Content uploaded by Jennifer Maria Olson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jennifer Maria Olson
Content may be subject to copyright.
LUCID’s Land Use Change Analysis as an Approach
for Investigating Biodiversity Loss and Land Degradation Project
Land Use Change Analysis as an Approach for Investigating
Biodiversity Loss and Land Degradation:
A Targeted Research Project Proposal to UNEP-GEF
LUCID Project Working Paper 13
By
Jennifer M. Olson, Francois Bart, David J. Campbell, Helen Gichohi,
Joseph M. Maitima, Milline Mbonile, Salome Misana,
Samuel Mugisha, Joy Tukahirwa and Robin S. Reid
September 2000
Address Correspondence to:
LUCID Projec
t
International Livestock Research Institute
P.O. Box 30709
Nairobi, Keny
a
E-mail: lucid@cgiar.org
Tel. +254-20-4223000
Fax. +254-20-4223001
Land Use Change Analysis as an Approach for Investigating Biodiversity
Loss and Land Degradation:
A Targeted Research Project Proposal to UNEP-GEF
The Land Use Change, Impacts and Dynamics Project
Working Paper Number 13
By
Jennifer M. Olson, Francois Bart, David J. Campbell, Helen Gichohi,
Joseph M. Maitima, Milline Mbonile, Salome Misana,
Samuel Mugisha, Joy Tukahirwa and Robin S. Reid
September 2000
Address Correspondence to:
LUCID Projec
t
International Livestock Research Institute
P.O. Box 30709
Nairobi, Keny
a
E-mail: lucid@cgiar.org
Tel. +254-20-4223000
Fax. +254-20-4223001
Copyright © 2000 by the:
Michigan State University Board of Trustees,
The University of Dar es Salaam,
Makerere University,
International Livestock Research Institute, and
United Nations Environment Programme/Division of Global Environment Facility Coordination.
All rights reserved.
Reproduction of LUCID Working Papers for non-commercial purposes is encouraged. Working
papers may be quoted or reproduced free of charge provided the source is acknowledged and
cited.
Cite working paper as follows: Author. Year. Title. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics
(LUCID) Project Working Paper #. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute.
Working papers are available on www.lucideastafrica.org or by emailing lucid@cgiar.org.
LUCID Working Paper 13 ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
II. PROJECT RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES..................................................................1
III. A REVIEW OF RELEVANT RESEARCH....................................................................... 5
IV. CURRENT SITUATION IN EAST AFRICA..................................................................8
V. RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS TO BE TESTED IN THE PROJECT...............................10
VI. ACTIVITIES...................................................................................................................11
A. Introduction ..............................................................................................................11
B. Site level data............................................................................................................15
C. National level data....................................................................................................16
D. Integrative Themes...................................................................................................16
VII. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................... 17
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................18
TABLES
1. Site Descriptions..................................................................................................................3
2. Site Research Methods......................................................................................................12
LUCID Working Paper 13 iii
I. INTRODUCTION
The "Land Use Change Analysis as an Approach for Investigating Biodiversity Loss and
Land Degradation" is a medium sized targeted research project funded by United Nations
Environment Programme-Global Environment Facility (UNEP-GEF) and other donors. The
project provides an umbrella for coordinated research activities occurring in sites across East
Africa, and at the East Africa regional level. The project’s goal is to contribute to the
conservation of biodiversity and prevention of land degradation by providing useful
instruments, or methodological guides, to identify and monitor changes in the landscape
associated with biodiversity loss and land degradation, and to identify the root causes of those
changes. The main approach has been to examine the linkages between the processes of
change in biodiversity, land degradation and land use in East Africa in order to derive
information and experience upon which to base the design of the guides for detecting such
trends. Various ecological, socioeconomic and land use change theories and conceptual
frameworks have informed the research and the guides.
The project is being conducted by the LUCID (Land Use Change, Impacts, and Dynamics)
team. LUCID is a partnership of scientists at national and international institutions who have
been studying land use change in East Africa and its implications for land degradation,
biodiversity, and climate change for over twenty years. LUCID developed a formal research
programme for UNEP-GEF to consolidate the findings from long term research sites
concerning the causes and consequences of land use change, land degradation and change in
biodiversity. This LUCID Working Paper is drawn from the proposal submitted to UNEP-
GEF in 2000 (GEF 2000). It provides a description of the objectives of the project, the
research and environmental situation in East Africa, summarizes current research on this
topic, and outlines the hypotheses and methodology for the new cross-site data collection and
analysis.1
II. PROJECT RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
The project will provide critical tools derived from land use change analysis for use by GEF,
subsequent GEF projects, decision makers and NGOs in meeting GEF operational goals in
biodiversity conservation, and prevention and mitigation of land degradation. Development of
these tools emanates from the need to identify the linkages between land degradation and the
GEF focal areas (GEF 1999). The information developed by the project on the linkages
between biodiversity and land degradation will assist in the design of GEF projects on land
degradation with multi-focal area benefits. The complexity of interactions between ecological
and societal processes over time and space has challenged attempts to understand the linkages
between change in biodiversity and land degradation. Land use change analyses provide an
entry into understanding these linkages and associated processes.
As discussed in the report of the STAP (1999) expert group workshop on land degradation,
land use change analysis is a particularly useful tool because it a) provides information on the
wide societal forces leading to environmental change, b) is a cause in and of itself of land
degradation and loss of biodiversity, and c) provides information on the type and extent of
environmental change.
The land use change analysis approach will be developed and tested in a region of high risk to
biodiversity and land degradation, East Africa. This is an area rich with existing research that
the project can draw upon. It is also an area with a history of varied environmental
management regimes and programs that provide many lessons.
1 The actual activities conducted by the project somewhat differ from what was proposed. For example,
two sites in Uganda were added, and a variety of specific studies not mentioned in the proposal were
completed. A full set of these papers are available on the internet at www.lucideastafrica.org.
LUCID Working Paper 13 1
The project falls under the GEF Operational Programme number one on Arid and Semi-Arid
Ecosystems. The tool will be developed and tested in the semi-arid region of East Africa, a
region with abundant biodiversity and of high risk to biodiversity loss and land degradation.
This is an area rich with existing research that the project can draw upon. It is also an area
with a history of varied environmental management regimes and programs that provide many
lessons (Tengberg et al. 1998).
The project will build upon a foundation of long term detailed landscape scale site studies of
environmental change and resource management in three East African countries (Kenya,
Tanzania and Uganda). The four sites are representative of highland to lowland ecological
gradients in East Africa, and the semi-arid plains in the lowlands contain biodiversity and
land degradation characteristics and problems representative of those ecosystems within the
wider region. The sites have comparable physical environments in terms of the range of
rainfall and temperature across their ecological gradients, with corresponding agroecological
zones which range from cool highland agricultural systems growing tea and/or coffee, to hot,
semi-arid areas formerly dominated by nomadic herding and wildlife. The lowland areas, as
in many semi-arid areas of Africa and indeed elsewhere, are currently experiencing broad
socioeconomic processes that are profoundly influencing land use, including an economy
shifting in favour of crops, in-migration by cultivators, local human population growth, and a
transformation of the land tenure system towards privatisation. These environmental and
socioeconomic similarities will encourage comparability and permit the development of
generalisations, including cross-site statistical analyses and modelling exercises.
Despite their similarities in environment and current socioeconomic processes, however, the
four sites are each unique due to their varied political, cultural and economic histories (Table
1). Past and current land use reflects these differences, as do the current state of biodiversity
and land degradation. The two sites on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro, for example, straddle
the national boundary between Kenya and Tanzania and, despite similar ecosystems and a
comparable ethnic composition, the land reflects different national socio-political histories.
