Namibia: Forest Fire Management Program (IFFN No. 25)

Impact of the Integrated Forest Fire Management Program on Rural Livelihoods in East Caprivi Region, Namibia

(IFFN No. 25, July 2001, p. 39-57)

1. Introduction

1.1 Background and objective of the study

The Namibia-Finland Forestry Program (NFFP) has been implementing an Integrated Forest Fire Management (IFFM) component in East Caprivi Region since 1996. According to the project document, the main objective was to assist the Directorate of Forestry in “reducing the fires in East Caprivi in order to improve the living standards and the environment of the local people” (GoN/GoF 1996). The immediate goal was to diminish the negative impacts of the indiscriminate us of fire on forest regeneration, agricultural and pastoral lands. Furthermore, with this program Namibia fulfils some of its obligations related to the signing the International Conventions on Climate Change.

A mid-term review took place at the end of 1998. A major recommendation for the Integrated Fire Management Component was to undertake a combined technical and socio-economic review (GoN/GoF 1999). The review was undertaken in July-August 1999 (Trollope and Trollope 1999, Kamminga 1999). In the 1999 socio-economic appraisal the strengths and weaknesses of the IFFM’s implementation strategy (the “model”) were assessed in terms of their effectiveness, socio-economic impact and long-term sustainability. Also more insight was obtained in the existing local knowledge, and fire management and practices.

The first phase of NFFP is coming to an end in April of 2001. In the upcoming second phase, fire management will no longer be a separate program component, but rather an integrated part of the new Community Forestry component. In this context, the IFFM advisor requested a second socio-economic assessment to be done, with an emphasis on quantification of economic benefits. Such information was expected to be particularly useful for generating Regional and National level decision-makers support for fire management activities in the future. The Government’s financial contribution to the IFFM activities during the first phase included financing of labor required for the construction and maintenance of firebreaks.

Unfortunately, the lack of base line information and the complexity of the issues at stake makes a conventional cost-benefit analysis impossible without arriving at broad generalizations and projections that make little sense to anybody who is really familiar with the local context. An illustration is the following. The risk of forest fires in East Caprivi is highest in areas where grazing pressure is low. The costs of protecting such an area with cutlines should be compared with the benefits derived from increased availability of pasture. If lack of water supply is the real constraint for bringing cattle into that area, it might be more cost effective and economically sustainable to construct a couple of boreholes so livestock will keep the grass sward down and reduce the fuel load for free. Allowing communal grazing within the State Forest would be another example of utilizing grazing as an instrument to reduce the fire risk (cf. Trollope and Trollope 1999, Kamminga 1999).

In order to assess the contribution of IFFM to poverty alleviation (“improved living standards” according to the project document) a more qualitative analysis was undertaken, drawing on recent experiences with so called “livelihoods approaches”. Since 1993, various international agencies (CARE International, DFID, Oxfam, UNDP) have developed approaches and methodologies that put people’s livelihood concerns at the center of analysis. Some recent publications that are particularly relevant for the situation in Caprivi are: Ashley and LaFranchi (1997), Ashley (2000), Ashley and Hussein (2000), and Shackleton et al. (2000).

The objective of this brief study was to identify and explore some of the key issues, to assess the contribution of Integrated Forest Fire Management component of the Namibia Finland Forestry Program to the enhancement of local livelihoods and to identify opportunities for improvement. The intended users of the information are (1) Regional and National level decision-makers and (2) the new Community Forestry team that will be responsible for the implementation of forestry activities in Caprivi Region during the upcoming second phase of the program. The study was undertaken by Evelien Kamminga, sociologist with the Namibia-Finland Forestry Program.

1.2. Approach and methodology

A recent publication by Shackleton et al. (2000) “Re-valuing the communal lands of Southern Africa: new understandings of rural livelihoods” provides a useful overview of the livelihoods approach:

The concept of “livelihoods” has moved analysis away from narrow parameters of production, employment and income to a much more holistic view that embraces social and economic dimensions, reduced vulnerability and environmental sustainability, all within the context of building on local strengths and priorities. Households pursue a range of livelihood strategies based on the assets (natural, financial, social, human and physical capital) they have to draw on and the livelihood outcomes they wish to achieve.

The livelihoods of the poor are complex and dynamic, typified by a diverse portfolio of activities that not only enhance household income, but also food security, health, social networks and savings. Most households maintain rural-urban linkages including activities and income sources such as casual and permanent wage employment, remittances, welfare grants, crop production, animal husbandry, wild resource use, social network transfers and other means of income generation through small enterprises. The contribution of different strategies varies and is constantly shifting as household members adapt to changes in the internal and external environment. Gender is integral and inseparable part of rural livelihoods. Men and women have different assets, access to resources and opportunities. New opportunities can increase income for men but increase subsistence responsibilities for women. Diversification can have positive and negative impacts. (Shackleton et al. 2000).

