
maintenance and catchment protection.
Estimates of how the expansion of cultivation will affect pastoral systems
over the next half century are based on scenarios of human population growth
and climate change for the year 2050 from Reid et al. (2000a) and Thornton et al.
(2002). Surprisingly, these changes may bring about an absolute expansion of cul-
tivation of only 4 percent, or a relative increase of about 15 percent (Figures 2.8
and 2.9). Most of the change will probably occur around the edges of currently
cultivated land in areas with the most rainfall. Thus pastoral areas are expected to
continue to contract further in the future and pastoral peoples to either continue
to adopt agropastoralism or become restricted to drier and drier land.

Carbon sequestration
It is not clear whether current changes in the eastern African rangelands
(land use change, overgrazing, fragmentation) are causing a net release or net
accumulation of carbon, either above or below ground. Expansion of cultivation
into rangelands probably strongly reduces carbon below ground, but may
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 59

Libyan Arab Egypt

Jamahiriya

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo
Key
Cropland or urban
Non-cropland
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique

Figure 2.8
Estimated extent of cropland and urban areas in eastern Africa in 2000. From Thornton et al.,
2002.

increase carbon above ground if farmers plant significant numbers of trees

(the success of which depends on rainfall). If overgrazing converts grassland to
bushland, then above-ground carbon will increase, but below-ground effects are
unknown. In addition, rangelands are a significant carbon sink (IPCC, 2000),
but the potential of these areas for further sequestration is not clear.
60 Grasslands of the world

Libyan Arab Egypt

Jamahiriya

Chad

Central
African Republic

Democratic Republic
of the Congo

Key
Cropland or urban
Non-cropland
Lakes
Bounding countries
International boundaries
Rivers
Capital cities

Angola
Mozambique
Zambia

Figure 2.9
Projected extent of cropland and urban areas in eastern Africa in 2050. From Thornton et al.,
2002.

Bush encroachment
Although grazing effects can be difficult to disentangle from the effects
of climate, those that have attempted to do so show that livestock grazing
can drive grassland systems into bushland (Archer, Scimel and Holland,
1995). Heavy livestock grazing can convert grassland to bushland in eastern
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 61

Africa, analogous to that observed in southern Africa (Ringrose et al., 1990).

Sometimes this conversion forms a monospecific stand of persistent woody
species, which greatly reduces biodiversity (de Queiroz, 1993).

Rehabilitation of grasslands
Rehabilitation of grasslands usually involves use of exclosures and restricted
access to allow the vegetation to recover and natural species to re-establish
from the seed bank in the soil or from spread of plants by vegetative means.
Grime (1979) recognized a variety of mechanisms of regeneration, with
different types of revegetative strategies based on disturbance, vegetative
cover and management, and proposed a model of vegetative succession and
vegetation dynamics. Vegetative expansion is associated with undisturbed
habitats with few seedlings and relies on rhizomes and stolons of perennial
grasses. Seasonal regeneration of gaps involves synchronous germination of
seeds from abundant seeders. Regeneration from persistent seed banks and
wind dispersed seeds is associated with spatially unpredictable disturbances.
Woody species also have persistent seed and seedling banks but opportunities
for recruitment are infrequent. Disturbances alter ecosystem processes and
may alter the equilibrium balance of the system (Chapin, 2003). Disturbances
are usually revegetated by species of the original community and return to the
previous species composition within a few years (Belsky, 1986). Introduction
of new species through colonization and recruitment following disturbances
may result in system change, and plant traits may be important indicators to
predict the consequences of global change (Chapin, 2003).
Many previous attempts at rehabilitation have not been successful due to
lack of consultation and involvement of local communities and their customs,
and a perception that traditional systems need changes. Many technological
interventions have been tested in the rangelands of southern Ethiopia but lack
of development impact is linked to unrealistic expectations of development
planners and poor appreciation of social values and production rationale of
pastoralists (Coppock, 1994). Community participation in rehabilitation of
degraded rangelands is an important step in promoting the success of current
projects. A system in Samburu District in Kenya built on local knowledge and
traditions to work in partnership with local people on local problems is having
some success (Herlocker, 1999).
Rehabilitation offers an opportunity to sequester carbon through forestation,
grass and shrub establishment. This is particularly important because pastoral
lands are so extensive and they sequester large amounts of carbon. Rangelands
are only second to tropical forests in the amount of carbon they sequester,
although most of this sequestration is unseen below ground in rangelands, in
contrast to carbon above ground in rain forests (IPCC, 2000). Poor use of range-
lands can cause up to a 50 percent loss in soil carbon, so the potential gains from
rehabilitation are substantial (Cole et al., 1989; IPCC, 2000; Reid et al., 2003).
62 Grasslands of the world

