COMMUNITY I'ARTICIPATION IN ISIOLO DIS'I'RICT.PAST IMTIATIVES AND OHTIONS NOR TIIE FTJTTJRE

4 . 1

4 .2

4 .3

4.4

4.5

4.6

CONTENTS

Introduction

Past Initiatives

The Role of NGOs and International Agencies

Community Participation in the ILDP

Options for the Future

Community Participation md Gender Needs

Page No.

I

2

4 '

5

l l

1 3

fartta ttalsb L992rGonmnlty Particlpation la Xsr.olo lltstr'l.otr Pact Inttiatl.vesand Optl.one for the Futuref I Arner 4 tn thc f g!.o1o Dlstr.|.ot _suppertPro,r annel a rcport suhltt;d bf, I,AIIDABtbo 3r{.ttgb Ovcrgcaa Dcvclopot Ailol.nl,strBtlon.

4 . 1

ANNEX 4COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN

PAST IMTIATIVF^S AND OPTIONSISIOLO DISTRICT:FOR TITE TUTI.JRE

Introduction

This annex examines the past, present and funrre role of community participation in thedevelopment of Isiolo Distria. Following an introductory preamble (section |. I below), itis divided into three main parts. Section 2 analyses the strengths and weaknesses of past (andpresent) attempts to elicit community participation in the development process. Specialanention is given (in section 2.3) to the initiatives taken or proposed under the IsioloLivestock Development Project flLDP). Section 3 is devoted to a discussion of the optionsfor ensuring community participation which should be followed up in the ILDP's successor,the proposed Isiolo District Support Programme (IDSP). Section 4 gives particularconsideration to the strategic gender needs of women (which were somewhat neglected in theILDP) as they arise and will be addressed in the context of this programme.

4.1.1 Comnrunity Participation in Perspoctive

Before examining past and present attempts !o incorporate community participation into thedevelopment process in Isiolo District, it may help to define more clearly what communityparticipation means, why it is important, and how it can be (or has been, in the context ofother development programmes) put into practice.

The experience of the past twenty or more years of development interventions t as made itclear that the participation of local communities in the identification, implementation,operation and evaluation of the projects which affect them considerably increases the chancethat these projects will carry real benefits and be sustainable in the long term. The failureto involve intended beneficiaries in the projea cyclc is frequently a recipe for failure. Forthis reason community participation is widely, though by no means universally, recognisedas essential to the success of many different kinds of development initiative.

Although the importance of community participation is widely recognised, there areconsiderable variations in the way in which it is mobilised. [n many casas communityparticipation is primarily identified with community contributions (in the tbrm of labour,materials or cash) to the implementation of development projects, especially when theseinvolve the construction of buildings, roads, or other infrastructural facilities. In Kenya suchcontributions are one of the primary connotations of 'Harambee', or self-help, in the localcommunity.

Where community participation is extended to include local involvement in project planning,operation and evaluation, more often than not this is still done on a project by project, orintervention by intervention, basis. This is and has been the prevalent practice in the case ofsmall-scale technical and other in:erventions sponsored by mmy NGOS (though it is notdifficult to find projects in which community parficipation does not feature at all). Instancesof this can be found throughout Kenya, in both ASAL and non-ASAL areas (see, f<rrexample, the overview of community participation initiative.s in different NGO projects in

-_______

4.2

Machakos District in a recent paper by Kaluli (1992)). An example from southern Ethiopia,among the northern relatives of the Isiolo Boran, is the CARE Borana Rangelands Project,which has focused upon water interventions and technical advice on grain storage given by

extension staff working at village level.

While tfie technical project approach is relatively common, it is not easy to find exarnples ofprojects or progr:rmmes which take a broader institutional approach to conrmunityparticipation. The development of local (or locally based) institutions to ensure communityparticipation in all phases of the planning cycle is a much more ambitious task, and difficult

for small NGOS to tackle alone in a meaningfirl way. Perhaps the most relevant example ofan institutional intervention of this kind is that undertaken in the context of the World Bank

sponsored Southern Rangelands Pilot Project (1988-1992), again in Borana Region in southernEthiopia. In this project service cooperatives (operating shops and veterinary drug stores)were formed on the basis of traditional Boran resource management units (the madda), albeitunits which had long been used by the government for administration and tax collection (see

Hogg 1990 for further details).

One of the primary objectives of the proposed IDSP is to promote the institutionalisation of

community participation and the participation of community institutions in the planningprocqss, as welt as in the implementation of specific development interventions. The nextsection reviews the past history of community participation in Isiolo District and examinesthe weaknesses inherent in existing initiatives.

Past Initiatives

The sections which follow analyse past (and present) approaches to eliciting communityparticipation in the development of Isiolo District. An analysis of government policy andpractice (section 2.1) is followed by an examination of the role played by NGOs and otherdonor agencies in fostering (or in some cases disregarding) community participation in thedistrict (section 2.2). The find and longest section (2.3) under this heading looks at thestrengths and weaknqsses of the initiatives taken or proposed under the ILDP.