The livelihood impact assessment of the IFFM component focused on how the program activities directly and indirectly affected people’s livelihoods, and the significance of these impacts for poor people. How the impacts are distributed across different categories of people. How people’s livelihood strategies affect their participation in and benefits from IFFM activities. How IFFM contributed to improving poor people’s livelihood security. How people’s assets and capabilities, their activities and strategies have been affected (cf. DFID 2000).

For this assessment, a wide range of key informants and resource people were interviewed. The villages Ibbu, Ikumwe, Isuswa, Lubuta, Muyako, Ngoma were visited. During these visits, interviews took place with traditional authorities, cutline contractors, cut line workers and regular male and female community members, either individually or in small groups. Information on other areas was collected through interviews with people originating from those areas, e.g. the Zambezi Floodplains and Sangwali (Samudono). Also existing secondary sources were consulted and relevant information has been incorporated in this report.

2. Description of the Integrated Forest Fire Management component

2.1 IFFM objectives, strategies and activities

The project was initially called “Pilot Project for Forest Fire Control”. The name was in 1998 modified to “Integrated Forest Fire Management” (IFFM) in order to emphasize that fire is a legitimate land management tool, if carefully timed and used (Goldammer 1999).

One objective of the IFFM component is assisting in National fire policy development and the elaboration of a regional fire management plan for East Caprivi. The main objective according to the project document, however, is “the implementation of an applicable model for integrated forest fire management, implemented by Namibians”. As major results (outputs) were defined:

Directorate of Forestry (DoF) and other agencies and stakeholders implementing applicable IFFM activities in the field with improved efficiency and effectiveness. National guidelines and Forest Fire Policy developed, and
Changed attitudes and behaviour of general public towards the use of fire and burning, and its detrimental effects to the environment in Caprivi. The assumption is that local people are careless with fire and that the costs occurred from wild fire on their resource-base are high.

The defined physical targets (called ‘indicators’ in the Log Frame) for the four-year program period from 5/1997 to 5/2001) are:

50% reduction of annual burning compared with the 1990’s, and
30% of the communities in East Caprivi and 5% of communities in Kavango Region implementing IFFM.

Sources of verification are satellite images, aerial photographs, field inspections, DoF reports, survey reports and Namibia’s Climate Change Report (NFFP 1999). Finnish funding to IFFM mounted to 4.3 million FIM over a three-year period. The contribution of the Government of Namibia is N$ 500,000 annually, with about N$ 200,000 reserved for the financing of community-based labor for fire break production (GoN/GoF 1999).

The implementing team consisted of one expatriate forest fire expert; three laborers, who were basically trained on the job, but do not have any formal education in forestry or related field; and two forest technicians. One of the two forest technicians is responsible for supervision (Fire Chief) and also deputy District Forest Officer. The project also utilized the expertise from the local Caprivian Arts and Cultural Association (CACA): actors for the drama performances and artists for the design of visual aids and materials.

Contrary to the mechanized approach in fire brake construction of the previous South African administration, a labor-based approach was adopted. This labor-intensive approach was thought not only to enhance long-term sustainability, but also to provide employment benefits to the local population. The developed IFFM model is summarized in the following two paragraphs.

2.1.1 Public awareness campaign

IFFM public campaign work has been focussed on the prevention of fire in general and fire accidents in particular. Activities include the placing of billboards along main roads; distribution of posters in various languages; radio programs and regular announcements of ongoing activities and results; designing and distribution of a national fire logo; production of car stickers, badges, key rings etc.; production of comic books and school materials; exhibits on art shows, trade fairs etc.; education program at schools; drama performances by a self-help theatre group. The 1999 review team concluded that the decrease in area annually burned could probably to a large extent be ascribed to the reduction of fire accidents (e.g. dropping of cigarettes; camp fires). IFFM’s awareness raising activities have played an important role in this respect and the implementation strategy has been effective (Kamminga 1999).

2.1.2 Community-level activities

At community-level, financial and technical assistance has been provided for cut line construction and maintenance. The communities involved in the program have benefited as follows:

Cash income;
Better protection against wildfires entering the territory and spreading of fires within the community’s territory, and
Experience the advantages of improved fire control.

In addition educational and mobilization activities were undertaken to promote community members voluntarily involvement in the suppression of fires and their prevention, and also to enhance social organization. Simple techniques for fuel load assessment and prescribed burning techniques were recently added to the list of activities.

The main aim of all activities has been reducing the area burned per annum. Activities generally emphasized the negative aspects of fire and tried to eliminate fire. The 1997 Forest Act was thereby utilized as an enforcement tool. The South African administration made the use of fire illegal and this is still the situation today. The new Draft Forest Bill, however, delegates fire management responsibilities to the Traditional Authorities. This will hopefully lead to local communities becoming empowered and assuming ownership over fire control and management. This is considered crucial for future sustainability of IFFM activities.