Indeed, the difference is visible from the air; the border between the two countries can be
traced on satellite imagery and aerial photographs. The Tanzanian side is intensely cultivated
with a high density of planted trees and bananas, whereas the Kenyan side is less intensely
cultivated. The agricultural production on Tanzanian side of the mountain has been central to
its national economy, whereas the Kenya side of the mountain has only recently attracted
important national economic policy and infrastructure attention with a spreading of
commercial crop production in particular places. The wildlife resources shared across the
border have also been differently managed, with resultant contrasting community/ wildlife
relationships.
In many respects, the site in Embu and Mbeere Districts on the eastern slopes of Mt. Kenya
resembles the Tanzanian side of Mt. Kilimanjaro more closely than the site on the Kenyan
side of the mountain. Similarities include a history of intensely cultivated highlands,
important downslope migration into the agro-pastoral area, and land management being
influenced by strong ties to the urban sector and to the national and international market. The
site in southwest Uganda also has a history of intensely cultivated highlands, though until
recently without the strong ties to the national and international market and without the soil
management practices found in Embu and the Tanzania site. For a variety of cultural and
political reasons, the adjacent semi-arid areas have only recently started to experience in-
migration by cultivators coming from the humid region.
LUCID Working Paper 13 2
TABLE 1. SITE DESCRIPTIONS
Selected Sites and
Countries
Groups
Economic
Activities
Environment
Issues
Topics of Existing Research
SOUTH-WEST
UGANDA:
Kabale, Mpalo
Bakiga,
Nyankole
Intensive cropping
(high); crops,
livestock herding
(low)
High elevation: steep,
rolling hills with some
valleys, high rainfall to
semi-arid savanna
Loss of soil productivity on hillsides,
drainage of swamps, movement of
people north towards semi-arid zone
Degree & determinants of soil erosion, farmer
perceptions of change in soil productivity,
change in soil management, land use/ cover
change, land tenure/ distribution issues
MT. KENYA:
Embu, upper
slope
Embu
Intensive
cropping, dairy
High elevation, steep
hillsides, high rainfall
Small farms, example of env successful
intensification, tree planting
Surveys on farmer perceptions of change in soil
productivity and changes in soil management;
land use change & driving forces of LUC,
watershed catchments, etc.
Mbeere, lower
slopes
Mbeere
Cropping, herding
small stock
Low elevation, semi-arid
Recently adjudicated, rapid conversion
to crops but marginal rainfall,
relatively small land holdings, loss of
pasture for herds and wildlife
Surveys on farmer perceptions of change in soil
productivity and changes in soil management;
land use change & driving forces of LUC, etc
MT. KILI-
MANJARO,
Tanzania:
Lower slopes
Maasai
Cropping, herding
cattle and small
stock
Semi-arid
Periodic (intensifying?) drought; water
quantify and quality; forage degradation Water quality and quantity, land management,
plant biodiversity, human migration, soil testing,
etc.
Upper slopes
Chagga,
Maasai
Intensive
cropping, dairy
High elevation, steep
hillsides, high rainfall
High pop density, small farms; loss of
soil productivity; water availability
Agricultural land use change, population-land
issues, soil productivity, water systems
MT. KILI-
MANJARO,
KENYA Upper
slopes
Maasai,
Kikuyu,
Kamba,
Chagga
Intensive cropping
High elevation, steep
hillsides, high rainfall
Small farms, soil degradation (land
abandonment?), declining farm
productivity
Surveys on farming systems; people-wildlife
interaction; land use change; change in
availability and use of vegetation
Lower slopes
(Kajiado)
Kikuyu,
Maasai,
Chagga
Rainfed &
irrigated cropping,
herding cattle and
small stock
Semi-arid with swamps
and streams, wildlife
parks
Division of group ranches, expansion of
cropping in marginal areas, expansion
of irrigation and piping, competition
over water & forage, threats to wildlife
Ecological research on impact of wildlife and
domestic herd on vegetation; land use change,
surveys on production systems, people-wildlife
interaction, land use conflict, change in
availability and use of vegetation, etc.
Kitengala, Kenya
Urban
dwellers,
Maasai,
farmers
Herding; tourism;
urban residences
Semi-arid, adjacent to
wildlife park
Conversion of grassland to cropping;
fencing of farms and ranches; these and
other threats to wildlife
Ecological research on impact of land use
change on wildlife, and wildlife/ domestic herd
impacts on vegetation; land use change, etc.
LUCID Working Paper 13 3
These similarities and idiosyncrasies of the four sites are typical of any sites that could be
chosen. They will be important in evaluating the relative importance of the various external
and local factors influencing land use change, and its impacts on biodiversity and land
degradation. Due to having four comparable sites with comparable information, the team will
be able to develop generalisations of the root causes of land use change and synthesize data
on the linkages between land use change, biodiversity and land degradation.
The four case studies are being conducted within a similar framework that examines the
impact of land use change on environmental conditions including land degradation,
biodiversity, hydrology and deforestation. This project would support additional data
collection and analysis to provide data complementarity between sites, allowing cross-site
comparison of the team’s research findings for the first time, and the development of the
guide to land use change analysis and a replicable framework to identify root causes. It will
thus provide global environmental change researchers and policy makers critical insights into
the linkages between land degradation and biodiversity, and tested approaches for such
analyses. It will provide the communities and countries vital information necessary for
effective land use and other policy addressing these serious environmental challenges.
The scientific information base will contribute to policy formation to improve peoples’
livelihoods and promote ecological integrity. It will complement existing projects and
research by illustrating how current approaches and findings might more effectively meet
ecological and socioeconomic objectives through an integrated assessment of issues and
alternatives. It will contribute to activities that assist East African governments to fulfil their
commitment to their NEAPs and NAPs through policies that reduce environmental
degradation, foster biodiversity conservation, and promote rural development and natural
resources management.
The project will contribute to current inquiries concerning environmental change in the social
and biophysical sciences, and especially in the integration of the two. It will do this through a
deliberate design of research questions that require consideration of the impact of the social
system on environmental variables and vice versa, and through the choice of methods that
permit joint collection of socioeconomic and ecological data (for example, transects and
surveys). The integrative questions and research methods are described in the section
following, Activities and Financial Inputs Needed. The project team is composed of
ecological and social scientists, who will work together to collect and analyze information
drawing upon their individual disciplinary expertise. Land use itself is the reflection of
biophysical and socioeconomic factors on the landscape, and the analysis of land use change
forces consideration of the interaction of one set of factors upon the other.
Many of the previous studies of land use change in tropical areas have focused on humid
forest ecosystems due to concerns of rapid loss of forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration
capacity. Land use change in other systems, especially in semi-arid ecosystems and in
agricultural landscapes, has been less studied and few models of land use change have been
developed. This project will contribute to that analysis, particularly in understanding the
trends, causes and environmental impacts of the land use transition from herding to cropping.
In addition to the loss of biodiversity inherent in this transition, the movement towards
intensified cropping and herding threatens accelerated soil degradation in the fragile soils and
variable rainfall regimes of semi-arid areas, placing the human population at greater risk.
At this time, our understanding of the interactions among land use, land degradation and
biodiversity globally is rudimentary. Particularly in the tropics, scientists know very little
about these relationships. This project will pull together the first synthesis of these
relationships of its kind. Existing biodiversity research in East Africa has been conducted
typically on a particular wildlife species. There has been much less research on questions of
broader society/ ecological interaction, for example the research that this project will conduct
LUCID Working Paper 13 4
on the trends of land use change across wide areas and their impact on types of biodiversity.