Government Policy and Pracfice

The importance of community participation in the development process is widely recognisedby the Government of Kenya. Indeed, support for the integration of participatory processesin development planning has increased considerably over the past decat e following theformulation and (ongoing) implementation of the Government's policy of District Focus forRural Development. Before Oris community participation and development were largely seenin the context of "Harambee' and self-help, including initiatives which were the particularresponsibility of the Department of Social Services in the Ministry of Culture and SocialServices. Now the Department of Social Services has mapped out a broader role for itselfin facilitating the implementation of the District Focus policy at local level. In Isiolo Districtpractice has yet to match the thmry, and neither the Department's activities nor policyimplementation in general have come close to attaining their stated goal of full andmeaningful community participation in development.

4.2.1

) .

4 . 2 . 1 . 1

4.2 . t .2

The District Focus for Rural Developntent

The formal institutional franrework for development planning and communityparticipation in the planning process is set out in 0re Covernment's policy of DistrictFocus for Rural Development, which became officially operational in 1983. A-fulldiscussion of the policy, especially as it operates at district level, can be found inAnnex 3. The following notes deal only with the local level and the (theoretical) roleof the locational and sub-locational development committees (LDCs and SLDCs).

As stipulated in the District Focus 'Blue Book' (Republic of Kenya 1987) the LDCshould be chaired by the chief of the location. The nrembers of the committee wereto include the relevant assistant chiefs, the KANU locational chairman, councillors,departmental officers, local representatives of parastatals and headmasters ofsecondary schools in the area. The core composition of each SLDC, chaired by itsa-ssistant chief, is (or was) meant to be basically tlre same, including the KANU sub-locational chairman, councillors, departmental officers and headmasters of primaryschools as appropriate. Both LDCs and SLDCs are also to include coopted localleaders and representatives of cooperatives, NGOs and self-help groups. The 'Blue

Book' further states that women's organisations must be adequately represented in theLDCs and SLDCs,

Although the District Focus for Rural Development policy provides a mechanism forcommunity participation, it does not ensure that such participation will be a regularand integral part of the planning procass. Committee members are left free to decidehow and when and who is coopted. As experience from other areas of Kenyaindicates, this leads to considerable variation in practice, ranging from adequate tominimal community and women's participation in the LDCs and SLDCs. In IsioloDistrict, however, the difference is at present academic, given that the LDCs andSLDCs do not function in the first place. As a result there 'is considerabledissatisfaction in many local communities with the existing system, which reliesheavily upon the charaster and actions of individual chiefs in the absence of anyformal mechanism for community representation or involvement. The District Focuspolicy does, at least in theory, provide for a solution to this situation. However, notuntil the policy is implemented at local level, and implemented in the right spirit, willit be possible to translate community alienation into participation in the planningprocess.

The Department of Social Services

In theory the Department of Social Services in the Ministry of Culrure and SocialServices also has an important part to play in the process of participatorydevelopment. According to its own statements, the department in Isiolo plays a keyrole in promoting community participation and ensuring the coordination ofdevelopment activities at the local level. This is achieved through the work of socialdevelopment assistants (SDAs) at divisional and locational levels. SDAs are normallyrecruited from the communities in which they work. They are expected to workclosely with local leaders in the identification, planning, monitoring and evaluationof development projecs from the local camp or conmunity up to divisional levels.They are also expected to act as secretaries to the different local developmentcommittees and sub-committees. One of their major tasks in this context is to ensure

F

I2.

the cqordination of development activities to avoid duplication. The department thussees irself as providing an important link between other ministries/departments andlocal communit ies in the provision of services.

In practice the department fal ls ratier short of metrt ing this grand pronrise. AlthoughSDAs are posted to each of the 4 divisional hr.udquarturs as well u; all of the lllocations in Isiolo District, many of them labour under severe constraints. One ofthese, and the one which the department itself is readiest to recognise, is their lackof transport and/or other provisions which would enable thent to undertake a regularprogramme of field visits. For this reason alone the SDAs are largely confined toworking in the particular centres of settlement in which they are based. Even if theyhad transport, however, it is unlikely that the SDAs could achieve more than afraction of the tasks which their district office envisages. There are, as noted above,no local development committees and sub-committees which they could be active on.More importantly, it is doubtful whetler their current training and level of motivationcould equip them to take a leading role in promoting community participation andinterdepartmental cooperation. The available evidence sugge.sts that the Departmentof Social Serv'ices in Isiolo District will not fulfil its full potential in this rggardwithout interventions designed to remove or reduce some or all of these constraints.

This is not to say that the department and individual SDAs do not perform importantfunctions. The department operates a variety of programmqs including a SocialWelfare Programme designed to assist the poor and disadvantaged, including thedisabled, the aged, the illiterate, unemployed youth and other vulnerable groups.Otherwise. and in the rural areas of the district, the work of the SDAs is most oftenmanifest in their assistance to women's and other self-help (including youth) groups.Close to 100 womcn's groups and more than 160 self-help groups are currentlyregistered with the Department of Social Services in the district. These representimportant community development initiatives, and more detailed consideration isgiven to one category of these, the women's groups, in section 4 bei:w.

The Role of NGOs and Internqtional Asencies

As noted in Section 4.1.I above, ffiffiy community participation initiatives, especially thoserelating to small-scale technical interventions, have been undertaken by NGOs. Isiolo Districthas perhaps had rather less experience of this than many other areas of Kenya. One reasonfor ttris is that there has been minimal NGO activity in the district to date. Certainly thereare relatively few NCOs working in Isiolo District at present, and many of those focusprimarily upon the Central Division (including Isiolo town) and/or upon child health andeducation programmes.