2.2 The 1999 Technical and Socio-economic review

The 1999 review team recommended a fundamental change in approach in order for the program to be more effective, socially acceptable and sustainable. Rather than forming a blueprint fire control program, the focus should be on enhancing local capacities in the use of fire as a management tool, while building upon existing knowledge and practices. Earlier the Mid-term review had emphasized the need for promoting a more natural resource management perspective and integrated approach (GoN/GoF 1999).

The major conclusion of the 1999 technical assessment was, that East Caprivi Region is subject to too frequent indiscriminate wild fires that have been ignited for apparently no valid ecological reasons (Trollope and Trollope 1999). It was also observed that the stakeholders involved have rather different interpretation of what a ‘wildfire’ is depending on their orientation and concerns (forestry; biodiversity; wildlife; hunting; crop cultivation; livestock production; thatch grass selling etc.).

In terms of the effects of the current fire regime on the vegetation of East Caprivi and the potential for IFFM, the following ecological zones were distinguished (see Trollope and Trollope 1999):

Kalahari woodlands

The woody vegetation and pastures in the Kalahari woodland areas are most at risk to fire damage. This is particularly the case where the grass sward is dominated by pioneer grass species and the woody vegetation comprises of two distinct layers of firstly short coppicing shrubs and secondly an overstory of scattered large trees. Exclusion of all fire, however, is generally not recommended. The potential impact of IFFM activities in terms of increased productivity of natural resources is estimated to be high in this zone.

A variety of institutional and political factors however needs to be addressed in order to deal with the underlying causes of the current problematic fire regimes. A significant proportion of the Kalahari woodland areas does not have a common property tenure regime: a) Caprivi National Forest (Directorate of Forestry); b) Sachinga quarantine station (parastatal), and c) community-based wildlife conservancies (community-based natural resource management or CBNRM).

Mopane woodlands

These woodlands generally burn less frequently and resources are less affected by fire damage. The main reason is the sparse nature of the grass sward (fuel load). There is therefore less need for burning of moribund and less risk of spreading in case that fire occurs. Thus the frequency of burning in these areas are probably primarily a function of the grazing pressure. Satellite images over the 1996-1999 and the information on grazing pressure globally confirms such relationship. (Mendelsohn and Roberts 1997; Trigg and Le Roux 2000). The potential impact of IFFM activities on the productivity of the natural resource base is probably not very high.

Zambesi Floodplains

They are subject to frequent (annual or biennial) fires, which are started by local people. This is generally acceptable from a livestock management perspective. Abundant moisture is provided by the annual flooding of the flat terrain, resulting in excessively high fuel loads of grass that have limited value for grazing and constitute a serious fire hazard. The potential of IFFM in these grassland areas is therefore relatively low.

Chobe, Linyanti and Kwando Floodplains

Indiscriminate wild fires negatively affect the fodder productivity of these plains. In these areas rainfall is generally lower and flooding has not occurred for a decade of more. As main causes of the wild fires have been identified: fires originating from Botswana and natural spreading of ground fires in the peat. Important benefits can be expected from IFFM.

Thatchgrass producing areas

Areas adjacent to the floodplains are of particular economic importance, since they produce an important new cash crop: thatching material. Wildfires are very destructive. Periodically controlled burns, however, are necessary to achieve optimal productivity. Different user groups (male livestock owners and female thatch grass cutters) might have different fire needs. A wild fire for one category might be a planned fire for the other. The potential benefits from IFFM in these areas are expected to be quite high (Trollope an Trollope 1999).

2.3 Developments since the 1999 review

Almost immediately after the 1999 review, the East Caprivian secessionist movement organized an uprising. This resulted in further political and economic isolation of the Region. This situation has affected functioning and performance of the IFFM component in many ways. The IFFM program has been one of the few foreign assisted programs that did not close shop and the team deserves much appreciation for their commitment. During a certain period, specific areas were not safe to work in; NDF soldiers were accused of starting forest fires intentionally; and so on.

The regional economy has been badly affected. Those to suffer were the commercial markets that currently exist for thatch grass, livestock and baskets. These are all indirectly related to IFFM’s work as will become clear in Chapter 3. In addition, tourism and trophy-hunting almost came to a halt and seriously hampered the take-off of the various community-based conservancies in East-Caprivi.

A major change since the mid-1999 review is that certain posters and billboards carry new messages. Rather than “stop the fire” or “ fire is evil”, messages are now “manage your fire” and “use fire wisely”. Some of the IFFM workers did not seem to have fully understood the implications of this changed terminology. The legal context has also not yet changed. The use of fire is currently still illegal, whatever the billboards say. These are among the reasons why little progress has been made in enhancing people’s capacities to use of fire to increase the productivity of their resources. Limited progress has been made in the implementation of the planned activity of “prescribed burning demonstrations”.