Reseeding has been tried, with limited success, using thirty-two different
species of grasses in Kenya (Bogdan and Pratt, 1967), although disturbance
with subsequent colonization and regrowth was found to be successful for
revegetation in the Serengeti Plains of Tanzania (Belsky, 1986). Options to
improve success in Kenya were identified as selection of appropriate species
for the ecosystem, good quality seeds, integration of reseeding with overall
land management policy, adequate seedbed preparation, reasonable rain and
a complete rest from grazing during the establishment period (Bogdan and
Pratt, 1967). Chloris roxburghiana was difficult to establish in the south Kenya
rangelands using seeds collected from natural stands (Mnene, Wandera and
Lebbie, 2000). While there is the opportunity to introduce more productive
exotic species into the system, these may often not be as well suited to the
environment as the indigenous species and may not establish well. The study
by Mnene indicated that ecotypes of the same species from different areas also
showed poor establishment compared with seeds collected from populations
in the same area.
Seed supply to support reseeding is a major constraint in eastern Africa
and most species have to be collected from the wild (Bogdan and Pratt, 1967),
a situation that has changed little over the past 30 years. Most succession in
pastoral areas is through natural means, such as wind dispersal, although some
projects are collecting seeds from natural stands for revegetation purposes.
A limited number of cultivars of Rhodes grass, setaria, coloured guinea grass
(Panicum coloratum) and signal grass (Urochloa decumbens) are available in
Kenya from the Kenya Seed Company. These are useful for pasture establish-
ment but have limited use for reseeding rangelands, except for revegetation of
the Hyparrhenia tall-grass region as described by Herlocker (1999) and other
areas where these grasses are an important part of the natural ecosystem. These
species can also be used for range improvement due to their high palatability
and nutritive value, but establishment is often poor due to low rainfall and
competition, as well as open grazing during the establishment phase (Bogdan
and Pratt, 1967).

PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES IN

PASTORAL LANDS
Some history
In the late 1970s, the World Bank withdrew 98 percent of its funding to
pastoral research and development because there had been little progress
in improving the intensity of production in livestock-dominated systems
(de Haan, 1999). The pressure to intensify existed despite the fact that crop
cultivation often failed in these systems and often was unsustainable over
the long term (Niamir-Fuller, 1999). Intensification of production has had
such success in higher potential land that policy-makers assumed it was
appropriate for pastoral lands, particularly because most policy-makers have
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 63

received their training in cropping systems for wet areas, with no personal
experience in extensive rangelands (Horowitz and Little, 1987). It might be that
the “intensification paradigm” is inappropriate for pastoral lands and that the
success and sustainability of production depends on extensification rather than
intensification, maintaining mobility and flexibility for opportunistic production
(e.g. Sandford, 1983; Scoones, 1995).
In addition, recent re-evaluations have recognized that livestock production
is not the sole value of pastoral lands; rather, the focus might be more appro-
priately placed on improving pastoral livelihoods and maintaining ecosystem
health in these vast lands (de Haan, 1999; Niamir-Fuller, 1999). A consensus
is emerging that pastoral lifestyles are more compatible with maintenance of
rangeland integrity than are other types of land use.

Rapidly changing systems with changing needs

Pastoral systems in eastern Africa are rapidly evolving, driven by a combination
of policy changes, drought, migration and human population pressure.
Research and development efforts need to recognize such change and develop
ways to understand and mitigate the effects of these changes.

Focus generally on human welfare and maintaining environmental

goods and services
Eventually, if major constraints are removed, it may be possible for pastoralists
to herd more productive livestock breeds in eastern African pastoral ecosystems.
Until that happens, the focus should be less on production increases per se
and more on diversifying livelihoods and maintaining environmental goods
and services in pastoral lands (de Haan, 1999). There is good potential for
alternative sources of income within pastoral areas from plant products (resins,
medicinal plants), pastoral ecotourism and wildlife tourism (de Haan, 1999).
There is some suggestion that income from ecotourism will surpass income
from beef production in these lands in the developed world over the next
decade (de Haan, 1999). Analogous to the Clean Development Mechanism of
the Kyoto Protocol, it eventually may be possible to pay pastoralists (through
biodiversity credits, for example) for maintaining ecosystem goods and services
that have global benefits.

More emphasis on providing pastoral people with high quality

information
Recent reviews of pastoral development emphasize the probable failure of
many technical interventions in pastoral ecosystems. Blench (2000) suggests
that the best way forward is better provision of high quality information to
pastoralists, by asking the question: “What will pastoralists do if they have
access to more and better information?” Pastoralists, because of their mobility
and loose connections to national economies, are likely to be some of the
64 Grasslands of the world

last to have access to information in any form, particularly high technology

information.

Restoring pastoral access to key resources, increasing mobility and

flexibility, and ensuring security
In many parts of eastern Africa, pastoralism is the only way to convert
sunlight into food. In these systems, new policies and management practices
can still learn from the wisdom of Stephen Sanford (1983): opportunistic
management of widely varying forage resources will be essential to reducing
pastoral vulnerability. This means that maintenance of mobility and flexibility
in grazing management strategies will remain particularly important. Another
issue in eastern Africa is security – pastoral livelihood will hardly improve
in areas where there is armed conflict. Asset and income diversification and
improved access to information and external resources will also help. Improved
risk management will enable pastoralists to take action to reduce the chance of
losing assets, income or other aspects of well-being (Little et al., 2001).

Addressing gaps in our knowledge about how pastoral systems

work in eastern Africa
We conclude this chapter with a number of questions that remain either
unanswered or partly answered, but that must be addressed fully in eastern
African rangelands. How many pastoralists are there in eastern Africa? How
poor are pastoralists compared with people in crop-livestock systems? What
is the evidence that eastern African rangelands are degraded (Niamir-Fuller,
1999)? Does the magnitude and variability of rainfall modify the effect of the
driving forces of change in pastoral ecosystems? How does extensification
of pastoral systems in eastern Africa affect ecosystem goods and services?
What are the ecological and economic costs and benefits of different land use
practices and land use change in these systems? How do pastoral land use
practices (adoption of cultivation, abandonment of nomadism, permanent
settlement, landscape fragmentation) affect the distribution, diversity and
viability of nutrients, vegetation, biodiversity and landscapes in pastoral
ecosystems in eastern Africa? How do changes in land tenure and economic
policy affect pastoral ecosystem structure and function? How do changes in
pastoral ecosystems affect household incomes and nutrition? What are the
economic, social and ecological values of global ecosystem goods and services
provided by pastoral ecosystems in eastern Africa (Homewood, 1993; Niamir-
Fuller, 1999)? What are the most reliable and broadly comparative indicators
of ecosystem change across eastern African pastoral systems (e.g. microbes,
soil crusts)? What forces serve to enhance or maintain complexity in pastoral
ecosystems and livelihoods, and what decreases complexity? How do we
establish benchmarks for ecosystem and livelihood change in pastoral systems
that are already heavily used?
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 65