One of the most active NGOs in the district is and has been Action Aid, who are currently(early 1992) in the process of moving their centre of operations from Isiolo town to Merti andthe tiree locations in Merti Division. Action Aid's current interests include technicalassistance to farmers, forestry initiatives, and the promotion of income generation activitiesfor women's groups. To date these interests have not involved any particular commitmentto an elaborate participatory approach, though the women's group programme, which is stillin its infancy, may well lead in this direction. The same might be said of the Council forHuman Ecology in Kenya (CHEK) which operates in Central Division and is thinking ofinitiating leadership and business training for women's groups in addition to its presenttailoring workshops and programme of improvedjttp (cooking stove) dissemination.

I

' i

r ltl

4.3

The work of the CAFOD community-based domestic water supply, health care, and sanitationproject provides a good example of the technical project approach to community participation.In the ca-se of well digging and improvement community workers encourage the formation oflocal water committees of about l0 menrbers, including at least two women. Thesecommittees organise contributions of cash and labour to well construction and the purchase

of pumps, whose operation and maintenance they are also responsible for. The CAFODengineer provides technical assistance and capital inputs.

Other international agencies and NGOs working in Isiolo District have had a much less happyrecord in terms of their limited efforts to engage community participation and the consequentfailure of their interventions. Notable examples of this are provided by a number ofexternally conceived irrigation projects along the Ewaso Ngiro which have since proveddifficult 16 su5tain. The adverse consequences of two such schemes, at lresa Boru andGafarsa, have been described by Hogg, arguing that they have acnrally increased thevulnerability of their would-be beneficiaries to drought and therefore famine andimpoverishment (Hogg 1987).

The lesson, it seems, has yet to be learncxl. A notable example is the irrigation projectcurrently being undertaken on behalf of the Roman Catholic Mission at Merti. The projecthas involved the construction of 5 km-long concrete-lined canal designed to irrigate some 200acre.s of land with water from the Ewaso Ngiro. The technical success of this capital-intensive projec has yet to be assured, and it has apparently already led to the accidentalflooding of a number of local homesteads. Far from being founded upon communifyparticipation, the irrigation project has exacerbated religious divisions within the localcommunity. It has also met with the disapproval of farmers and others living downstreamof Merti who fear, quite naturally, that the project will deny them the water that they needto irrigate their own fields. This is clearly not community participation at work.

Communit.v Participation in the ILDP

This section examines the strengths and weaknesses of the approach to communityparticipation elaborated under rire ILDP. Particular attention is given to the weaknesses ofthe ILDP approach: this is not for the sake of academic debate, but in recognition of the factthat the proposed IDSP is very much a succe-ssor to the ILDP, and must build upon a criticalevaluation of its achievements.

4.4,L llescription of the ILDP Approach

The innovative work on comnrunity participation and its mobilisation undertaken in thecontext of the ILDP marked a radical departure from other approaches as described above.This work was founded upon sociological research and inputs from 1989 onwards (describedby Swift and Umar l99l). Its major achievement was the outline of an institutional approachto community participation in Isiolo Disuict, supported by up-to{ate socio-economic data anddetailed information on problems and needs as perceived in different local communities andas they varied (quite consistently, it rurned out) between different wealth groups.

Research began with an examination of the existing institutions and decision-makingprocedures of the Boran (including Boran Gutu, Sakuye and Waata) living in the three easterndivisions of Isiolo District. Some institutions, like clanship (particularly important for theredistribution of livestock and other assets), well or borehole cornmittees, and primary school

4.4

committees; wer€ found to have relatively restricted functions. Attention therefore turned toBoran spatial organisation, from qh (camps) through arda (groups of contiguous camps) todeda (groupings of add. Particular interest focused upon the deda) (plural dedowan, buthere anglicised), describexl as ttre'largest recognisable gangraphic unit of resourcemanagement in Isiolo Boran society' (Swift and Umar l99l:22).

According to Swift and Umar fsfu 'are quite stable geographic areas which, although tlwy

do not lwve rigidly ftxed bowdaries, are well understood by Boran and are respected asresource nvrnagemev units' (l9l:22). Ded,a membership - the people identified with theseessentially geographic units - was found CI be relatively stable. Meetings, kora deda, weresaid to be held regularly to discuss common problems - for example about the local schoolsand irrigation - &s well as take decisions over collective grazing. These me€tings are opento all (male) herd owners and have no chairman or formal procedure, though respected clanelders have particular authoriry. Sociological research also revealed that while deda areidentical to administrative sub-locations in some cases, assistant chiefs have no special statusin deda decision making.

As a result of this analysis, the Boran deda became the institutional focus for communityparticipation in the ILDP. Further research was conducted on a deda by deda basis. A totalof 14 deda, most of them abutting the Ewaso Ngiro, were identified, together with six"common grazing areas" outside of the deda and reaching to the northern, eastern andsouthern boundaries of the three eastern divisions of the district. "Dossiers' were drawn upfor each of the deda, and later for the common grazing areas, describing their principalcharacteristics as well as the out@me of wealth ranking exercises and problem-solution gamesin each of them. it was envisaged that these dossiers, and periodically updated versions ofthem, would become important planning tools in subsequent phases of the ILDP.