As was noted in 1999, the selection of project sites is rather opportunistic and objectively verifiable and transparent criteria have not been developed (Kamminga 1999). This has not changed. As unemployment rates are still very high and social pressures are being put on decision making IFFM/DoF staff members, who are all from local origin. As a result, cutlines are not always constructed where fire risks are highest or even high.

Human resource capacity still forms a major constraint and an important reason why making the transformation into a more natural resource management oriented program has been so difficult. The fire workers are skilled in the technical aspects of cutline construction and fire suppression, and also are able to make contracts for cutline construction and supervise their implementation. They can also hold simple educational sessions and they know how to use the disc meter for assessing the grass sward (fuel load) and how to do “controlled burns”. The communication techniques they utilize, however, are poorly developed. They are all one-way and focussed on transfer of technology and telling people what to do. They lack social and analytical skills, and proper attitude to be able to generate a community- based discussion on what people’s concerns are and how the issue of fire possibly fits in. Facilitating a process in which various user groups discuss and negotiate their fire needs is beyond comprehension. Essentially they are hands-on fire technicians with very little formal education. The IFFM component as a whole lacks experience and vision in community development and participatory approaches.

3. IFFM and local livelihoods

3.1 Introduction

Satellite imaging has shown a significant reduction in the incidence of fire since the initiation of IFFM in 1996 (Trigg 1998, GoN/GoF 1999). The project’s target is “50% reduction in annual burning compared with the 1990s”. IFFM has no system in place for monitoring of vegetation changes on the ground (Trollope and Trollope 1999).

The positive contribution of IFFM in reducing the area burned is particularly ascribed to:

A diminishing number of fire accidents due to successful campaigning, and
Spreading of fire is reduced by the construction of cutlines

What these figures mean for the livelihoods for local people will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

3.2 Vulnerability context

Life in East Caprivi is full of uncertainties. Community members interviewed considered damage from wild fires as one of the many risk factors that affect their lives. Other factors beyond their control are unreliable rainfall; drought; attacks from wildlife on crops and livestock; too much or too little flooding; crop pests; animal diseases; fluctuation of meat prices; loss of household members (labour) to HIV/AIDS; political unrest and possibly landmines etc. At the moment of this study, most of East Caprivi suffered from late rains and people expected it to become a drought year. This would imply crop failure, poor pastures, limited water supply and so on. Also many communities visited suffered from problem animals: elephants attacking maize plants, and lions and hyenas their livestock.

In 2.2 an overview was given of how the potential negative and positive effects of fire differ per ecological zone. The risk of wild fires within each zone is strongly related to the prevailing land use system and tenure regime. Traditional extensive systems have built-in strategies to cope with risks such as wild fire and patchy rainfall. Mobility (moving livestock) is one of them (cf. Scoones 1996). Establishing crop fields in different zones is another one. Both strategies are applied in East Caprivi (see 3.3.2.1 and 3.3.2.1). Generally, when land-use systems become more ‘intensive’ (in terms of productivity per ha and/or economic value of individual resources) investing in reducing risk levels becomes economically more justified. Fortunately, when grazing pressure increases the risk of wildfires are automatically reduced as well (decreased fuel load).

Another contextual vulnerability factor is the HIV/AIDS epidemic that has severely hit the Region. Caprivi has one of the highest HIV/AIDS infection rates in the country (UNDP 1998, Webb and Simon 1995). Although still not openly discussed, people indicated that the effects are felt in the availability of (healthy) labor for crop cultivation. It is in this context that potential costs and benefits of fire control should be placed.

3 Direct and indirect effects of IFFM activities

The IFFM strategy attempts to improve people’s livelihoods through:

The provision of employment in cutline construction and maintenance,
The protection of the resource base against “wild fires” through subsidizing cut lines[1], and
Promotion of enhanced integrated fire management by communities.

The third set of activities includes the provision of knowledge, skills and motivation in order for community members to better control and use fire (e.g. prescribed burning) and enhanced social organization and local regulation to ensure fire control.

Rural households in East Caprivi rely on a combination of economic activities and sources of subsistence and income:

Crop production
Livestock production
Harvesting, processing and/or selling of wood products
Regular wages and pensions
Wildlife and tourism

East Caprivi has a settlement pattern, whereby houses are concentrated together and crop fields are located away from the village on the flood plane and/or higher grounds. Livestock is kept in different areas during the year. A survey among Salambala Conservancy member-communities showed that most villages were utilizing at least 10 different grazing areas during a single year (Mosimane 1996). Wildlife and tourism are expected to be a future source of income for Conservancy members. So far, however, earnings have been disappointing, mainly due to the political instability of the previous two years.