Similarly, most past research on land degradation has been confined to the local scale. The
contribution this project will make is in linking integrated findings from the local level to
those from the meso or higher levels.
In summary, the ultimate goal of the project is to contribute to the conservation of
biodiversity and prevention of land degradation by providing useful instruments to identify
and monitor changes in the landscape associated with biodiversity loss and land degradation,
and to identify the root causes of those changes. The three intermediate objectives are as
follows:
1. Analyze new and existing data concerning the linkages between the processes of
change in biodiversity, land degradation and land use in order to design a guide on
how to use land use change analysis to identify spatial and temporal trends, and
linkages, of change in biodiversity and land degradation.
2. Integrate ecological, socioeconomic and land use data and theory to develop a
replicable analytical framework to identify the root causes of land use change leading
to changes in biodiversity and land degradation.
3. Provide integrated data and information on the patterns and trends in land use,
biodiversity and land degradation in East Africa that will provide a basis for more
effective local, national and regional programs.
III. A REVIEW OF RELEVANT RESEARCH
Following is a summary description of research addressing the linkage between biodiversity
and land degradation, and the root causes of land use change, constituting the “baseline” of
current research. Also mentioned are gaps in current knowledge that will be addressed by this
project.
The project sites are important both ecologically and economically for the nations. Highland
agriculture on the slopes, and the rich wildlife and herding areas with related tourism in the
semi-arid areas, generate crucial sources of food and income for the population and the
national economies. The ecological and economic importance places the sites at the core of
national economic policy, yet much of their productive potential depends on lands undergoing
rapid land use change, making them susceptible to land degradation and biodiversity loss.
Reduction and fragmentation of habitat, conversion of land from pasture or natural riverain
vegetation to crops, clearance of woodlands, fencing, and reduction of fallow length in
cultivated areas are all examples of threats to biodiversity and causes of degradation
associated with land use change. The current situation is characterized by partial, but
continuing degradation of vegetative cover and soil productivity, reduced access to water and
other key resources by wildlife and pastoralists, and declining wildlife numbers. It is a
condition of a socioeconomic system that is experiencing rapid changes itself, in economics,
the political and social context, and demographics. Land use change trends are both extremely
rapid, and in flux.
These trends need to be identified, and their impact on land degradation and biodiversity be
understood, before remedial policies and programmes can be effective in the long term across
wide areas. The baseline research situation in the region, however, is of a patchwork of
studies being conducted usually in relatively small areas and often focussing on one wildlife
species or one other aspect of the ecological or social system. Lacking thus far has been a
wider analysis of the societal and ecological trends across space, especially of several areas in
different countries of East Africa that would allow a generalisation of patterns and processes
to be made, and general lessons to be learned.
Approaching this type of analysis requires studying the patterns and root causes of land use
change, and the impact of land use change on the environment. This project is particularly
LUCID Working Paper 13 5
interested in the ecological and processual linkages between change in biodiversity and land
degradation. The root causes of land use change and the environment impacts of these
changes are typically studied separately, and each topic has its own theories, methods and
models. By approaching the analysis through integrated questions, methods and analytical
techniques, this project hopes to go beyond this separation to understand the interlinkages and
feedbacks.
The land use change literature has evolved out of efforts to understand, predict and manage
ecologically damaging land use changes such as deforestation. It provides landscape or higher
level information on biophysical changes in the landscape, such as changes in the extent,
location and fragmentation of habitats, degradation of forest canopies, the spreading or
shrinking of ecosystems, and changes in biomass production or in vegetative species. It also
provides a wealth of socioeconomic information critical in the identification of the driving
forces of those changes.
Interest in land use change analysis has grown due to improved availability of remotely
sensed data, especially multi-spectral satellite imagery, and facilitated interpretation with
geographic information systems (GIS). The combination of increased interest in large scale
environmental changes and improved data and interpretation methodologies is leading to an
increasing number of studies and projects using land use change analysis. Indeed, the
international global environmental change research community has chosen land use/ cover
change as a major area of research because it provides broad scale data on changing carbon
storage and sequestration by terrestrial plants, and because it provides an entry into
understanding the human dimensions of environmental change (Lambin et al. 1999; Turner et
al. 1995).
Most previous studies of land use change in tropical areas have focused on humid forest
ecosystems, such as in Amazonia, the Congo Basin or Asia, due to concerns of loss of forest
biodiversity and carbon sequestration capacity. Recent efforts to model land use change have
therefore been directed at deforestation in humid areas (Lambin 1997). Land use change in
other tropical systems, especially in semi-arid ecosystems and in agricultural landscapes, has
been less studied, particularly the trends, causes and environmental impacts of the land use
transition from herding to cropping that is occurring in many semi-arid regions of the globe.
In addition to the loss of biodiversity inherent in this transition, the movement towards
intensified cropping threatens accelerated soil degradation in the fragile soils and variable
rainfall regimes of semi-arid areas, placing the human population at greater risk. By widening
the analysis to include the adjacent humid ecosystem, the biophysical and societal interactions
between the ecosystem gradients that are critical to the functioning of the semi-arid ecosystem
will also be better understood. Alterations in these interactions are a prime reason behind
current rapid land use change and threats to environmental sustainability occurring in the
semi-arid zone of East Africa (Bart 1999). This theme, interaction between ecosystems, is an
example of examining the interface between the social and ecological systems, across space
and time. Land use change provides useful starting point for analyzing such interlinkages
because it is a physical imprint of society/ environment interaction.
Analysis of land use change processes requires a three level approach: determination of the
spatial and temporal pattern of change, site studies to understand the driving forces and
dynamics, and comparative analyses and modelling to identify the broad factors affecting land
use change.
Defining and analyzing the causes at different sites, and cross-site comparisons, permits a
generalized understanding of the drivers of land use change that can be linked to patterns of
change at the regional scale. The root causes of the land use conversions in any one site are
associated with events in other areas, competition between land users, the national and
international economic and policy context, and local socioeconomic and biophysical
LUCID Working Paper 13 6
processes. Land managers’ decisions are shaped by their access to resources, their social and
economic status, and the opportunities and constraints defined by the institutional and policy
context. Political ecology, an approach that structures this analysis by defining major
processes at different scales that contribute to land use patterns, will inform the underlying
research questions and analysis (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Campbell 1998; Olson 1998;
Peet and Watts 1996). Recent directions in political ecology are moving towards
incorporation of concepts of non-equilibrium dynamics and stochastic models from
contemporary ecology to support conservation efforts that extend beyond protected areas
(Zimmerer 2000). In this project, interpretation of root causes and trend analysis will be
structured within a land use change conceptual framework that combines phases derived from
intensification theory with contextual factors illuminated by political ecology (Olson 1998).
Political ecology and, increasingly, other approaches to land use change analysis are realizing
the importance of incorporating information on field-level and household level decision
making in land use change analyses. Quantitative analyses of these human dimensions,
including differentiation between households and income diversification factors, can reveal
properties of the land use system and lead to better prediction and improved models.
Nevertheless, this relationship between household structure and landscape pattern has thus far
remained implicit (Skole et al. 2000). This project will analyze findings from extensive
existing field-level and household surveys conducted by team members, and complement this
with additional data collection, to allow cross-site comparisons of these influences. The effect
of household variations in resources, for example, will help inform land use interpretation and
illuminate the poverty/ land degradation relationship through multivariate statistical
modelling.