Addressing gaps in our knowledge about how these systems can be

improved
Does the addition of livestock to wildlife-only systems in eastern Africa
improve biodiversity and nutrient cycling? What social institutions best
promote mobility and flexibility of land use among pastoralists and what
policy alternatives can strengthen these institutions (de Haan, 1999)? What
information is most useful to pastoralists and policy-makers, and in what form
is it most easily accessible to each group? What types of incentive encourage
extensification rather than intensification of pastoral ecosystems? How can
pastoralists be compensated for protecting environmental goods and services
of benefit to the globe? Will carbon credits work for pastoral lands? How can
pastoralists take advantage of global conventions and funders (UN Convention
to Combat Desertification (CCD); Global Environment Facility (GEF))?
How can pastoralism be better integrated with crop cultivation in areas where
such integration would be beneficial? How and when is co-conservation
(integration of pastoral production and biodiversity conservation) most
successful in eastern Africa?

REFERENCES
Amadi, R. 1997. Land tenure in the IGAD area – what next? The IGAD expe-
rience. in: Sub-regional workshop on land tenure issues in natural resources
management in the Anglophone East Africa with a focus on the IGAD region.
Sahara and Sahel Observatory/United Nations Economic Commission for
Africa (OSS/UNECA).
Angassa, A. & Beyene, F. 2003. Current range conditions in southern Ethiopia in
relation to traditional management strategies: The perception of Borana pasto-
ralists. Tropical Grasslands, 37: 53–59.
Archer, S., Schimel, D.S. & Holland, E.A. 1995. Mechanism of shrubland expan-
sion: land use, climate or CO2. Climatic Change, 29: 91–99.
Ayoub, A.T. 1998. Extent, severity and causative factors of land degradation in the
Sudan. Journal of Arid Environments, 38: 397–409.
Belsky, A.J. 1986. Revegetation of artificial disturbances in grasslands of the
Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. II. Five years of successional change. Journal
of Ecology, 74: 937–951.
Blench, R. 2000. ‘You can’t go home again.’ Extensive pastoral livestock systems:
issues and options for the future. ODI/FAO, London, UK.
Bogdan, A.V. & Pratt, D.J. 1967. Reseeding denuded pastoral land in Kenya.
Kenya Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, Nairobi, Kenya.
Boonman, J.G. 1993. East Africa’s grasses and fodders: Their ecology and hus-
bandry. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Boonman, J.G. 1997. Farmer’s success with tropical grasses: Crop-pasture rota-
tions in mixed farming in East Africa. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Hague,
The Netherlands.
66 Grasslands of the world

Bourn, D., Reid, R., Rogers, D., Snow, B. & Wint, W. 2001. Environmental change
and the autonomous control of tsetse and trypanosomosis in sub-Saharan Africa.
Environmental Research Group Oxford Ltd., Oxford, UK.
Box, T.W. 1968. Range resources of Somalia. Journal of Range Management,
21: 388–392.
Brockington, D. 2002. Fortress Conservation: The Preservation of the Mkomazi
Game Reserve, Tanzania. Oxford, UK: James Currey.
Busingye, H. 2002. Customary land tenure reform in Uganda: Lessons for South
Africa. in: International Symposium on Communal Tenure Reform, Johannesburg,
South Africa, 12–13 August 2002.
Campbell, D.J., Gichohi, H., Mwangi, A. & Chege, L. 2000. Land use conflicts in
S.E. Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Policy, 17: 338–348.
CAST [Council for Agricultural Science and Technology]. 1999. Animal agriculture
and global food supply. Task force report 135. Council for Agricultural Science
and Technology, USA. 92 p.
Chapin, F.S. 2003. Effects of plant traits on ecosystem and regional processes: a concep-
tual framework for predicting the consequences of global change. Annals of Botany,
91: 455–463.
Cole, C.V., Stewart, J.W.B., Ojima, D.S., Parton, W.J. & Schimel, D.S. 1989.
Modeling land use effects on soil organic matter dynamics in the North
America Great Plains. pp. 89–98, in: L. Bergstrom (ed). Ecology of Arable Land
– Perspectives and Challenges: Developments in Plant and Soil Sciences. Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Conelly, W.T. 1994. Population pressure, labour availability and agricultural disin-
tensification: The decline of farming on Rusinga Island, Kenya. Human Ecology,
22: 145–170.
Coppock, D.L. 1994. The Borana plateau of southern Ethiopia: Synthesis of pastoral
research, development and change, 1980–91. International Livestock Centre for
Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Corbett, J.D., Stuth, J., Dyke, P. & Jama, A. 1998. New tools for the characteriza-
tion of agricultural (crop and livestock) environments: the identification of pastoral
ecosystems as a preliminary structure for use in sample site identification. Presented
at National Workshop on Early Warning System for Monitoring Livestock
Nutrition and Health. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 4 February 1998. Sponsored by the
Small Ruminant Collaborative Research Support Program (SR-GL/CRSP) in col-
laboration with the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization (EARO).
Davis, S.D., Heywood, V. & Hamilton, A. (eds). 1994. Centres of plant diver-
sity. A guide and strategy for their conservation. Volume 1. Europe and Africa.
Cambridge, UK: IUCN.
de Haan, C. 1999. Future challenges to international funding agencies in pastoral
development: an overview. pp. 153–155, in: D. Eldridge and D. Freudenberger
(eds). Proceedings of the 6th International Rangeland Congress, Townsville,
Australia, 17–23 July 1999.
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 67