This institutional approach to community participation represented, at least in its generalintention, a considerable advance upon existing government and non-government practice inthe district (as outlined in sections 4.7.1 and 4.2 above). This was not accurately reflected,however, in the draft ILDP plan drawn up in 1991. Despite its numerous references toprocess planning and community participation, the draft plan focused upon outlining possibletechnical interventions and treated "deda developmcnt' as just one of these rather than thenecessary framework in which district and local development should be undertaken (ILDPl99l: 56-57). One of the main objectives of the proposed IDSP is to build upon the positiveachievements of the ILDP and foster the institutionalisation of community participation indevelopment planning and project implernentation as originally envisagod. In order to do so,however, it is first necessary to evaluate the ILDP approach more critically than has hithertobeen the case.

4.4.2 Weaknesse of the ILDP Approach

Despite its innovativeness, the ILDP approach, especially its existing application, has anumber of shortcomings. The most serious objections, enumerated below, all concern thechoice of the Boran deda as the institutional vehicle for community participation. As will beseen later (in section 4.3.2), the rejection of the deda as the primary and specific locus fordevelopment at the community level does not entail that the underlying principle ofneighbourhood organisation has to be abandoned: in fact the opposite is the case. Theproblem is with the deda itself as a traditional (or even pseudo-traditional) form of localorganisation whose further development and formalisation could have very different

--r

consequences for community participation than those intended. Four aspects, or areas ofconcern, relating to the "deda concept' are discussed below.

The Irnportanc€ of the Dedr

Strong arguments can be made to the effect that the deda do not have the institutionalstatus ascribed to them by the ILDP researchers. Neither of the anthrogrclogists whoconducted long-term fieldwork among the Isiolo Boran in the 1970s described sucha role for.the deda (see Dahl 1979; Hogg l98l). Meanwhile, and contrary to theargument that the deda may have grown in importance since then, a number ofcontemporary observers, including Boran, note that the concept has declined insignificance in tandem with the general decline of Boran pastoralism since the shiftaWar of the 1960s.

The primary reference of deda is to grazing or a grazing area. By extension it issometimes used to refer to a group of camps which habitually use a particular grazingarea. It can also be used to refer, by implication, to a particular settlement node orarea, meaning simply that there is a concentration of people there who use thesurrounding grazing. However, no deda iuea can be defined socially and the dedadoes not define any righs in land. All Boran are free to graze throughout Boranterritory and rights to water are formally structured according to clanship rather thanlocality.

While it is true that ties of localiry have been more important since the 196Os and tbeloss of many Boran stock, the deda concept does not provide the sole or even primarymeans by which these ties are articulated. As resource management units, the dedaare essentially unimportant and only mobilised in times of pressing need (forexample, to coordinate a common response to incursions by Somali pastoralists).Most livestock management decisions are taken at the household or camp level. Onthe other hand, there is growing identification with the nodes of settlement referredto above. Such places, which are the foci of small scale enterprise and various socialand other services l(including schools, clinics and cattle crushes), do have definiteresourc€s for the local community to manage. The ILDP research,"in is tendencyto idealise Boran pastoralism (as a threatened but nonaheless viable way of life),appears to have confused ordinary neighbourhood meetings (such as can be called atshort notice in most settlements) with the traditional, but increasingly insignificant,institution of deda councils.

It might be added that the ernphasis upon the 0eda also encodes a geographical andethnic bias. The ethnic bias is most apparent: the deda are (or are reconstructed as)Boran institutions. It is not clear how they can be useful in enhancing theparticipation of other ethnic communities in the district, including the Somdi - a topicwhich was not dealt with at all satisfactorily, as ILDP staff acknowl,""Jge, when the

. dossiers for the central grazing areas were compiled. At the same time, the dedaapproach explicitly excludes dl of Central Division, including the polyethnic areasin and around Isiolo town, from participation in the participatory process planning itis supposed to promote. With its emphasis upon one ethnic group and a single sectorof production, the ILDP was very much mnceived as a Boran livestock developmentprojea. The intention of the proposed IDSP is much broader than this, and it isimportant that it is not seen to have a particular ethnic bias.

Deda Boundaries and FJhnic Conflict

Daspite the recognition that the deda do not have rigidly fixed boundaries (seeabove), ILDP staff drew up deda boundaries on the map, claiming these to have beenroughly agreed with local deda elders. The delineation of the boundaries in Orisway,as a first step in the (once proposed) formalisation of the deda, carries a number ofdangers. The least important of these dangers, but the only one which was discussedat any length, was the possible effect on access tio resources. As noted above, Boranenjoy free access to grazing throughout their territory, and at any one time aparticular deda may contain only a fraction of the local community's livestock. Thus,envisaging that land adjudication might take place on a deda basis, it was recognisedthat this would have to be done in a way which ensured reciprocal rights of accessbetween difference deda.