Macro-scale spatial models such as those derived from von Thunen are being developed to
integrate these elements of the social structure with those of the economy (e.g., commodity
prices, transport costs) to predict conversions of land use (Chomitz and Gray 1996; Walker
1997). This bid-rent approach has been applied to deforestation, but not yet to the herding/
cropping transition to be examined in this study. It is hoped that analyzing the influence of
changing relative economic return of land uses, within the context of other socioeconomic
and biophysical parameters, will illuminate proximate factors affecting land use conversion
on the agricultural frontier. The results of spatial analyses (that address where changes occur)
with other information and models (that address why and the type of change) will be
combined in a spatially nested approach to develop logical assumptions of future land use
changes. Scenario analyses will test the impact of alternative policy choices and other
interventions on the type and location of change.
Currently, land use and other society/ environmental issues in the East Africa savanna region
are being examined in a multitude of research and development projects usually covering one
area and/or focussed on a particular issue. Much existing research on biodiversity in East
Africa has been conducted in terms of particular wildlife species, for example the elephant
population in Amboseli is the best studied in the world. There has been much less research on
questions of broader society/ ecological interaction, for example the trends of land use change
across wide areas and their impact on plant and other forms of biodiversity. Similarly, most
past research on land degradation has been confined to the local scale, and usually at the plot
level examining soil parameters at agricultural research stations or on particular farms.
It is recognized that land degradation in semi-arid areas is probably widespread and the most
important change in the ecosystem brought about by human activity. Systematic
measurements of degradation, and especially identifying the links between degradation to
changes in land use and in biodiversity, are, however, rare. The degradation processes
involved that ultimately results in the loss of biodiversity richness are often complex and not
obvious (Ezcurra and Oba 1999). In long-standing pastoral systems, for example, the existing
biome is the result of regular disturbances in the form of fire, livestock grazing and other
LUCID Working Paper 13 7
management practices. Indeed, on-going research by team members and others have
identified positive impacts of the Maasai management system, such as the rotation of bomas,
on maintaining ecosystem variability (Muchiru 1992; Reid and Ellis 1995; Stelfox 1986;
Young 1995). This and other ecological research is calling into question the need to restrict
all community/ wildlife land sharing (Homewood and Brockington 1991). The outcome of
any human induced changes to these systems depends on the nature of the system and the
intensity of the perturbation. Intense livestock grazing pressure may lead to the dominance of
certain plant species, for example, and may increase risks of soil compaction and erosion
causing severe land degradation and biodiversity loss (Du Toit and Cumming 1999).
Research is showing that human induced disturbance leads to unexpected changes in
biodiversity, but some patterns are now becoming known. In the transition from herding to
farming, an intensification of land use occurs. In this process, phases of intensification are
associated with different land use strategies and land cover patterns. The project will provide
cross-site comparability to identify the flora and fauna of intensification phases and how they
are affected by the transition. Intensification leads to changes in the relative value of land,
labour and capital, increasing the relative value of land and eventually to greater investments
in soil management. The project will examine this intensification/ land management
relationship to understand the impact of intensification on the use of key resources, on land
degradation, and on ecosystem fragmentation. This intensification/ environment relationship
is an area where relatively little previous research has been done, but that would have broad
implications for other regions (Maitima 1998; Olson 1998; Reid et al. 1997).
In sum, current understanding of the interactions among land use, land degradation and
biodiversity globally is rudimentary. Particularly in the tropics, scientists know little about
these relationships. This project will pull together the first synthesis of these relationships.
The synthesis will be particularly valuable because it will focus on land use change initiated
principally by smallholder farmers and herders in the tropics.
IV. CURRENT SITUATION IN EAST AFRICA
The project sites encompass highland to lowland ecological gradients in four areas in East
Africa. Human and wildlife land use systems of the semi-arid savanna in East Africa evolved
to take advantage of the diversity of natural resources across the gradient. Herders and
wildlife of the savanna depend on the water and vegetative resources of higher elevations and
on the permanent water sources in the lowlands to survive prolonged dry seasons and
recurrent drought (Gichohi, Mangui, and Gakuhu 1996; Kisanga 1999). However, these same
water and vegetative resources in the higher areas and wetter margins of the savannas have
been the focus of expanding agricultural settlement. This change in land use has altered the
resource base available to herders and to some the richest remaining wildlife biodiversity in
the world.
The biodiversity of the East African savanna and adjacent wetlands and woodlands is famous
and unparalleled in the world. Herds of large herbivores, such as the zebra, wildebeest,
gazelles and giraffe are joined by the more threatened lesser kudu and eland. Other large
mammals relying on large expanses of habitat include the elephant and black rhinoceros.
Carnivores preying on these and other animals include the endangered wild dog and cheetah.
Equally important in the functioning of the ecosystem, and extremely diverse in numbers of
species and individuals, are the smaller animals and the region’s plants.
Co-existing for centuries with the wildlife in this rich and complex ecosystem are the cattle,
sheep and goats of herders. On-going research by project members and others is illuminating
how the management system of Maasai herders promoted the grassland and woodland mix
sustaining wildlife biodiversity (Muchiru 1992; Reid and Ellis 1995; Stelfox 1986; Young
1995), and how livestock / wildlife coexistence is not necessarily destructive to wildlife
LUCID Working Paper 13 8
(Homewood and Brockington 1991). Nevertheless, structural changes in land tenure systems
are raising questions of the economic feasibility of wildlife conservation outside of protected
areas (Norton-Griffiths and Southey 1995). These and other new understandings of the
wildlife/ society relationship have implications for wildlife management, and in land use
management and policy.
Research into habitat requirements of savanna animals has shown the necessity for the
maintenance of large expanses of grasslands, a mosaic of ecosystem types (often provided by
altitudinal gradients), grazing and water sources during the dry seasons and droughts, and
unobstructed migration corridors. Similarly, woodland species including primates, rodents,
elephants and birds all depend upon maintenance of sufficiently sized tracts (Debinski and
Holt 2000; Western and Gichohi 1993). Loss of these required habitats and fragmentation
over the past 30 years has been the most important threat to the region’s biodiversity. The loss
in habitat has been through direct mechanisms, for example, deforestation or conversion of
grasslands to cropping, and through incremental degradation of soils and vegetation.
The expansion of cultivation is resulting in clearance and fragmentation of wildlife habitats,
disruption of access to water by fencing, and water pollution by agricultural chemicals.
Clearance of riparian and grassland vegetation in the lowlands, and encroachment on
remaining upland forests entails the loss of significant biodiversity. The degree of agricultural
biodiversity that replaces these remains to be fully documented. Further, on the upper slopes
and in irrigated areas, team members are examining changes in established cropping systems
that contribute to deforestation, affect agricultural biodiversity, and influence land
degradation (Blot 1999; Misana 1999; Pomel 1999). These areas continue to be visited by
wildlife, though fencing restricts access by larger animals and smaller species now dominate.
Recurrent damage by elephants and small species (e.g. porcupine) causes considerable losses
to farmers. The economic threat to agriculture is increasing as farmers plant higher value
crops (e.g. horticulture and coffee), and the political costs are high as damage results in
reduced local support for wildlife management programs. Meanwhile, the expansion of
cropping and the intensification of herding in semi-arid areas is leading to increased pressure
on fragile soils and creating economic systems highly vulnerable to rainfall fluctuations.
Team members and collaborating institutions are examining the relationship between these
processes—land use change, loss of biodiversity and land degradation. The current approach
will be strengthened to permit cross-site comparison and regional generalization in order to
provide information on the physical and temporal linkages between the processes.