de Haan, C. & Gilles, J.L. 1994. An overview of the World Bank’s involvement
in pastoral development. Recent trends in World Bank pastoral development
projects: A review of 13 bank projects in light of the “New Pastoral Ecology”.
Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK.
de Haan, C., Steinfeld, H. & Blackburn, H. 1997. Livestock and the environment:
Finding a balance. FAO, Rome, Italy. 115 p.
de Leeuw, J., Waweru, M.N., Okello, O.O., Maloba, M., Nguru, P., Said, M.Y.,
Aligula, H.M., Heitkonig, I.M. & Reid, R.S. 2001. Distribution and diversity of
wildlife in northern Kenya in relation to livestock and permanent water points.
Biological Conservation, 100: 297–306.
Delgado, C., Rosegrant, M., Steinfeld, H., Ehui, S. & Courbois, C. 1999.
Livestock to 2020: The next food revolution. Food, Agriculture and the
Environment Discussion Paper, No. 28. International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO) and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Washington,
D.C. 72 pp.
de Queiroz, J.S. 1993. Range degradation in Botswana. Pastoral Development
Network Paper, No. 35b. Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK.
de Waal, A. 1996. Class and power in a stateless Somalia. A Discussion Paper.
Published on the Justice Africa Web site. See: http://www.justiceafrica.org/clas-
somalia.html.
Deichmann, U. 1996. Africa Population Database. 3rd version. University of
California, Santa Barbara, California, USA, as a cooperative activity between
National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA),
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), United
Nations Environment Programme/Global Resource Information Database
(UNEP/GRID) and World Resources Institute (WRI).
Diouf, A. & Lambin, E.F. 2001. Monitoring land-cover changes in semi-arid
regions: remote sensing data and field observations in the Ferlo, Senegal. Climate
Research, 17: 195–208.
Dougall, H.W. 1960. Average nutritive values of Kenya feeding stuffs for rumi-
nants. East Africa Agriculture and Forestry Journal, 26: 119–128.
Dublin, H.T. 1995. Vegetation dynamics in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem: the role of
elephants, fire and other factors. pp. 71–90, in: A.R.E. Sinclair and P. Arcese (eds).
Serengeti II: Dynamics, Management and Conservation of an Ecosystem. Chicago,
Illinois, USA: University of Chicago Press.
EEA/EEPRI [Ethiopian Economic Association/Ethiopian Economic Policy
Research Institute]. 2002. A research report on land tenure and agricultural
development in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: United Printers, for Ethiopian
Economic Association/Ethiopian Economic Policy Research Institute.
EC [European Commission]. 2000. EU Food aid and food security programme
Towards recipient country ownership of food security. Bi-annual report 1998–9.
ECSC-EEC-EAEC. Brussels, Belgium. 41 p
68 Grasslands of the world

Ellis, J., Reid, R.S., Thornton, P.K. & Kruska, R. 1999. Population growth and land
use change among pastoral people: local processes and continental patterns. Poster.
pp. 168–169, in: D. Eldridge and D. Freudenberger (eds). Proceedings of the 6th
International Rangeland Congress, Townsville, Australia, 17–23 July 1999.
Ellis, J. & Swift, D.M. 1988. Stability of African pastoral ecosystems: Alternative
paradigms and implications for development. Journal of Range Management,
41: 450–459.
FAO. 1978. Reports of the agro-ecological zones project. FAO World Soils
Resources Reports. No. 48.
FAO. 2000. The elimination of food insecurity in the Horn of Africa. A
strategy for concerted government and UN agency action. Summary
report of the Inter-agency Task Force on the UN Response to Long-
term Food Security, Agricultural Development and Related
Aspects in the Horn of Africa. FAO, Rome, Italy. 13 p. See:
http://www.gm-unccd.org/FIELD/Multi/FAO/FAO9.pdf
Fischer, G., Velthuizen, A. & Nachtergaele, F.O. 2000. Global agro-ecologi-
cal zones assessment: methodology and results. Interim report. International
Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
Fisher, M.J. & Kerridge, P.C. 1996. The agronomy and physiology of Brachiaria
species. pp. 43–52, in: J.W. Miles, B. L. Maass and C.B. do Valle (eds).
Brachiaria: Biology, Agronomy and Improvement. CIAT, Cali, Colombia.
FSAU [Food Security Assessment Unit Somalia]. 2003. Annual Post Gu 2003
Food Security Outlook. Food Security Assessment Unit Somalia, Nairobi,
Kenya. 28 p. See: http://www.unsomalia.net/unsoma/FSAU/FOCUS.htm
Galaty, J.G. 1994. Rangeland tenure and pastoralism in Africa. pp. 185–204, in:
E. Fratkin, K.A. Galvin and E.A. Roth (eds). African Pastoralist Systems: An
Integrated Approach. Boulder, Colorado, USA: Lynne Reiner Publishers.
Georgiadis, N.J. 1987. Responses of savanna grasslands to extreme use by
pastoralist livestock. PhD Thesis. Syracuse University, NY, USA.
GLASOD. 1990. Global Assessment of Soil Degradation. International Soil
Reference and Information Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands, and United
Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Grime, J.P. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. New York, NY, USA:
Wiley.
Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162: 1243–1248.
Herlocker, D. (ed). 1999. Rangeland ecology and resource development in Eastern
Africa. GTZ, Nairobi, Kenya.
Herren, U.J. 1990. The commercial sale of camel milk from pastoral herds in the
Mogadishu hinterland, Somalia. ODI Pastoral Development Network, Paper
30a. Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK.
Hiernaux, P. 1996. The crisis of Sahelian pastoralism: ecological or economic?
Pastoral Development Network Paper, No. 39a. Overseas Development
Institute (ODI), London, UK.
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 69