A much gr€ter danger, also linked to land adjudication, went unrecognised or atleast was left unstated. This relates to tlre potential for the deda system and itsinstitutionalisation to feed into the long standing ethnic conflict between Boran andSomali livestock herders in Isiolo District. In its present form this conflict dates fromthe aftermath of the shifta war when the Boran, having suffered massive stock losses,felt that they had been cheated by their erstwhile Somali allies into bearing an unfairshare of the punishment for their support for secession. The depletion of Boran andespecially Sakuye camel herds paved the way for the subsequent influx of Somalipastoralists from North Eastern Province into the wet season grazing areas that theBoran could no longer occupy in large numbers. Since then Somali herders haveperiodically been ejected from the district by force - the last time in 1989 - only toreturn shortly afterwards. At present the Somali herders are considered to be fairlyimmune from such action, having powerful supporters both in Isiolo town and,reputedly, at higher levels of government.

Both Boran and Somali politicians have already begun to manoanvre in anticipationof possible land adjudication, and there are clear indications that the deda concept isalready the subject of machinations on either side. For the Boran, deda developmentsignifies recognition of their central position in the affairs of the district, as well asof their inalienable right to ttre best gruing land along the Ewaso Ngiro. Thecorollary of this is the exclusion, relative or otherwise, of the Somali - indeed, someBoran have already suggested that the deda boundaries should extend through the so-called cofirmon grazing areas and on to the boundary of Isiolo District.

For the Somali, the definition of deda boundaries provides them with an opportunityto claim that these are the normal bounds of Boran territory. By implication thecommon grazing areas, all the land ouside of the deda, thereby belongs to (or at leaston this basis might be adjudicated in favour of) the Somali themselves.

It should be stressed that this is not idle speculation. Arguments for botl sides couldbe heard in Isiolo town in early 1992. In fact there is no real boundary betweenBoran and Somali in the district, at least not as fixed as the deda map suggests.Boran are settled permanently in some of the central grazing areas (Garba Tula) beinga good example), where they also seek wet season grazing alongside Somali ando0ters from outside tlre district. otherwise, and especially in the dry season, Somalican also be found grazing their camel herds near the Ewaso Ngiro, in the core of theBoran deda. More certain is the fact that conflict exists, that this is exacerbated bv

_I

the ongoing shifta Oanditry) problem, and that a means to resolve it has yet to befound.

It is also clear that the formalisation of the deda proposed by the ILDP would not bea neutral factor in this situation. More generally the ILDP approach can be chargedwith largely ignoring the Somali question. [n fact the only study which gives theSomali population (19% of the district total according to the 1979 census) dueattention'is the report by Dahl and Sandford (1978). The basic facts about Somalisettlement and movernent within the district are o0rerwise unknown. This is asignificant gap in our knowledge, and it must be filled if community participationinitiatives in the eastern divisions are to involve more tlan one ethnic community, theBoran alone.

Deda rnd Women's Participation

As well as carrying an dhnic and geographic bias, the ILDP's choice of the deda asthe vehicle for communiry participation also promotes a gender bias. As noted duringthe ILDP research, gender is one of the main axes of differentiation in Boran society,and women headed housetrolds areoften among thepoorest (Swift and Umar l99l:39, 43-43). At the same time women, even if they are herd owners or householdheads, do not normally participate as full members in meaings, whether these arededa councils or other public assemblies. Instead they have to rely on male relativesto defend their interests. This means that the choice of the deda, or any othertraditional Boran institution for that matter, does not favour women's participation incommunity decision-making, but only the representation by male proxies.

Given their role in production and reproduction, not to mention their relativelydisadvantaged status (see section 4.4 below), it is clearly desirable to increasewomen's participation in the planning and implementation of projects which in manycases directly affect them and their children. Unmodified application of the dedamodel would discourage this and lend support to the status quo: (i.e. minimalparticipation by women). The ILDP proposals are silent on how this problem mightbe ol'ercome: indeed it does not even appear to have been recognis{ as a problem(except, in passing, by Swift and Umar l99l: 6a).

Unkages with Formal Irutitutioru

The ILDP draft proposals do not indicate how the deda might tink up withgovernment policies and instirutions. The obvious danger is that of promotinginstitutions which are seen to function in parallel, or even in opposition to, ratherthan in support of, the formal st.ructure of decision-making. While there is a cleargap between community needs and government practice (see section 4.2.1 above),this does not provide an argument for ignoring existing government policy andinstitutions at &e local level. At the same time, the formalisation of indigenousinstitutions like the deda (if it may be called an indigenous institution) would set aprecedent which might have far-reaching and possibly undesirable implications fordevelopment planning in other ASAL (or even non-ASAL) districts, especially wheredifferent ethnic groups and their institutions have to be accommodated. The potentialfor administrative confusion compounded by ethnic conflict is clearly considerable.

' i

ii ,

ii

The relation between the dcda as definetl by ILDP staff and the administrativelocations and sub-locations in the three eastern divisions is variable. [n some casesthe deda correspond closely to existing administrative areas, but in others they do not(Swift and Umar l99l: 24). As noted above, chiefs and assistant chiefs carry no

- special status on deda councils. The II-DP did not elahorate any specific proposals. :rs to how tlre tJetla nright link up with the existing adrnirristration, but suggqstrd tllat

these linkagx should evolve in situ (ILDP l99l: 57). In an ILDP workshop held inSeptember l99l the Isiolo Distria Commissioner gave his a^proval to theappoinunent of deda commiuee mernbers to the sub-DDCs. How exactly this mightbe done and how to match the deda with different sub-DDCs, including LDCs andSLDCs, was left undetermined.