Land in the savannas of East Africa is thus the key to survival of wildlife, and to the economy
of the human population. During the past 30 years, competition between land users—between
groups of people, and between people and wildlife—has intensified and led to widespread
conversions of land use (Campbell and Migot-Adholla 1981). The conversions have been
driven by new land use and tenure policies, by an evolution of the rural economy favoring
farming over herding or wildlife, and by human population growth including in-migration
from highland areas (Kimani and Pickard 1998; Mbonile 1999). The root causes of the land
use conversions are thus associated with events in other areas, the national and international
economic and policy context, and local socioeconomic and environmental processes.
Defining and analyzing these causes at different sites, and cross-site comparisons, will permit
the development of a conceptual model of the driving forces of land use change that lead to
biodiversity loss and to land degradation. Comparisons of the root causes at each of the study
sites of the project, and of other sites studied by team members, will permit a generalized
understanding of the drivers of land use change that can be linked to patterns of change at the
regional scale. Political ecology, an approach that structures the analysis by defining major
processes at different scales that contribute to land use patterns, will inform the underlying
research questions and analysis (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Campbell 1998; Olson 1998).
LUCID Working Paper 13 9
The development of the generic root causes framework, and of the guide to land use change
analysis, is thus based on the coordination of the existing site studies. In short, project
collaborating institutions and others are involved in a multitude of research and development
activities, usually covering a small area and usually focussed on a particular issue. This
project adds to these findings by conducting additional data collection and analysis permitting
cross-border, cross-site comparability, and conducting synthetic analyses focusing on the
links in the East African savannas between land use change, biodiversity change and land
degradation. It will use those results as a base for the development of the generic framework
and guide to be of use globally, to GEF and other environmental agencies.
V. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED IN THE PROJECT
It is thus hypothesized that rapid land use change in semi-arid ecosystems is leading to
accelerated land degradation and loss of biodiversity, and that land degradation and change in
biodiversity are linked. There is an urgent need to identify the root causes of the land use
change and to develop an analytical tool to predict the impact of land use change on these
ecosystems. The hypothesis above will be tested by an analysis of the following themes.
1. Identification of land use / cover change spatial patterns and trends.
2. Identification of the driving forces of land use change at the community, national and
international levels: causes, trends, trajectories
a. changing rural economies (e.g., within pastoralism, from pastoralism to mixed
agriculture, economic links with urban centers)
b. demographic trends: density, distribution, migration, urbanization
c. infrastructure development: roads, education and health facilities, markets, etc.
d. policies and programs concerning land distribution, land tenure and land use;
also, policies affecting the economy, markets, demography, tourism and other
relevant sectors
e. social factors: distribution of land and other resources between groups and
generations, resource use competition, the decision making process, land tenure
f. climatic /hydrological factors: drought frequency and duration; access to ground
and surface water
g. biological factors: incidence of human and livestock disease
h. natural resource factors: effects of negative feedbacks on land-use caused by
over-use of natural resources
3.Impacts of the changes in land use/ land management on biodiversity and land degradation
a. identification of important types of change in land use and land management
(fires, deforestation, ploughing, riparian irrigation, planting of crops, frequency of
cultivation, erosion control, biological and chemical fertilizers, pesticides etc.)
b. impacts on ecosystem fragmentation and diversity,
c. impacts on vegetative cover and structure and plant biodiversity
d. impacts on soil characteristics and erosion
e. impacts on water quality
f. impacts on wildlife biodiversity: migration corridors, habitat, breeding areas,
seasonal and drought refuges
4. Integrative questions: relationship between changes in land use, biodiversity and land
degradation
a. Land use transition from herding to cropping: driving forces, spatial patterns &
trends, impact on biodiversity and land degradation.
b. Agricultural intensification/ change in biodiversity relationship.
c. Ecological interactions and feedbacks between land degradation and changes in
biodiversity
LUCID Working Paper 13 10
d. Community/ wildlife relationship
e. Role of poverty in land use and differential land management
f. Feedback effects of land degradation on farmer soil management
g. Interactions across ecological gradients
V. ACTIVITIES
A. Introduction
The LUCID team will build upon a foundation of long term detailed landscape scale studies
of environmental change and resource management in three countries at four representative
ecological gradients. The GEF project would support selective additional data collection and
analysis to fill gaps and provide data complementarity between sites, allowing cross-site
comparison of the team’s research findings and the development of analytical and
methodological frameworks. The emphasis of the project is to use existing data whenever
possible. The project will also support the development, testing and write up of regional
syntheses and models, and the generic framework, guide and monitoring system. This will
involve travel expenses to bring together project scientists to discuss generalisable patterns
and processes, field costs of verifying and disseminating results, and time of the scientific
coordinators and others who will conduct the syntheses and generic activities.
The existing site studies have employed a variety of information sources, analytical
techniques and models to provide an understanding of the dynamics of the driving forces of
changing land use and their environmental impacts. Table 2 provides information on existing
data and data gaps at each site.
The project will use the following methods to analyze existing or gather new information, and
as a basis for testing methods for the guide and framework. The guide and framework will
include sections critiquing the utility of various methods for this particular use. A basis of this
type of research is the integration of socioeconomic and ecological data, quantitative and
qualitative data, and data of different scales. Analytical approaches and integration and
verification techniques such as triangulation will be presented and discussed.
LUCID Working Paper 13 11
TABLE 2. SITE RESEARCH METHODS
Mt. Kilimanjaro,
Tanzania Mt. Kilimanjaro Kenya Kabale, Southwest
Uganda Embu/Mbeere, Mt. Kenya Regional
Land use change
(LUC) spatial
patterns
Have analyzed aerial photos
(1962, 1982, 1987) and
SPOT images (1991, 1994) .
Will have 1973, 1987,
1995 (Rombo image),
1988, 1998 (Amboseli,
Kilimanjaro image)
interpreted; have 1999 &
2000 images
Have interpreted air
photos of Katuna &
Mpalo for the 1950s &
1990s, district level SPOT
of 1995 & SPOT of
Katuna.
Have interpreted air photos
of small areas in highland &
lowland for the 1950s &
1980s, and district-level of
1995 SPOT. Have a recent
TM; need to interpret images
to see district-level change.
What are the patterns
(e.g., where is transition
zone of crop expansion,
what are changes in
herding/wildlife areas)?
Trends & projections of
change.
Root causes of LUC Framework of root
causes
Socioeconomic
characterization Livelihood system
dynamics: Social
differentiation - age, gender,
ethnic, wealth, access to
resources. Political,
institutional & affiliations
Livelihood system
dynamics
Social differentiation
Political, institutional
system and affiliation
Livelihood system
dynamics
Social differentiation
Political, institutional
system and affiliation
Livelihood system dynamics
Social differentiation
Political, institutional system
and affiliation
Population dynamics:
changing rural
population size &
structure
Changing population
density and structure
(census data)
Changing population
density and structure
(census data). Have
1969, 1979, 1989, 1999
density in GIS.
Changing population
density and structure
(census data, GIS)
Changing population density
and structure (census data).
Have 1969, 1979, 1989, 1999
human pop density
nationwide in GIS.
Evolution of pop. change,
patterns & projections
Evolution of the
farming system:
impacts of econ, polit.,
demog. etc. on land
mangement/
intensification
Evolution of the farming
system: impacts of changing
pop. density, economy, etc.
on farm size, land mngt/
intensification; using coffee
as indicator of evolution of
changing system
impacts of changing econ
ties, population. etc. on
farm size and land mngt/
intensification.
Horticulture expansion:
where, why, impacts on
econ & ecol.