Hiernaux, P. 1998. Effects of grazing on plant species composition and spatial

distribution in rangelands of the Sahel. Plant Ecology, 138: 191–202.
Hiernaux, P. 2000. Implications of the “new rangeland paradigm” for natural
resource management. pp. 113–142, in: H. Adriansen, A. Reenberg and I.
Nielsen (eds). The Sahel. Energy Supply, Economic pillars of Rural Sahelian
Communities, Need for Revised Development Strategies. Proceedings from
the 12th Danish Sahel Workshop, 3–5 January 2000. SEREIN [Sahel-Sudan
Environmental Research Initiative] Occasional Papers, No. 11. 212 p.
Hodgson, D.L. 2000. Pastoralism, patriarchy and history among Maasai in
Tanganyika, 1890–1940. pp. 97–120, in: D.L. Hodgson (ed). Rethinking pastoral-
ism in Africa. Oxford, UK: James Currey Publ., and Athens, Ohio, USA: Ohio
University Press.
Holden, S.J. & Coppock, D.L. 1992. Effects of distance to market, season
and family wealth on pastoral dairy marketing in Ethiopia. Journal of Arid
Environments, 23: 321–334.
Holechek, J.L., de Souza Gomes, H., Molinar, F. & Galt, D. 1998. Grazing inten-
sity: critique and approach. Rangelands, 20: 15–18.
Holechek, J.L., Pieper, R.D. & Herbel, C.H. 1989. Range management: principles
and practices. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.
Homewood, K. & Brockington, D. 1999. Biodiversity, conservation and develop-
ment in Mkomazi Game Reserve, Tanzania. Global Ecology and Biogeography,
8: 301–313.
Homewood, K., Lambin, E.F., Coast, E., Kariuki, A., Kikula, I., Kivelia, J., Said,
M., Serneels, S. & Thompson, M. 2001. Long-term changes in Serengeti-Mara
wildebeest and land cover: Pastoralism, population, or policies? Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98: 12544–
12549.
Homewood, K.M. 1993. Livestock economy and ecology in El Kala, Algeria:
Evaluating ecological and economic costs and benefits in pastoralist sys-
tems. Pastoral Development Network Paper, No. 35a. Overseas Development
Institute, London, UK.
Homewood, K.M. & Rodgers, W.A. 1991. Maasailand Ecology: pastoralist
development and wildlife conservation in Ngorongoro, Tanzania. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Horowitz, M.M. & Little, P.D. 1987. African pastoralism and poverty: some
implications for drought and famine. pp. 59–82, in: M. Glantz (ed). Drought
and Famine in Africa: Denying Drought a Future. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
IBPGR [International Board for Plant Genetic Resources]. 1984. Forage and
browse plants for arid and semi-arid Africa. IBPGR, Rome, Italy.
IEA [Instituto Ecologia Applicata]. 1998. AMD African Mammals Databank – A
Databank for the Conservation and Management of the African Mammals Vols
1 and 2. Report to the Directorate-General for Development (DGVIII/A/1) of
70 Grasslands of the world

the European Commission. Project No. B7-6200/94-15/VIII/ENV. Instituto

Ecologia Applicata, Rome, Italy.
IFAD [International Fund for Agricultural Development]. 1995. Common prop-
erty resources and the rural poor in sub-Saharan Africa. IFAD, Rome, Italy.
Igoe, J. & Brockington, D. 1999. Pastoral Land Tenure and Community
Conservation: A Case Study from North-East Tanzania. Doc. 7385IIED. IIED
Pastoral land tenure series, No. 11. 103 pp. IIED, London, UK.
IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]. 2000. Land use, land-use
change and forestry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
ISO [International Organization for Standardization]. 1996. Requirements for
characterization of excavated soil and other soils materials for re-use. CD 15176
ISO/TC 190/SC 7/ Soil and site assessment/ WG1/N2. rev.3.
IWMI [International Water Management Institute]. 2001. World Water and Climate
Atlas. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Jank, L., Calixto, S., Costa, J.C.G., Savidan, Y.H. & Curvo, J.B.E. 1997. Catalogo
de caracterizacao e avaliacao de germoplasma de Panicum maximum: descricao
morfologica e comportamento agronomico. Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de
Gado de Corte, Campo Grande, Brazil.
Jones, P.G. & Thornton, P.K. 2003. The potential impact of climate change on
maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055. Global Environmental
Change, 13: 51–59.
Jordan, A.M. 1986. Trypanosomiasis Control and African Rural Development.
London, UK: Longman.
Kruska, R. 2002. GIS database of cattle population density for Africa. International
Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lamprey, R. & Waller, R. 1990. The Loita-Mara region in historical times: patterns
of subsistence, settlement and ecological change. pp. 16–35, in: P. Robertshaw
(ed). Early Pastoralists of South-western Kenya. British Institute in Eastern
Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lawrance Report. 1966. Report of the Mission on Land Consolidation and
Registration in Kenya, 1965-66. Government Printer, Nairobi.
Lindqvist, S. & Tengberg, A. 1993. New evidence of desertification from case
studies in Northern Burkina Faso. Geografiska Annaler, 75A: 127–135.
Little, P.D. [2000]. Living in risky environments: the political ecology of pas-
toralism in East Africa. In: S. Taylor, G. White and E. Fratkin (eds). African
Development in the 21st Century. Rochester, NY, USA: University of
Rochester Press. Forthcoming. See: http://www.cnr.usu.edu/research/crsp/
politic-ecol.pdf
Little, P.D., Smith, K., Cellarius, B.A. Coppock, D.L. & Barrett, C.B. 2001.
Avoiding disaster: Diversification and risk management among east African
herders. Development and Change, 32: 401–433.
Loveland, T.R., Reed, B.C., Brown, J.F., Ohlen, D.O., Zhu, Z., Yang, L. &
Merchant, J. 2000. Development of global land cover characteristics database
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 71