In theory the deda are rather less permanent than administrative locations and sub-locations, though both may change. This might be cited as another reason fordoubting the utility of the deda as a unit of management. Recent instances of thecreation or disappearance of deda, as described by ILDP staff, are particularlyinstructive. Gubatu deda, for example, is said to have been created some years agowhen Gubatu became a separate sub-location of Sericho l.ocation. Kinna deda isreported to have once been two deda, Kinna and Rapsu, until attacks by shifta banditsin 1988 forced the inhabitans of Rapsu, including the assistant chief, to move toKinna. Most interesting of all, perhaps, is the case of Bisan Biliko deda, said to havebeen formed out of part of Kom common grazing area in the run-up to the 1988election when a polling station was opened there. Is inhabitants came from south ofthe Ewaso Ngiro at Malka Daka, and are said to have moved north of the river at theinstigation of a clansman who was a candidate for the northern constituency, andwanted to make sure of their eligibility to vote for him.

If anything, these different cases make it clear that the deda - or what were identifiedas deda by the ILDP team - are not the simple grazing areas of Boran tradition.Rather they reflect residential concentrations, especially in association with the smalluading centres and permanent settlements of the district. To the extent that theadministrative boundaries also reflect these concentrations, there is a close relationbetween the two - althougtr ;s indicated earlier, the delineation of deda boundariescreates more problems than it solves. Viewed in this light, it is only a short step torecognising neighbourhood association for what it really is, abandoning the recreatedtradition of the deda in the process.

4.5 Options for the Future

At this suge it is nei0rer feasible nor desirable to draw up a blueprint for ensuring communityparticipation in development planning and implementation throughout Isiolo District. Giventhe above critique of the ILDP approach, however, it is possible to indicate some of theavailable options. The sub-sections which follow discuss some of the directions whichirlstirutional and other initiatives might take in the proposed IDSP, following a learning-by-doing approach.

4.5.1 The Use of Existing Institutions

The use of existing indigenous institutions is especially appropriate for the development andoperation of specific projecs. Among the Boran a variety of traditional and non-traditionalcommitteqs, meeting for different purposes, have already been identificd and describcd in the

1 0

' lr {

tIliterature. These include well and borehole committees, as well as school committees (see

Swi f tandUmar l99 l : 25) .Otherk indsof commit tee, suchasthoseoperat ingsmal lscaleirrigation schemes, are somewhat less well known. It would be useful to know more aboutthe composition, proceJures and capabilities (including shortconrings) of all these instirutions,

,. so ttrat they can be adopted or adapted as and when appropriate. At the same time it wouldbe useful to build up a comparable knowledge of non-Boran institutions, including thoseoperating in polyethnic contexts. .."

4.5.2 The Institutionalisation of Community Participation

A primary objective of the proposed IDSP remains the institutionalisation of communityparticipation in development planning and implementation in general. The experience of theILDP suggests a number of ways in which this might be best approached, and these arediscussed below. Perhaps the most important point, which contrasts with the ILDP approach,is the long term aim of integrating community participation into the formal administrativestructure of decision-making; in effect putting stated government policy into practice. In theshort term it may be more a question of the community having an impact upon the formalsystem: but ttris should take place in a way which can ultimately lead to the integration ofthe two. Specifrc aspects which are of importance include:

Nei ghbourhood Organissti ons

Despite its stated origin in traditional resource management units, the deda model ofthe ILDP clearty demonstrated the imgrorunce of neighbourhood organisation focusingupon the growing number of small but permanent settlements in the rural areas ofIsiolo District. Indeed many so-called deda meetings are little more than ad hoc localassemblies. One option for the IDSP is t,o build u4nn such neighbourhoodcooperation and encourage the formation of local development committees of thiskind, with other smaller user conmittees in the area suitably represented on them.The geographic foci for such committees would be permanent settlements like thosealong the Ewaso Ngiro. One important way in which these would differ from thededa is that boundaries would not be drawn around or between them (unless, quitefortuitously, their distribution matched that of eristing or future sub-locations). Itshould be noted that committees of this kind need not be restricted to the Boranalong.

Impacts Upon and Integration into the Formal System

The degree to which it might be desirable to formalise neighbourhood committeesmay depend upon a number of factors, including the possible nature of theirinteraction with the formal system of administration and development planning. Thelong term goal should be to make current government policy, as outlined in theDistrict Focus for Rural Development, effwtive at local level, with functional LDCsand SLDCs. In the short term, however, this may not be possible, and it might bemore feasible to build up neighbourhood and other committees so that they can havean impact on the formal system as it currently operates.

There are two main ways in which neighbourhood committees might be formed soas to interact with the formal system, whether the latter is in place or not. On theone hand they might be constituted directly as the core of (potential) LDCs andSLDCs, with appropriate government and other representatives already on them.