Impacts of changing
econ., polit econ, pop.
density on farm size, farm
fragmentation, land mngt/
intensification & swamp
drainage; large vs. small
holders (have survey data)
Impacts of changing tenure
system, population density,
econ, & gov’t programs on
farm size and land mngt/
intensification (existing
survey & catchment data)
Model of LUC/
intensification including
soil management
evolution
Gradient interactions:
migration and changing
land ownership: why,
who, where; impacts
on land use & mngt
Migration to semi-arid area,
changing land ownership &
tenure in the semi-arid area,
ecol, cultural impacts;
(census data, existing survey
data)
Migration from highland
and elsewhere to semi-
arid (census data,
existing & new surveys)
Movement to adjacent
semi-arid area: why, who,
LUC & soil mngt impacts
(new study)
Impact of adjudication,
migration from highland to
lowland, purchases of land in
semi-arid area, LU & cultural
& econ impacts (existing &
new work)
Patterns, trends and
projections. What is
driving the LUC herding
to cropping transition
(econ, cult, polit.)
LUCID Working Paper 13 12
Impact of policies
(international, national
& local) on land use.
Impact of land tenure
changes on land use.
Impact of group ranches,
privatization, subdivision
(formal and informal) on
land use, ecol/ culture/
econ; tourism policy;
development of land-use
history timelines
Links with urban
centres, impact on land
mngt/use
Impact of remittances,
absences on land mngt/land
use
Impact of remittances,
absences on wealth, land
mngt/ use (existing data)
Comparison of Mt. Kili
TZ with Mt. Kenya.
Impact of land use
change on
biodiversity and land
degradation
Manual on how to use
LUC to id changes in
biodiversity & land
degradation
Bio-physical and land-
use characterisation GIS analysis of soils, DEM,
slope, vegetation, climate,
land-use, population,
infrastructure to map zones;
sampling framework for
transects: much already
done, will use existing
cross-gradient transects
GIS analysis of soils,
climate, DEM, slope,
vegetation, land-use,
human populations,
infrastructure to map
zones; sampling
framework determined
for transects
GIS analysis of soils,
climate, DEM, slope,
vegetation, land-use,
population, infrastructure;
sampling framework
determined for transects.
Current transects are in
Katuna & Mpalo.
GIS analysis of soils,
climate, DEM, slope,
vegetation, land-use, human
populations, infrastructure to
map zones, sampling
framework for transects: may
use PLEC transects &
supplement their findings
Field surveys along
transects for
biodiversity (structure,
flora), degradation, soil
indicators), land use &
ownership history
Current transects have info
on LU/LC, farming &
herding systems, soil
profiles; will supplement
for plant biodiversity
Current transects have
info on plant species,
new data will be
collected on plant species
indicators and other
factors
Current transects in Ug
have info on soil mngt,
LU, slope, soil, tenure;
will supplement for
biodiversity. Add transect
in semi-arid area
Possible analysis of PLEC
transect findings, supplement
with additional factors
Patterns and trends of
LUC impacts on
biodiversity, on land deg.
Linkages between
changes in biodiversity
and land deg.
LUCID Working Paper 13 13
Impacts of LUC on
ecosystem diversity &
fragmentation using
remote sensing
Needs to be done,
plus analysis of
changing wildlife
migration corridors
and access to water
sources
Needs to be done, & wildlife
mig. corridors and access to
water sources. How will
subdivision affect
fragmentation, access to water,
wildlife migrations
Needs to be done Needs to be done Types of LUC that
affects ecosystem
diversity and
fragmentation, and
biodiversity.
Wildlife surveys, esp.
cross-border migratory
animals
Will be done w/
Kenya team Will be done in Amboseli and
Longido w/ TZ team What is the impact of
LUC on wildlife
migration.
Perceptions of changing
soil characteristics:
where, why, who
(related to wealth, soil
mngt & land use)
Perceptions of changing soil
characteristics: will do survey,
interviews
Perceptions of changing soil
characteristics & soil mngt:
have survey data for Katuna
& Mpalo; in semi-arid area,
do group & key informant
interviews
Perceptions of changing
soil characteristics & soil
management: have survey
& catchment data for
highland & lowland
Relationship between
changing land use/
management, and soil
properties. Responses of
farmers to deg.
Key informant
interviews on changing
biodiversity
Have done
interviews with bee
keepers on their
knowledge of
changing plant spp.
Interviews with bee keepers on
their knowledge of changing
plant spp.
Write up info on changing
community/ wildlife
interactions (why, impacts on
wildlife & on communities).
Interviews with bee
keepers on their
knowledge of changing
plant spp.
Info on changing
biodiversity, and
community/ biodiversity
relationship
Soil degradation patterns soil profile - about
200 profiles have
been done on the
southern and western
slopes.
Soil fertility changes in areas
with different land-use
histories
Write up existing field
research on LUC/ erosion at
field and landscape scale.
Soil fertility changes in
areas with different land-
use histories; review
existing studies.
LUCID Working Paper 13 14
B. Site level data:
1. Ethnography: key informant interviews and focus groups to obtain data on economic
activities, resource conflicts, perceptions of change in soil characteristics and
biodiversity, the impact of policies at the local level, and causes and trends of
migration.
2. Surveys: household and field level surveys of farmers and herders on changing land
use and land management techniques; perceptions of changes in environmental
variables including soil, plant and wildlife species; migratory history, household
characteristics and economic activities including ties to the urban and non-farm
sector.
3. Feedback seminars during which community members, decision makers and others to
verify data interpretation and to explain the context of survey findings, e.g. the impact
of land use change on the soil, plant and animal biodiversity, or the history of land
tenure and its impact on land use.
4. Remote sensing and GIS. Land use change for 2-3 periods. Project members have
conducted GIS analyses of land use/ cover change using satellite images from the
1970s to present, and aerial photographs from the 1950s to the 1980s. The team will
further examine the interactions among land use change and wildlife distributions and
habitat, soil characteristics, ecosystem fragmentation, human migration, etc..
Analyses will identify the hotspots of LUC and impact of LUC on key resources and
on wildlife migration corridors. The root causes analysis will relate LUC to other data
and information using methods such as spatial regression and scenario analysis.
5. Ecological field surveys. Synthesis of existing, and collection of new data on selected
indicators of the effects of land use/ cover change (land clearing, grazing intensity) on
land degradation (e.g., soil fertility, vegetative cover and structure) and biodiversity
(plant and wildlife species diversity).
An approach being developed by the PLEC project will be used and expanded to
provide an overview of land degradation and biodiversity across the sites. It is based
on 1) developing a biophysical characterization of the area using climate and soils
data in a GIS, and 2) field surveys along transects that cross ecological gradients and
represent the spectrum of land use types. This project will broaden this
characterization to include social variables in the GIS (land use, tenure, human
population density, infrastructure) to develop an initial description of each site.
Along each transect, the project will assess the impact of land-use change and land
degradation on selected ecological variables. Sampling will be conducted along the
transects for areas of high and low land-use intensity. Information on vegetative
structure and the abundance of key indicator plant species will be collected to provide
indices of plant diversity, soil fertility (productivity) and soil degradation. We will
use species area curve analysis to determine the probable total biodiversity for each
site and land-use type. We will also collect soil samples for analysis to show ranges in
soil fertility measures (indices). Analyses will include comparing results of areas with
different land use histories and intensities, and comparing data obtained from the
transect study with that obtained from the land use/ cover change analysis.
6. Wildlife surveys: Wildlife surveys will assess the impacts of different types of land-
use on wildlife populations. This will be done by conducting fine-resolution ground
counts of the spatial interactions between people, land-use, livestock and wildlife,
using a new technique developed by one of the team members. This information will
be supplemented by information on the impacts of land-use on wildlife population
structures and behavior.