and IGBP DISCover from 1-km AVHRR data. International Journal of Remote
Sensing, 21: 1303–1330.
Lowe, A.J., Thorpe, W., Teale, A. & Hanson, J. 2003. Characterisation of germ-
plasm accessions of Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum and P. purpureum ×
P. glaucum hybrids) and comparison with farm clones using RAPD. Genetic
Resources and Crop Evolution, 50: 121–132.
Mabbutt, J.A. 1984. A new global assessment of the status and trends of deserti-
fication. Environmental Conservation, 11: 100–113.
Magguran, A.E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton, New
Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.
Mangubuli, M.J. 1991. Mkomazi Game Reserve – a recovered pearl. Kakakuona,
4: 11–13.
McNaughton, S.J. 1976. Serengeti migratory wildebeest: facilitation of energy
flow by grazing. Science, 199: 92–94.
McNaughton, S.J. 1979. Grassland-herbivore dynamics. pp. 46–81, in: A.R.E.
Sinclair and M. Norton-Griffiths (eds). Serengeti: Dynamics of an Ecosystem.
Chicago, Illinois, USA: University of Chicago Press.
McNaughton, S.J. 1984. Grazing lawns: Animals in herds, plant form and co-
evolution. American Naturalist, 124: 863–886.
McNaughton, S.J. 1985. Ecology of a grazing ecosystem: the Serengeti.
Ecological Monographs, 55: 259–294.
Mduma, S.A.R., Sinclair, A.R.E. & Hilborn, R. 1999. Food regulates the
Serengeti wildebeest: a 40-year record. Journal of Animal Ecology, 68: 1101–
1122.
Milchunas, D.G. & Laurenroth, W. K. 1993. Quantitative effects of graz-
ing on vegetation and soils over a global range of environments. Ecological
Monographs, 63: 327–366.
Mkutu, K. 2001. Pastoralism and conflict in the Horn of Africa. Report, Africa
Peace Forum and Saferworld. Department of Peace Studies, University of
Bradford. 35 p.
Mnene, W.N., Wandera, F.P. & Lebbie, S.H. 2000. Arresting environmental
degradation through accelerated on-site soil sedimentation and revegetation
using micro-catchment and re-seeding. Paper presented at the 3rd All-Africa
Conference on Animal Agriculture, Alexandria, Egypt, 6–9 November 2000.
Muchiru, A.N., Western, D.J. & Reid, R.S. submitted. The role of abandoned
Maasai settlements in restructuring savanna herbivore communities, Amboseli,
Kenya. Journal of Applied Ecology.
Myers, N. 1972. National parks in savanna Africa. Science, 78: 1255–1263.
Nachtergaele, F. 2002. Land degradation assessment in drylands (LADA proj-
ect). LUCC Newsletter, No. 8 (Dec. 2002): 15. See: http://www.indiana.
edu/~act/focus1/LUCCnews8.pdf
Neumann, R.N. 1997. Primitive ideas. Protected area buffer zones and the poli-
tics of land in Africa. Development and Change, 27: 559–582.
72 Grasslands of the world

Niamir, M. 1991. Traditional African range management techniques: Implications for

rangeland management. Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK.
Niamir-Fuller, M. 1999. International aid for rangeland development: trends and
challenges. pp. 147–152, in: D. Eldridge and D. Freudenberger (eds). Proceedings of
the 6th International Rangeland Congress, Townsville, Australia, 17–23 July 1999.
Nicholson, S.E., Tucker, C.J. & Ba, M.B. 1998. Desertification, drought and
surface vegetation: an example from the West African Sahel. Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society, 79: 815–830.
Nyongeza, A. 1995. National Land Policy. The Ministry of Lands, Housing and
Urban Development, Dar es Salaam, Kenya.
Oba, G., Vetaas, O.R. & Stenseth, N.C. 2001. Relationships between biomass
and plant species richness in arid-zone grazing lands. Journal of Applied Ecology,
38: 836–845.
Ottichilo, W.K., de Leeuw, J., Skidmore, A.K., Prins, H.H.T. & Said, M.Y. 2000.
Population trends of large non-migratory wild herbivores and livestock in the
Masai Mara ecosystem, Kenya, between 1977 and 1997. African Journal of
Ecology, 38: 202–216.
Pantuliano, S. 2002. Sustaining livelihoods across the rural-urban divide: Changes
and challenges facing the Beja pastoralists of North Eastern Sudan. International
Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London, UK.
Pengelly, B.C., Hacker, J.B. & Eagles, D.A. 1992. The classification of a collection
of buffel grasses and related species. Tropical Grasslands, 26: 1–6.
Perkins, J.S. 1991. The impact of borehole-dependent cattle grazing on the environ-
ment and society of the eastern Kalahari sandveld, Central District, Botswana.
PhD Thesis, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Phillips, S. 1995. Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea – Poaceae (Gramineae). Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, and Uppsala, Sweden: Addis Ababa University, and Science
Faculty, Uppsala University.
Pratt, D.J. & Gwynne, M.D. 1977. Rangeland management and ecology in East
Africa. London, UK: Hodder and Stoughton.
Rasmussen, K., Fog, B. & Madsen, J.E. 2001. Desertification in reverse?
Observations from northern Burkina Faso. Global Environmental Change,
11: 271–282.
Rattray, J.M. 1960. The grass cover of Africa. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Reid, R.S. 1999. Impacts of trypanosomosis on land-use and the environment in
Africa: state of our knowledge and future directions. pp. 500–514, in: OAU,
Nairobi (Kenya). International Scientific Council for Trypanosomiasis Research
and Control. Proceedings of the 24th meeting of the International Scientific
Council for Trypanosomiasis Research and Control. OAU/STRC Publication,
no. 119. Nairobi, Kenya: OAU/STRC.
Reid, R.S. & Ellis, J.E. 1995. Impacts of pastoralists on woodlands in south
Turkana, Kenya: livestock-mediated tree recruitment. Ecological Applications,
5: 978–992.
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 73