3.3.1 Employment in cutline construction and maintenance

A major observation of the 1999 review team was that community members consider cutline work as the most important benefit from IFFM and this was again confirmed during this second study. This is understandable because cut line work produces cash income in a context where paid work is extremely hard to find.

The work is done during a period of about six months (May to October) and involves usually about 10 people per community. The amount earned depends on the number of kilometers finished by the group. There is a large variation in earnings per person, per community and per year. IFFM has so far worked in 68 communities. Some communities participated every year, others stopped for one or more years and continued again; others stopped after one or more years. The decision to discontinue comes sometimes from the side of the community (contractor, the village chief [induna]or workers), sometimes from the side of IFFM. Most common reasons are arguments between workers and the local contractor; dissatisfaction about pay and toughness of the work; arguments among the workers; poor relationship with IFFM staff.

The average pay is about N$ 200 per month, which is equivalent to the amount paid in ongoing food-for-work schemes in the region. The assumption of these food-for-work programmes and also the IFFM model is that part of the work is done on a voluntary basis (= the communities’s contribution). Additional incentives are provided to the cutline workers in the form of boots and protective clothing (uniforms) . The pay is good compared to what a Zambian herdsboy earns (about N$100), but the cutline workers do not like this comparison. Many of them are young school leavers, who in the past would have the task of cattle herding but now refuse to do this work. Complaints about the level of pay were widespread. In Lubate community for example, the workers referred to the much better pay of the Conservancy game guards (N$ 750). This community is a member of the Mashe Conservancy. The village chief (induna) argued that goal of the cutline work is to conserve the environment (“to protect the lizards and even the trees”) and therefore the responsibility of the government (or institution on its behalf).

There is a fundamental contradiction in perspectives between the IFFM component and the local people. In the IFFM model, the work is considered as partially voluntary (= the community’s contribution) and the pay is therefore relatively low. From the perspective of the cutline workers, the work is just a job and they want to get proper wages. This observation has important implications for the future social and economic sustainability of the firebreaks.

In the livelihoods approach, emphasis is not so much put on the amount earned (quantified benefit), but rather on the strategic importance of the activity:

Advantageous is that cut line work takes place within the village environment and outside the rainy season (March-October). People can remain in the village and the work does not compete with agricultural tasks. It could compete with herding because during the same period livestock is moved over long distances, e.g. from the Zambesi plain to the Chivulamunda[2] woodlands (between February and July), but increasingly herding is done by Zambian boys anyway. February and March are the months that men cut poles to repair their houses. In July – August thatch grass is harvested. This is traditionally women’s work, but since commercialization has increased, also men have become involved. The conclusion is that cutline work provides an opportunity for households to diversify their sources of income.
Depending on the options and motivations of the individual cutline worker, earnings are utilized for household needs or personal expenses. People interviewed said that women and married men would generally use the money to buy food, pay for school fees etc. while youngsters would use the money more often for non-basic needs. This can explain why contractors said that married men and women are generally more hardworking and committed to the work than youngsters. Recruited youngsters would also not necessarily come from the poorest households, while women and married men usually do.
In terms of gender, fewer women are working on cutlines than men. Village headmen usually make the selection. Several of the headmen expressed their concern about the jobless youngsters who are just hanging around. They wish to put them to work and hope that they learn some discipline. In addition, poor women said that they were not in a position to “waste their time” and wait for the pay (see next point). They might be better off making baskets. Another problem is that much of the work is done far out in the bush, which is not considered safe for women. Staying overnight is also common. In Muyako village, the contractor explained that married men were not willing to participate because they did not want to leave their wife alone during the night. The best solution seems that women would be allowed to work on cutlines closest to the village, while men do the work further away from home. No examples of such scenario were encountered.
Disadvantageous is that payments have been irregular in terms of amount and unreliable in terms of timing. Often one payment is done at the end of the season or several months later. Apparently, the cause of this problem is not with IFFM but with the Directorate of Forestry in Windhoek. This financial situation has frustrated both community members and IFFM staff, and has been negative for developing a relationship of trust. The livelihood implication is that cash does not become available in smaller amounts and not on a regular basis. This reduces the potential that the earnings contribute to food security and poverty alleviation in general. The conclusion is that the financial resources allocated by the Government cut line work are not optimally utilized and that the poorest sections of the rural population do not benefit as much as they could when payment was better organized (cf. Kamminga 1999).

3.3.2 Protection against wild fires

In the IFFM model, cutlines are an instrument to prevent wild fires and thus protect the natural resource base of local people. In the following paragraphs, the direct and indirect effects on people’s livelihood activities and strategies will be discussed.