LUCID Working Paper 13 15
C. National level data
The following macro-level analyses will contextualize site level information within national,
regional, and international frameworks.
1. Population census and other socioeconomic data: demographic patterns and
processes, including migration, and other data (e.g., agricultural production,
income, land tenure) will be analyzed and integrated into the project database
2. Economic and policy analysis: Economic trends and policies that affect the sites
will be incorporated into the framework of this project. These include protected
areas, land tenure, economic restructuring, and international economic and
environmental agreements.
3. Ecological data synthesis: Synthesis of a variety of site-level studies (most in the
grey literature) of the impacts of human activities on wildlife populations in
Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania.
Cross-Site Comparisons and Regional Analysis
h. Coordination of the socioeconomic, land use change and ecological research
a. communication and travel by regional coordinators to ensure cross-site
comparability of data collection and analysis
b. analysis of regional-level land use change root causes and other GIS
analyses
c. literature searches and contacts with land use and other communities
d. review and comment on project papers
i. Develop and maintain project database
j. Prepare a CD-ROM (decision making tool), build and maintain project web site
k. Prepare annual project reports and conduct internal project evaluation
l. Organize regional workshops and meetings
m. Design, format and disseminate project “working paper” series
D. Integrative Themes
The themes being addressed require an approach that relates changes occurring in the social
system with those occurring in the biophysical system, and interactions between aspects of the
biophysical system. The complexity of the question requires a focus on critical relations and
processes. The following integrative questions will frame the research.
• Intensification/ biodiversity relationship. In the transition from herding to farming, an
intensification of land use occurs. In this process, phases of intensification are
associated with different land use strategies and land cover patterns. What are the
associated flora and fauna of these phases, and how are they affected by the
transition? What is the impact on key resources, land degradation, ecosystem
fragmentation? This is an area where relatively little previous research has been done
(Maitima 1998; Olson 1998; Reid et al. 1997).
• Poverty/ land degradation relationship. How does poverty and the socioeconomic
status of households affects land use choices, soil management, and the soil. This is
an area where previous research has elucidated major parameters (Biot et al. 1995;
Campbell 1999; Olson 1994; Scherr and Yadav 1996; Tengberg et al. 1998). This
project will test those parameters in a semi-arid environment, and provide a
framework to examine the issue for developing programmatic responses.
• Wildlife / community interaction: impact of changes in the agro-pastoral system (land
management, nomadism) on wildlife habitat and on wildlife. This is an area of recent
inquiry, for example the positive role of old pastoral settlements in enhancing the
structure and function of ecosystems (Reid and Ellis 1995). These interactions can
also be negative; the expansion of cultivation precipitated strong declines in wildlife
populations in the Mara in the last two decades (Ottichilo et al. in press). When are
wildlife/community interactions positive and when are they negative? What
determines the outcome of these interactions? This project will also examine the
LUCID Working Paper 13 1
6
impact of tourism, and government and NGO programs on the community/wildlife
relationship. Increasingly, communities are demanding that wildlife contribute to the
local economies, otherwise land will continue to be converted for more profitable
uses. A great deal of effort is thus being made to improve the socioeconomic well
being of communities living with wildlife by helping them derive benefits from
wildlife and by involving them more in wildlife management. Activities that will be
examined include the creation of community wildlife sanctuaries, linking
communities in wildlife rich areas with the private sector for tourism and nature
based enterprise development, and especially ways to reduce conflicts between
human activity and wildlife to rationalize land use to permit biodiversity
conservation.
• Societal and ecological interactions across ecological or altitudinal gradients: what
are the interactions, how have the interactions evolved, what is impact of changes on
society, wildlife, land degradation (Bernard, Campbell, and Thom 1989).
• Ecological interactions and feedbacks between land degradation and changes in
biodiversity: As land begins to degrade, some work shows that, initially, biodiversity
can increase (Reid et al. 1997; Wilson et al. 1997). How do land degradation and
biodiversity interact? When does land degradation lead to biodiversity loss and when
does it not? When there is loss, is it a gradual, linear loss or are there thresholds and
surprises in this relationship? If land degradation is defined as biodiversity loss, how
can they be separated conceptually?
VII. CONCLUSION
The LUCID team will conduct research in four case study sites to examine the root causes of
land use change and its impact on environmental conditions including land degradation and
biodiversity. The research will be conducted within a common analytical and methodological
framework to produce data complementarity between sites, allowing cross-site comparison of
the research findings. The site and regional research findings will be disseminated in the form
of working papers, on the project’s internet site, on a project CD-ROM, and in policy
workshops. The results will form the basis of the development of guides to using land use
change analysis for identifying and monitoring change in biodiversity and land degradation,
and a replicable framework to explain the root causes of land use change. The results will
provide researchers and policy makers critical insights into the linkages between land
degradation and biodiversity, and tested approaches for such analyses. It will also provide the
communities and countries vital information necessary for effective land use and other policy
addressing these serious environmental challenges.
LUCID Working Paper 13 1
7
REFERENCES
Bart, Francois. 1999. Up and Down the Mountain: The Altitudinal Zonation of Mt.
Kilimanjaro Farming System. Paper read at Mount Kilimanjaro: Land Use and
Environmental Management, July, at Arusha, Tanzania.
Bernard, Frank E., David J. Campbell, and Derrick J. Thom. 1989. Carrying Capacity of the
Eastern Ecological Gradient of Kenya. National Geographic Research 5 (4):399-421.
Biot, Yvan, Piers M. Blaikie, Cecile Jackson, and Richard Palmer-Jones. 1995. Rethinking
Research on Land Degradation in Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: World
Bank.
Blaikie, Piers, and Harold Brookfield. 1987. Land Degradation and Society. London:
Methuen & Co., Ltd.
Blot, Jacques. 1999. Ecology, Dynamics and Evolution of Vegetation in Kilimanjaro. Paper
read at Mount Kilimanjaro: Land Use and Environmental Management, July, at
Arusha.
Campbell, David J. 1987. Participation of a Community in Social Science Research: a Case
Study from Kenya Maasailand. Human Organization 46 (2):160-167.
Campbell, David J. 1998. Towards an Analytical Framework for Land Use Change. In
Carbon and Nutrient Dynamics in Tropical Agro-Ecosystems, edited by Bergstrom
and Kirschmann. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
Campbell, David J. 1999. Response to Drought among Farmers and Herders in Southern
Kajiado District, Kenya: A Comparison of 1972-1976 and 1994-1996. Human
Ecology 27 (3):377-416.
Campbell, David J., and Shem E. Migot-Adholla. 1981. The Development of Kenya's Semi
Arid Lands. Nairobi: Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi.
Chomitz, K.M., and D.A. Gray. 1996. Roads, Land Use and Deforestation: A Spatial Model
Applied to Belize. The World Bank Economic Review 10 (3):487-512.
Debinski, D.M., and R.D. Holt. 2000. A Survey and Overview of Habitat Fragmentation
Experiments. Conservation Biology 14 (2):342-355.
Du Toit, J.T., and D.H.M. Cumming. 1999. Functional Significance of Ungulate Diversity in
African Savannas and the Ecological Implications of the Spread of Pastoralism.
Biodiversity and Conservation 8 (12):1643-1661.
Ezcurra, E., and G. Oba. 1999. Interlinkages Between Land Degradation and Biodiversity.
Paper read at The Global Environment Facility Scientific Technical Advisory Panel
Workshop, at Bologna, Italy.
Fairhead, James and Melissa Leach. 1996. Misreading the African Landscape: Society and
Ecology in a Forest-Savanna Mosaic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
GEF (Global Environment Facility). 1999. Clarifying Linkages Between Land Degradation
and the GEF Focal Areas: An Action Plan for Enhancing GEF Support. Washington,
D.C.: Global Environment Facility Council.