L 1

Alternatively, they might be formed as independent bodies, almost like local pressuregroups, which can then elect members to represent them on the LDCs and SLDCs.Given the imperfect correlation between numbers of permanent settlements (includingpossible future ones) and adnrinistrative locations and sub-locations, the second ofthese alternatives appears the most atlractive. it also greatly increases the number ofpossible participants in the planning proc€ss, albeit at a lower level. This isespecially so if, as might be expected, all male herd owners or household heads ina neighbourhood are eligible to participate in local meetings.

Buuring Women's Participation

Given the current const-ruction of gender roles in Isiolo District, it would beunrealistic to imagine that women's participation on neighbourhood commiuees canbe readily secured. This, at lea-st, is the case among the Boran, as suggested above,though the (brief) experience of the CAFOD project indicates that women'sparticipation on well{igging and improvement committees can be encouraged by anexternal donor.

A more effective means of ensuring women's participation in the planning processwould be through their membership of separate bodies. Women's groups, whichhave already met with acceptance by many men in the district, form an ideal vehiclefor this (see section 4.6.2 below). Women's group representatives can be readilyincorporated into the LDCs and SLDCs on a par with the representatives ofneighbourhood bodies. In this way women's groups can be mobilised as another kindof pressure group parallel to ttre male{ominated neighbourhood committees.

Facili tating Community Participation

There are different ways in which the institutionalisation of community participationmight be facilitated. One approach is to provide material assistance and/or trainingto ttre relevant government bodies and their personnel so that they can implementtheir policies more effectively. The most pertinent of these policies is the DistrictFocus for Rural Development. The latest edition of the Distria Focx 'Blue Book'(Republic of Kenya 1987) recognises that the LDCs and SLDCs are not suffrcientlyactive in all districts. It ascribes this to the fact that their personnel are not equippedwith basic skills in project planning, monitoring, and the preparation of detailedminutes so tlrat they can communicate effectively with the divisional and districtdevelopment committees. The suggested remedy is appropriate training. However,given the current absence of functioning LDCs and SLDCs in Isiolo District, it mightbe more appropriate to direct such training at the neighbourhood committees andwomen's groups which should eventually form the core of their membership.

A case can also be made for providing assistance to the Department of SocialServices. Given its own brief to facilitate the process of participatory development,not to mention its existing work with women's groups, there is every reason to workwith and through the department and its field staff. However, as described above thedepartment suffers from a number of constraints, especially its lack of transportfacilities and the low motivation and inadequate training of its staff. Whether or notttrese corutraints should be tackled as a major priority is perhaps more doubtful.Even if they were removed overnight, it would still take time for the department to

L 2

fulfil its facilitatory role, especially in the absence of some of the formal institutionsit is supposed to work with.

If assistance is to be channelled more directly to the local instirutions themselves, thenthis should not be done without a much clearer idea of their training and other needs,if any. If may be, for example, that resources can be best spent on the training ofwomen and women's groups, given their current level of development in IsioloDistrict as compared to their considerable potential. It may also be thatneighbourhood committees require very few inputs to function effectively. It isperhaps more obvious that financial res,ources should not be fed directly into theseinstirutions as was suggested for ttre deda in the ILDP plan flLDP l99l: 57),although it may be feasible 0o test their ability to manage selected pilot interventions.Otherwise, work of ttris kind might be most fruitfully undertaken in collaborationwith experienced NGOs, especially those with a record of flexibility and openness toexperiment. Despite the start made by the ILDP, the exact ways and means ofensuring community participation in the planning process remain very much to be.discovered.

4.6 Community Pnrticipation and Gender Needs

Although women headed households were recognised as a disadvantaged and vulnerable groupin Boran society, the ILDP paid scant attention to the practical and strategic gender needs ofwomen. It also turned a blind eye to the conspicuous absence of women from its chosenmodel for participatory development, the deda councils. This final section reiterates the needto involve women in the planning process and provides additional background information onwomen's groups in Isiolo District as a suggested means of fostering women's fullerparticipation.

4.6.1 The Changing Position of Women

Detailed information on the status of women in both rural and urban areas of Isiolo Districtcan be gleaned from earlier research by Dahl (1979) and Hjort (1979). Although thisresearch was conducted in the mid-1970s, it outlines a pattern which is still valued today.Generally the picture is one of declining status. Among the Boran, for example, women havenever enjoyed more than a subordinate stafus in terms of their control over properry, labour,and the products of labour. In many rqspects they have only possessed status by virtue oftheir attachment to livestockowning men. With the decline in pastoral production and themovement of many households, including those headed by women, inlo permanentsettlements, women's position has generally become even worse in the face of scarceeconomic opportunities.

Under these circumstances, women's participation in community decision-miking processeshas remained minimal. The search for increased economic security and income generatingoppornrnities has, however, fostered the growth of women's groups, as described below.These groups, though not noted for their financial success, provide an ideal vehicle forpromoting women's participation in the plurning process.

4.6.2 Wonren's Groups in Isiolo Districl

According to recent (1992) information from the Department of Social Services there aresome 97 registered women's groups in Isiolo District with a total membership of

|,.I

I

1 3

______

approximately 3,2A0 women. These figures do not take account of the presence ofunregistered groups, the degree to which registered groups remain active, and the growth ordecline of their active membership since they were registered. Nonetheless, they do providean indication of the overall position of the women's group movement in the district.