3.3.2.1 Crop fields and crop production

Crop cultivation is the cornerstone of the household economy of the Mafwe and Subiya people. Staple crops are maize, millet and sorghum. Some households earn cash with selling a surplus, but probably more common is that people sell because they need the money or exchange produce for other essentials. They then have to buy food later on in the year. According to Ashley and LeFranchi, the variability in harvest between households and between years is striking, but probably most households in most years cannot produce the cereals they need for the whole year. In livelihood terms, crop production provides:

subsistence food products
limited cash income
means to barter or for reciprocal exchange
rights to avail’ (maintain access rights to communal grazing)
savings (storage of staple grains for future consumption or sale (Ashley and LeFranchi 1997).

The main inputs are labour (particularly women’s labour) and draught power for plowing. Farmers’ strategy is “low-input low-output”. The availability of labour is the most critical factor within the farming system. Labour is becoming increasingly scarce due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. People in several communities said that they noticed that households produced less due to losses in the family.

Many people interviewed initially said that their crops suffer from wild fires in order to underline the importance of further project support for cutline work. From more probing and from interviews with various resource people it must be concluded that the risk of wild fires is usually not very high. In certain areas people could not remember that crops ever burned, while in other areas it happened so rarely, that the problem was really minor compared to all the other risks.

How complex the issue is can be illustrated by the following example. In Labuta, a village south of Kongola in the Kalahari Woodlands zone, fires sometimes come through and cause damage to standing crops. People reported that this had indeed happened in 2000. This village is a large maize producer and maize is an important source of income. The loss of crops results in a loss of means of subsistence plus income. It also implies a waste of women’s labour in a period in which labour is getting scarcer. Some families might have also invested money in hiring workers. Fortunately however, people in this area usually have several fields distributed over a larger area. The result is that they spread the risk of patchy rainfall, pests and also fire. When wild fires strike they usually do not loose all their harvest at once. Also in other communities visited, people used to have several fields, normally in different ecological zones, but also possibly related to inheritance of land. It can be assumed that when crop fields catch fire, the most vulnerable households will suffer most because they have only a small area cultivated to satisfy (part of) their subsistence needs. They do not have the option to participate in the risk spreading strategy.

The Regional Rural Development Planner is responsible for food relief in the Region. He said that there are no cases of food relief being provided to people who lost their crops to fire, only to people who lost their homes and that is usually in (peri) urban areas. When asked if people could apply for assistance for crop loss his answer was vague.

Since cropfields are usually individually owned (ancestral rights) and land use is relatively intensive (productivity per ha) one can assume that the incentives to protect ones own crop field against fire are stronger than for any other use. Cutline subsidy should therefore only be provided in communities where repeated crop loss occurs due to indiscriminate fires from the outsided (e.g. cross boundary; peat fires) Indirect measures to cope with the effects of wild fires should also be looked at: addressing security of tenure; techniques that reduce labor inputs (e.g. access to draught animals; techniques that increase crop productivity; and system for food relief for particularly vulnerable households that loose their crops and have no other means to bridge the loss.

3.3.2.2 Pasture and livestock production

For the Subiya and Mafwe people, livestock keeping is extremely important, not necessarily for food and cash, but for their value for ploughing, transport, building up reserves (to cope with drought; disease etc.). Livestock also has numerous social and cultural functions. Households without livestock have lower crop production, greater dependence on off-farm cash income and generally greater economic insecurity. Negative impacts resulting from fire are one of the risk factors for livestock owners (Ashley and LaFranchi 1997).

Distribution of livestock is increasingly unequal. Probably, most communities have households that do not own any cattle and households with over 200 heads of cattle (cf. Mosimane 1996). There are traditional social mechanisms to distribute the benefits to some extent. The mafisa system for example gives the herdsboy the right to keep some of the calves. This system is eroding for various reasons.

Caprivi’s traditional grazing systems are not well documented. They are complex and dynamic with varying patterns of shifting, usually between the flood plains (winter grazing) and the Mopane and Kalahari woodland areas (summer grazing). It seems that people shift their animals between particular sub-khutas (silalo), one in the flood zone and one on the higher grounds. A silalo consists of a small number of villages. Each silalo has a number of different grazing areas or ‘forests’. These areas have specific names and are usually called after the waterpan in the middle. The critical factor according to resource people and villagers interviewed is the availability of drinking water for the animals. Although stocking rates are believed to be increasing, the current system is still more water than fodder restricted.