GEF (Global Environment Facility). 2000. Land Use Change Analysis as an Approach for
Investigating Biodiversity Loss and Land Degradation. Available on the internet:
www.gefweb.org/Documents/Medium-Sized_Project_Proposals/
MSP_Proposals/Reg_Kenya_Tanzania_Uganda.pdf.
Gichohi, H., E. Mangui, and C. Gakuhu. 1996. Savanna Ecosystems. In East African
Ecosystems and Their Conservation, edited by T. R. McClanahan and T. P. Young.
New York: Oxford University Press.
LUCID Working Paper 13 18
Homewood, K., and D. Brockington. 1991. Biodiversity, Conservation and Development in
Mkomazi Game Reserve, Tanzania. Global Ecology and Biogeography 8 (3-4):301-
313.
Kenya. 1979. Arid and Semi Arid Lands: The Framework for Implementation, Programme
Planning and Evaluation. Nairobi: Government Printer.
Kenya. 1994. The Kenya National Environment Action Plan (NEAP) Report. Nairobi:
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources.
Kenya. 1999. National Action Programme (NAP) to Combat Desertification. Nairobi:
National Environment Secretariat, Ministry of Environmental Conservation.
Kimani, K., and J. Pickard. 1998. Recent Trends and Implications of Group Ranch
Subdivision and Fragmentation in Kajiado District, Kenya. Geographical Journal 164
(July):202-213.
Kisanga, Danielson, R. 1999. The Impact of Some Tree Species on Soil and Water
Management on the Slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro. Les Cahiers de l’IFRA 16
(March/April):41-47.
Lambin, Eric F. 1997. Modelling and Monitoring Land-Cover Change Processes in Tropical
Regions. Progress in Physical Geography 21 (3):375-393.
Lambin, E.F., X. Baulies, N. Bocksteil, G. Fischer, T. Krug, R. Leemans, E.R. Moran, R.R.
Rinkfuss, Y. Santo, D. Skole, B.L. Turner II, and C. Vogel. 1999. Land-Use and
Land-Cover Change (LUCC) Implementation Strategy. Bonn, Germany: International
Geosphere-Biosphere Programme and the International Human Dimensions
Programme on Global Environmental Change.
Maitima, J.M. 1998. Changes in Vegetation Structure and Species Diversity in Lambwe
Valley: A Study of Tsetse Control Impacts on Land Use: IFAD, Integrated Approach
to the Assessment of Trypanosomiasis Control Technologies and their Impacts on
Agricultural Production, Human Welfare and Natural Resources in Tsetse-Affected
Areas of Africa.
Mbonile, Milline. 1999. Population Dynamics on the Slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro. Cahiers
de l’IFRA 16 (March-April):18-23.
Misana, Salome, B. 1999. Community Utilization and Management of Forest on Mount
Kilimanjaro. Les Cahiers de l’IFRA 16 (March/April):48-58.
Muchiru, A.N. 1992. The Ecological Impact of Abandoned Maasai Settlements on Savanna
Vegetation and its Herbivores in the Amboseli Ecosystem. MSc. Thesis, University
of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Norton-Griffiths, M., and C. Southey. 1995. The Opportunity Costs of Biodiversity
Conservation in Kenya. Ecological Economics 12:125-139.
Olson, Jennifer M. 1994. Farmer Responses to Land Degradation in Gikongoro, Rwanda.
Ph.D., Geography Department, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Olson, Jennifer M. 1998. A Conceptual Framework of Land Use Change in the East African
Highlands. Paper read at Earth's Changing Land: Joint Global Change and Terrestrial
Ecosystems and Land Use and Land Cover Change Open Science Conference on
Global Change, at Barcelona, Spain.
Ottichilo, W.K., J. de Leeuw, A.K. Skidmore, H.T. Prins, and M. Y. Said. in press. Population
Trends of Large Non-Migratory Wildlife Herbivores and Livestock in Masai Mara
Ecosystem, Kenya: 1977 - 1997. African Journal of Ecology.
Peet, R., and M. Watts. 1996. Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social
Movements. New York: Routledge.
LUCID Working Paper 13 19
Pomel, Simon. 1999. Soils as Indicators of Anthropic Actions on Kilimanjaro. Paper read at
Mount Kilimanjaro: Land Use and Environmental Management, July, at Arusha.
Reid, R.S., and J.E. Ellis. 1995. Livestock-Mediated Tree Regeneration: Impacts of
Pastoralists on Dry Tropical Woodlands. Ecological Applications 5 (4):978-992.
Reid, R.S., C.J. Wilson, R.L. Kruska, and W. Mulatu. 1997. Impacts of Tsetse Control and
Land Use on Vegetation Structure and Tree Species Composition in Southwestern
Ethiopia. Journal of Applied Ecology 34 (3):731-747.
Scherr, Sara J., and Satya Yadav. 1996. Land Degradation in the Developing World:
Implications for Food, Agriculture and the Environment to 2020. Washington, D.C.:
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Skole, D. L., R. T. Walker, W. A. Salas, and C. H. Wood. 2000. Pattern to Process in
Amazônia: Measurement and Modeling of the Inter-Annual Dynamics of
Deforestation and Regrowth. East Lansing: Department of Geography, Michigan
State University.
STAP. 1999. Report of the STAP Expert Group Workshop on Land Degradation (Prepared by
the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel). Washington, D.C.: Global Environment
Facility.
Stelfox, B.J. 1986. Effects of Livestock Enclosures (Bomas) on the Vegetation of the Athi
Plains, Kenya. African Journal of Ecology 24:41-45.
Tengberg, Anna, Jim Ellis-Jones, Romano Kiome, and Michael Stocking. 1998. Applying the
Concept of Agrodiversity to Indigenous Soil and Water Conservation Practices in
Eastern Kenya. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 70:259-272.
Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M. and Gichuki, F. 1994. More People, Less Erosion: Environmental
Recovery in Kenya. Chichester: John Wiley.
Turner, B.L. II, David Skole, Steven Sanderson, Gunther Fischer, Louise Fresco, and Rik
Leemans. 1995. Land-Use and Land-Cover Change Science/Research Plan:
International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme.
Uganda. 1993. The Republic of Uganda National Environment Action Plan (NEAP).
Kampala: NEAP Secretariat, Ministry of Natural Resources.
Uganda. 1999. Framework for the National Action Programme to Combat Desertification and
Drought in Uganda: The Way Forward in Implementing the United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification. Entebbe: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal
Industry and Fisheries.
Walker, R.T. 1997. Land Use Transition and Deforestation in Developing Countries.
Geographical Analysis 19:18-30.
Western, David, and Helen Gichohi. 1993. Segregation Effects and the Impoverishment of
Savannah Parks. The case for ecosystem viability analysis. African Journal of
Ecology 31:268-271.
Wilson, C.J., R.S. Reid, N.L. Stanton, and B.D. Perry. 1997. Ecological Consequences of
Controlling the Tsetse Fly in Southwestern Ethiopia: Effects of Land-Use on Bird
Species Diversity. Conservation Biology 11:435-447.
Young, T.P. 1995. Long-Term Glades in Acacia Bushland and their Edge Effects in Laikipia,
Kenya. Ecological Applications 5:97-108.
Zimmerer, K. S. 2000. The Reworking of Conservation Geographies: Nonequilibrium
Landscapes and Nature-Society Hybrids. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 90 (2):356-369.
LUCID Working Paper 13 20