More than tlrreenuarters of the registercd groups are based in Central Division, the majorityof them in and around Isiolo town. This concentration of groups is not surprising given theoverall distribution of the district's population, the ethnic composition of Central Division,the number of .women in need of social support and additional income generatingopportunities in the urban and peri-urban areas, and tlre relative ease of access 0o theDepartment of Social Services and other sources of assistance (financial or otherwise) enjoyedby groups in or near Isiolo oown.

Individual women's groups typically engage in a range of activities. Livestock rearing andtrading are the most widespread group enterprises in the district, followed by farming andtrade in foodstuffs. Other income generating activities undertaken by women's groups includebee-keeping, poultry production, trade in veterinary drugs, clothes hawking, and theproduction of handicrafts for the tourist market. Croups also perform important welfarefunctions. One of the ways this manifests itself is the pooling of cash contributions to helpindividual members who are in some kind of difticulty or have otherwise requested financialassistance. It is interesting to note, however, that most Boran women's groups do not operatethe rotating savings and credit associations which are so common in agricultural and urbancommunities elsewhere in Kenya.

The Department of Social Services provides advice to women's groups, while governmentgrants may be given to them on its recommendation. In practice this advice is not veryevenly distributed within the district and groups are sometimes formed with no other purposein mind than to secure a grant.

Isiolo District was one of four ASAL districts chosen for the implementation of a projectsponsored in the 1980s by the Food and Agriculrure Organisation (FAO) of the UnitedNations: Community Action for Disadvantaged Rural Women (CADRW). This project waslaunched in M;r;, I982 as one of the ASAL programmes coordinated by the then Ministry ofFinance and Planning. Its stated objective was to improve the social and economic welfareof rural women in ASAL areas by assisting women's groups in the identification of theirneeds and the development of suitable programmes, with an emphasis upon food production,income generating activities and training.

Among the activities which the CADRW project sponsored in Isiolo District were a trainingworkshop for women's group leaders from Central Division (held in 1984), an educationaltour of local women's group representatives to Baringo District (in 1987), and a seminar forchiefs in the District on the subject of women and income generation (also held in 1987).The project also provided grants to seven women's groups in the District, six of them withinCentral Division, and as a result the baseline information which was collected and publishedin the course of the projea mainly concerns these groups.

In the absence of a subsequent evaluation, it is not clear whether or not the CADRW projecthad any significant impact upon women's groups in lsiolo District. The number of groupsin the district, xpecially in its eastern part, remains relatively small, and it is apparent thatthey are somewhat undeveloped compared to groups in other parts of Kenya. In this respect,though, they are no different from groups in other ASAL areas. The NGO initiatives referred

1 4

to in section 4.2 above have yA to have any impact: perhaps the most significant fact is that

at least two NGOs, Action niO anO CHEK, now have women's groups mentioned specifically

in their work Programmes'

Although women's groups in the east of Isiolo District are notably undeveloped, there is

considJrable potentii foittreir development under the proposed IDSP' On the one hand they

can act as the channels for specific dlvelopment interventions: some groups, for example,

have already expressed a wiin 16 become lngaged or expand their existing trade in simple

;;";i".y ,o.Oiiino. More importantly, the groups can function as a means of enhancing

,uo**'r'involvement in community level decision-making, a first step on the road to

women's empowerment and a Dec€ssary component in the promotion of equitable community

participation.

1 5

REFERENCF^S

Dahl, Gudrun 1979 Suffering Grass: Subsistence and Society of Waso Borana. Stockholm:University of Stockholm.

Dahl, Gudrun and Stephen Sandford 1978 lfhich Way to Go? A Study of Peogle and Pastoralismin Isiolo District in Kenya, report to the Canadian International Development Agency and theInternational Livestock Centre for Africa.

,,

Hjort, Anders 1979 Savanna Town: Rural Ties and Urban Opgortunities in Northern Kenya.Stockholm: University of Stockholm.

Hogg, Richard l98l The Social and Economic Qrganisation gf Isiolo Boran, unpublished Ph.Dthesis, University of Manchester.

Hogg, Richard 1987 'Settlement, Pastordism and the Commons: the ldeology and Practice ofIrrigation Development in Northern Kenya', in D.Anderson and R.Grove (eds) Conservation inAfrica: People. Policies and Practic€. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.293-306.

Hogg, Richard 1990 'An Irstitutional Approach to Pastoral Development: An Example fromEthiopia", ODI Pa.storal Development Network Paper 30d, Iondon.

Isiolo Livestock Development Project (ILDP) l99l A Development Plan for the Pastoral Sector ofIsiolo District. District Livestock Production Office, Isiolo.

Kaluti, J.W. 1992 "NGOS and Technological Change', in Mary Tiffen (ed) 'Environmental Changeand Dryland Management in Machakos District, Kenya, 193G1990: Institutiond Profile", ODIWorking Paper (ms), London.

Republic of Kenya 1987 District Focus for Rural Development, Offtce of the President, Nairobi.

Swift, Jeremy and AMi Noor Umar 1991 Participatory Pastoral Development in Isiolo Distrigt:Socio-economic Research in the Isiolo Livestock Development Pro.le.d!, Isiolo Livestock DevelopmentProject, Isiolo.

,'|

lI

1 6