When discussing the effects of fire on pasture villagers y usually responded that some fires are good and some are bad. They all had experienced damage of wildfires on pastures. People were generally convinced that cutlines are an effective instrument for protecting pastures against external fires and help to better control (prevent spreading of) fire when burns are applied. Considering the location of most cutlines in relation to the village, protection against fire means secured availability of fodder within close distance to the village. Water sources are generally available here.
The risk of indiscriminate wild fire varies highly from one community to another. According to Trollope and Trollope (1999), wild fires are particularly negative for the fodder productivity of the the Chobe, Linyanti and Kwando Floodplains. In these areas rainfall is relatively low and flooding has not occurred for a decade or more. These fires often originate from Botswana or result from ground fires in the peat and spread naturally. Cut lines in these areas are relatively effective.
Some of the IFFM cutlines have been constructed in places with apparently little or no danger of fire. This observation was made by both community members and key informants. It is not uncommon that cutlines are primarily built to generate income and are utilized as an instrument to demarcate the village territory and function as roads. Targeting of project activities and selection of sites does still not take place according to objectively verifiable and transparent criteria (cf. Kamminga 1999). Since paid work is hard to find, social pressures on IFFM/DoF staff who are responsible for making the decisions on the allocation of funds are significant. As a result, firebreaks are not always sited where most effective from a foresters’ point of view. They might, however, serve other local developmental goals.
The real impact of IFFM cutlines on livestock production depends primarily on the alternative grazing opportunities. This is a function of the combined water supply and fodder situation in nearby grazing areas. Natural water sources are freely accessible for everybody, but boreholes sometimes are privatized. In general, poor water supply is a major development problem in Caprivi and the largest concern in almost all communities visited (cf. UNDP 1998). Specific areas mentioned in this context were Kabe, Malindi, Lusu and Sangwali. In terms of access rights (tenure), people can shift their animals freely within their own sub-khuta (silalo), but need to ask permission to enter another silalo. The headman (induna silalo) will generally provide permission without asking payment. Cultural norms and values support the sharing of resources in crisis situations (Kamminga 2000).
Access to alternative grazing, is in some parts of Caprivi, restricted due to large areas being converted into Conservancies and Parks. Certain areas lost access to alternative grazing because of the establishment of protected areas. Of special note is that “emergency” grazing and livestock watering are not allowed in any of these areas. Such a measure could increase local goodwill towards nature protection. People further explained that certain grazing areas have become less popular due to danger of wild life. Compensation for wildlife damage does not exist either. People in DRM, IRDNC and Salambala Management were opposed to these ideas of reducing the negative effects of wildlife on people’s livelihoods.
In most communities people said that alternative grazing opportunities are usually sufficient to cope with the effects of wild fires. The combination of “drought” (= combination of lack of water and lack of fodder) and fires is the most disastrous. In those situations animal losses occasionally occur. Some induna silalo announce a ban on the use of fire under such circumstances (Harrison 1995).
People were aware that the risk of wild fires is related to grazing pressure. The shifting of animals from the Zambesi plain helps to reduce the fire risk in the upper woodlands. This year animals might not be allowed to travel due to an animal disease that was discovered on the Zambesi floodplains. Reduced grazing pressure could increase the risk of wildfire in those upper woodlands.an have consequences for the risk of fire in other areas.
People also noticed a trend of mobility (moving of cattle) becoming a less important factor in the livestock management system. More information is needed on this issue. Permanent settlement in the woodland areas away from the plains is increasing (e.g. along the Ngoma road). Increasingly, livestock is kept in these areas on a permanent basis. Some people also mentioned the issue of local boys not being interested in herding anymore and the hiring of Zambian herdsboys. Trusting these boys to the extent that they can take the animals over long distances is a problem. In fact, these boys are generally considered as “careless” and being a main cause of fire accidents. As was mentioned before, in the traditional mafisa system the herdsboy (e.g. son, nephew or other local boy) has a vested interest.
Fire is widely utilized as a tool for managing pastures, especially in the floodplain areas. It is traditionally the responsibility of the traditional leaders to announce the timing and the area that needs to be burned. People can then prepare themselves and take their animals to another area. It seems however, that there strong differences in management style and level of authority among the individual leaders. Although people have in principle access to all grazing within their own silalo, it is likely that decisions on burning are taken by the nearest by village induna. Probably, pastures nearby a village are coming more directly under the jurisdiction of that particular induna (see also Kamminga 2000).
Households are affected differently by the protection of nearby grazing areas against wild fire. The poorest households and generally women do not own livestock. The large livestock owners (say over 200 head) will benefit. These men are also likely to have the means to cope with the consequences of wild fires. They can effort to finance shifting of their animals and cover associated costs. The households with a small number of animals probably benefit most, as they do no not have to encounter additional costs of shifting and face less risk loosing their savings and draught animals.
In summary, the real damage of wildfires on livestock production and therefore the effects of cutlines (or any other form of protection) depend on many situational factors. These factors can be the distance to alternative grazing; water supply; access rights to water and grazing; level of mobility in the existing livestock management system; the role of the traditional leadership; the ability of individual households to cope with the additional costs of shifting animals etc. Clearly from the livelihood perspective, fire should not be addressed in an isolated manner, but as an integrated part of the whole land-use system. When mobility in the livestock system is decreasing the incentives for more intensive fire management are likely to increase.