Reid, R.S., Thornton P.K. & Kruska, R.L. 2001. Predicting agricultural expan-
sion: livestock disease control and changing landscapes in southwestern
Ethiopia. pp. 271–290, in: A. Arildsen and D. Kaimowitz (eds). Agricultural
Technologies and Tropical Deforestation. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
Reid, R.S., Wilson, C.J., Kruska, R.L. & Mulatu, W. 1997. Impacts of tsetse
control and land-use on vegetative structure and tree species composition in
southwestern Ethiopia. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34: 731–747.
Reid, R.S., Kruska, R.L., Wilson, C.J. & Thornton P.K. 1998. Conservation
crises of the 21st century: tension zones among wildlife, people and livestock
across Africa in 2050. pp. 353, in: A. Farina, J. Kennedy and V. Bossu (eds).
International Congress of Ecology. Firma Effe, Reggio Emilia, Italy, 12–16
July, 1998.
Reid, R.S., Kruska, R.L., Deichmann, U., Thornton, P.K. & Leak, S.G.A.
2000a. Human population growth and extinction of the tsetse fly. Agricultural
Ecosystems and Environment, 77: 227–236.
Reid, R.S., Kruska, R.L., Muthui, N., Taye, A., Wotton, S., Wilson, C.J. &
Mulatu, W. [Andualem Taye; Woudyalew Mulatu]. 2000b. Land-use and land-
cover dynamics in response to changes in climatic, biological and socio-political
forces: the case of southwestern Ethiopia. Landscape Ecology, 15(4): 339–355.
Reid, R.S., Rainy, M.E., Wilson, C.J., Harris, E., Kruska, R.L., Waweru, M.,
Macmillan, S.A. & Worden, J.S. 2001. Wildlife cluster around pastoral set-
tlements in Africa. 2, PLE Science Series, International Livestock Research
Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Reid, R.S., Thornton, P.K., McCrabb, G.J., Kruska, R.L., Atieno, F. & Jones,
P.G. 2003. Is it possible to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in pastoral ecosys-
tems of the tropics? Environment, Development and Sustainability, 6: 91–109.
Ringrose, S., Matheson, W., Tempest, F. & Boyle, T. 1990. The development and
causes of range degradation features in southeast Botswana using multitempo-
ral Landsat MSS imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing,
56: 1253–1262.
Rodgers, W. & Homewood, K. 1982. Species richness and endemism in the
Usambara Mountain forests. Tanzania. Biological Journal of the Linnean
Society, 18: 197–224.
Rogers, P., Brockington, D., Kiwasila, H. & Homewood, K. 1999. Environmental
awareness and conflict genesis. People versus parks in Mkomazi Game Reserve.
pp. 26–51. in: T. Granfelt (ed). Managing the globalised environment. London,
UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Rutten, M.M.E.M. 1992. Selling Wealth to Buy Poverty. The Process of the
Individualization of Land Ownership among the Maasai pastoralists of
Kajiado District, Kenya, 1890–1990. Saarbrücken, Germany: Verlag Breitenbach
Publishers.
Sandford, S. 1983. Management of Pastoral Development in the Third World.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
74 Grasslands of the world

