PASTORALISM IN TANZANIA: Making an Economic Case within the context of Kilimo Kwanza Alais Ole-Morindat Pastoral Programme EA Alais Ole-Morindat

The Livestock Herd – Key Asset

The Pillars of Pastoralism Natural Resources The HerdThe Family & Wider Social Institutions

PHOTO: Kelley Lynch Pastoralism driver of economic prosperity in Africa’s drylands

Introduction In Tanzania & EA decision makers believe pastoralism to be an archaic, economically inefficient and environmentally destructive form of land use. Pastoralists are viewed as backward, resistant to change and inherently violent, willfully refusing the benefits of modernization

Introduction deep-seated perceptions have a direct impact on policy justifying either alienation of pastoral land or measures to turn pastoralists into modern livestock keepers. this perpetuates a vicious cycle: increasing poverty, resource conflict and environmental degradation, thereby reinforcing the very perceptions surrounding pastoralism as a livelihood.

Introduction This not only deprives pastoralists of their rights of self determination, but it also represents a missed opportunity to capitalize on the significant economic potential pastoralism offers in arid and semi arid areas of Tanzania in a context of increasing climatic variations.

POVERTY AS A PROBLEM The biggest challenge facing Tanzania today is how to move from a rural based economy to a more modern & competitive economy in line with: VISION 2025 also MKUKUTA & KILIMO KWANZA Sectoral Policies – i.e. Agriculture. Livestock, health, education etc. – and ongoing reform processes (i.e. decentralisation) are critical if we are to succeed.

Opportunities One of the huge opportunities is Livestock: TZ has 18.5 million cattle 13.1 Million goats 3.6 million sheep 60 out of a total of 94 million hectares are rangelands. Over 90% of the livestock population is of indigenous types, having low genetic potential but well adapted to harsh environmental conditions and highly resistant to diseases.

THE TWO PRODUCTION SYSTEMS Tanzania has two major production systems namely extensive and intensive. The intensive system, which is limited in size, has been receiving most emphasis in investment and improvement. The extensive system, which is mostly led by pastoralist & agro-pastoralism, is neglected. This is a missed opportunity as demands for meat (research shows) is on the increase.

Recent Research Livestock to agric GDP : Kenya 50%, Tanzania 30%; Uganda 1 % of national herd indigenous : Kenya 75%, Tanzania 97%; Uganda 95% Export hides US$ million in 2000 Kenya 0.11m, Tanzania 5.68m, Uganda 12.89m Beef production tonnes 2000 Kenya 290,000, Tanzania 181,000

Contribution livestock to national economies EthiopiaKenyaTanzaniaUganda Agric. GDP45%42-50%30%19% Overall GDP20%10%6.1%7.5% Export hides/skins in millions of $ $41 (1998) $0.11 (2000) $5.68 (2000) $12.89 (2000) Beef production in metric tonnes (2000) 298,000290,000 to 320, ,000 to 360, ,800 Government expenditure on agriculture (on livestock) 5% agric 0.3% on L/S (‘93-98) 3% on agric 1% on L/S (‘02/03)

Livestock populations Total Cattle % drylands Total shoats % drylands Total Camels % drylands Source Ethiopia38.5 million (20%) 17 million 25% sheep 73% goats 0.5 million (100%) FAOSTAT Kenya11.7 million (60%) 17.9 million 60%) GoK; WISP 2007) Tanzania16.8 million (25% Arusha, Dodoma, Morogoro, Manyara) 15.6 million go.tz Uganda6.3 million7.9 million s.org

Grasslands store approximately 34% of the global stock of CO2 – a service worth $7 per hectare

Pastoralist work is hard

Pastoralist are knowledgeable

Pastoralists co-exist with wildlife making perfect use of natural pastures

Mobile livestock more productive than sedentary livestock 7 herds: 3 sedentary & 4 mobileSedentary (149) Mobile (546) Meat production per Kg of breeding female0.023 kg0.057 kg Calving rate45%65% Total deaths35%15% Calf deaths40%11%

Pastoralism is more productive than some alternative land uses: commercial / irrigated agriculture Annual net returns per hectare of Awash river valley land Pastoralism = annual profit of US$417 to US$835 per hectare in 2009 State cotton farm = annual loss of US$ 1,165 per hectare over s

Direct values Indirect values Subsistence and livelihoods values Human capital values Market based values Economic input values Environment input values New conceptual framework Total Economic Value of Pastoralism

Pastoralism contributes significantly to other sectors Tourism: $85 million to Tanzania’s northern circuit tourism industry each year through preservation of dry season pastures Informal meat roasting business (nyama choma) 601 nyama choma businesses in Arusha town employing 5,600 people with estimated 25,000 dependents – 6.6% of pop of Arusha At national level, estimated annual turn over US$ 22 million with 2.2 million people receiving some support

Product branding…an indirect value…?

Pastoralists practice agriculture

If the government does not address land-related issues, frustration and conflict may arise

Poor understanding of pastoralism Why do governments overlook the contribution of pastoralism?  Existing data on benefits is limited There may be political or economic reasons (e.g. vested interests) which means governments ignore the evidence. Pastoralists lack the capacity to argue their case

In conclusion: Government needs to make critical choices in support of pastoralism – KILIMO KWANZA – an important entry point. pastoral groups in Tanzania need to be at the centre of local and national discourses that relate to their livelihoods