Schlesinger, W.H. & Gramenopoulos, N. 1996. Archival photographs show no

climate-induced changes in woody vegetation in the Sudan, 1943–1994. Global
Change Biology, 2: 137–141.
Scoones, I. 1995. New directions in pastoral development in Africa. pp. 1–36, in: I.
Scoones (ed). Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development
in Africa. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Serneels, S. & Lambin, E.F. 2001. Impact of land-use changes on the wildebeest
migration in the northern part of the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem. Journal of
Biogeography, 28: 391–407.
Serneels, S., Said, M.Y. & Lambin, E.F. 2001. Land-cover changes around a
major East African wildlife reserve: the Mara Ecosystem (Kenya). International
Journal of Remote Sensing, 22: 3397–3420.
Shivji, I.G. 1999. The Lands Act 1999: a cause for celebration or a celebration of
a cause? Keynote address to the Workshop on Land, held at Morogoro, 19–20
February 1999.
Sinclair, A.R.E. 1995. Serengeti past and present. pp. 3–30, in: A.R.E. Sinclair and
P. Arcese (eds). Serengeti II: Dynamics, Management and Conservation of an
Ecosystem. Chicago, Illinois, USA: University of Chicago Press.
Sisay, A. & Baars, R.M.T. 2002. Grass composition and rangeland condition of the
major grazing areas in the mid-Rift Valley, Ethiopia. African Journal of Range
and Forage Science, 19: 167–173.
Skarpe, C. 1990. Shrub layer dynamics under different herbivore densities in an
arid savanna, Botswana. Journal of Applied Ecology, 27: 873–885.
Skerman, P.J. & Riveros, F. 1990. Tropical grasses. FAO Plant Production and
Protection Series, No. 23. 832 p. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Smith, T.B., Wayne, R.K., Girman, D.J. & Bruford, M.W. 1997. A role for eco-
tones in generating rainforest biodiversity. Science, 276: 1855–1857.
Snyder, K.A. 1996. Agrarian change and land-use strategies among Iraqw farmers
in northern Tanzania. Human Ecology, 24: 315–340.
Srivastava, K.L., Abebe, M., Astatke, A., Haile, M. & Regassa, H. 1993.
Distribution and importance of Ethiopian vertisols and location of study sites.
pp. 13–27, in: Improved management of Vertisols for sustainable crop-livestock
production in the Ethiopian highlands: Synthesis report 1986–92. Technical
Committee of the Joint Vertisol Project, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Staal, S., Chege, L., Kenyanjui, M., Kimari, A., Lukuyu, B., Njumbi, D., Owango,
M., Tanner, J.C., Thorpe, W. & Wambugu, M. 1997. Characterisation of dairy
systems supplying the Nairobi milk market. International Livestock Research
Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Stattersfield, A.J., Crosby, M.J., Long, A.J. & Wedge, D.C. 1998. Endemic bird
areas of the world. Priorities for biodiversity conservation. Cambridge, UK:
Birdlife International.
Steinfeld, H., de Haan, C. & Blackburn, H. 1997. Livestock-environment interac-
tions: Issues and options. Fressingfield, UK: WRENmedia. 56 p.
The changing face of pastoral systems in grass-dominated ecosystems of eastern Africa 75

Sullivan, S. 1999. The impacts of people and livestock on topographically diverse

open wood- and shrublands in arid north-west Namibia. Global Ecology and
Biogeography Letters, 8: 257–277.
Tcacenco, F.A. & Lance, G.N. 1992. Selection of morphological traits for charac-
terization of elephant grass accessions. Tropical Grasslands, 26: 145–155.
Thornton, P.K., Kruska, R.L., Henninger, N., Kristjanson, P.M., Reid, R.S.,
Atieno, F., Odero, A. & Ndegwa, T. 2002. Mapping Poverty and Livestock in the
Developing World. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Tucker, C.J., Dregne, H.E. & Newcomb, W.W. 1991. Expansion and contraction
of the Sahara Desert from 1980 to 1990. Science, 253: 299–301.
Ubi, B.E., Komatsu, T. & Fujimori, M. 2000. AFLP-based analysis of genetic
diversity in diploid and tetraploid cultivars of rhodesgrass (Chloris gayana
Kunth). In: VIII International Plant and Animal Genome Conference, San
Diego, California, USA, 9–12 January 2000. See: http://www.intl-pag.org/8/
abstracts/pag8905.html
Unruh, J.D. 1995. The relationship between the indigenous pastoralist resource
tenure and state tenure in Somalia. GeoJournal, 36: 19–26.
USGS/EDC [U.S. Geological Survey – Earth Resources Observation Systems Data
Center]. 1999. 1-km Land Cover Characterization Database, with revisions for
Latin America. U.S. Geological Survey – Earth Resources Observation Systems
(EROS) Data Center (EDC), Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA.
Van de Wouw, M., Hanson, J. & Luethi, S. 1999. Morphological and agonomic
characterization of a collection of napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum) and P.
purpureum × P. glaucum. Tropical Grasslands, 33: 150–158.
Vuorio, V., Muchiru, A.N. & Reid, R.S. In prep. Abandoned Maasai settlements
facilitate changes in plant diversity in the Mara ecosystem, southwestern Kenya.
Walker, B.H. 1993. Rangeland ecology: understanding and managing change.
Ambio, 22: 80–87.
Waller, R.D. 1990. Tsetse fly in western Narok, Kenya. Journal of African History,
31: 81–101.
Watson, R.M. 1991. Mkomazi – restoring Africa. Swara, 14: 14–16.
Western, D. 1989. Conservation without parks: wildlife in the rural landscape.
pp. 158–165, in: D. Western and M.C. Pearl (eds). Conservation for the Twenty-
first Century. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Western, D. & Gichohi, H. 1993. Segregation effects and the impoverishment
of savanna parks: the case for ecosystem viability analysis. African Journal of
Ecology, 31: 269–281.
White, D.H. 1998. Livestock commodities: a global agro-climatic analysis. Economic
Evaluation Unit Working Paper, No. 30. Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Canberra, Australia.
White, F. 1983. The Vegetation of Africa; a descriptive memoir to accompany the
Unesco/AETFAT/UNSO vegetation map of Africa. Natural Resources Research
Series, XX. Paris, France: UNESCO. 356 p.
76 Grasslands of the world

Wilen, C.A., Holt, J.S., Ellstrand, N.C. & Shaw, R.G. 1995. Genotypic diversity
of Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum) populations in California. Weed
Science, 43: 209–214.
Williams, S.D. 1998. Grevy’s zebra: ecology in a heterogeneous environment.
PhD thesis. University College, London, UK.
Wilson, C.J., Reid, R.S., Stanton, N.L. & Perry, B.D. 1997. Ecological conse-
quences of controlling the tsetse fly in southwestern Ethiopia: effects of land-
use on bird species diversity. Conservation Biology, 11: 435–447.