3.3.2.3 Harvesting of non-wood products

While livestock is considered a male domain, wild resources are generally more a female domain. The products are particularly important for the poorest categories of women and form an security buffer (cf. Ashley and LaFranci 1997, Mosmane 1996). Several categories of non-wood products can be distinguished.

Veld products

Women and children collect most veldfruits. Most commonly collected are the fruits from the Ximenia americana (blue sourplum); mushrooms; bark of the Berchemia discolor (birdplum) used to dye palm leaves for basketry), various green leafed vegetables, waterlilies and herbs. These products are essential for subsistence (food; nutrition; health), and provide also a limited – but often very important – source of cash income and means for local barter. Strategic advantages are that the products are relatively drought resistant and become available at different times during the year. The variety of products utilized by the Subiya and Mafwe people in East Caprivi is rather limited. The uses of veld products are not very varied, processing methods and marketing not well developed compared to for example the Ovambo Regions. This might be related to their background as fishermen. The Khoi people in West Caprivi on the other hand are using a larger variety of bush products (cf. Ashley and LaFranci 1997, Mosmane 1996).

A major constraint for obtaining more benefits, is the lack of a market outlet. The creation of nature conservation areas and the associated danger of wild animals have reduced bush products in certain areas. The effects of bush fires are difficult to assess, because they have to do with the time that women spent on harvesting, the opportunity costs of that time, the use value of the products, opportunities to sell and so on.

When discussing particular products, people said that blue sour plum and bird plum are not sensitive to wild fires. Mushrooms and green leafed vegetables generally grow during the wet season when there is no fire danger. Some herbs need seasonal fires, but they can also suffer from wild fires. The potential damage depends on the availability of alternative resources and marketing opportunities. The further away the more the demands on women’s time and the lower the return on their labour.

Thatch grass and reeds

Reeds and thatch grasses are traditional building materials in East Caprivi. They are usually harvested by women for their own use, for barter/exchange or for local sale. Recently, the commercial market for thatch grass has improved and also men are now taking part. The market was very good until the security situation deteriorated in 1999. During 2000 the outside market virtually collapsed.

Thatch grass grows in areas adjacent to the floodplains. Wildfires are very destructive, but periodic burns are necessary to achieve optimal productivity (Trollope and Trollope 1999). The two communities that requested assistance with prescribed burning, Ibbu and Isuswe, both wanted to burn thatch grass areas that had not been burned in several years.

Thatch grass resources are considered still plentiful when utilized for subsistence use, but increasing commercial exploitation in certain areas has began to put putting pressure on the resources. There are signs of emerging conflicts between user groups (between neighbouring communities or between women who cut thatch grass and men grazing their livestock in the same area) due to competition. As was explained, people can traditionally go freely to areas within and outside their own silalo to cut thatch grass for their own use, but they have to follow the rules: the nearest by induna announces the moment when cutting can start (somewhere in June or July). The main rule is that the grass must have seeded before cutting can start. This is an illustration of the existing local knowledge and management practices.

With increasing demand and the market value of thatch grass growing, the need to better define access-rights and use conditions is growing as well. When the benefits are assured people will be more likely to invest in the costs of fire management. The benefits from such an investment however, must accrue to those people who carry the costs. Tenure is probably the key issue to be addressed in order to create incentives for fire management.

Palm leaves

The Hyphaene petersana or fan palm is utilized for the production of basketry. This is one of the few income generation options for women. The work can be well combined with other chores. Recently, marketing opportunities have in certain areas improved due to NGO assistance. In some localities in East Caprivi raw material supply problems were already observed in 1994 (Terry et al. 1994). In certain areas elephants cause much damage. Apparently fires are not common in the palm producing areas (Harrison 1995). IFFM has not been working in these areas.

3.3.2.4 Harvesting of wood-products

At the regional level, the short term and long term availability of wood resources for local people is affected by factors such as land clearing for agriculture, excision of forest use areas (National Forest; Conservancy core areas) and also fires. Due to less flooding in recent years Combretum imberbe is expanding – or encroaching depending on your perspective – into the mulapo, seasonally flooded areas. These areas are usually burnt annually to enhance grazing. These burns destroy regeneration or make it grow back into multi-stemmed shrubs (idem) (cf. Harris 1995). IFFM has not been monitoring the effects of fire on vegetation and the effects of the project activities (Trollope and Trollope 1999).

At the local level, trees play an essential role in livelihoods, especially of those people living in or nearby wooded areas. The direct benefits from the collection of firewood and timber, and also from non-wood forest products are:

subsistence needs (energy; construction material, food, medicines, raw materials);
cash earnings (to buy food, clothes; pay for school fees; medicines; cuca shop etc.); and
reciprocal exchange and barter (firewood and poles for food).

Some of the indirect effects and strategic aspects are:

risk reduction/ drought coping/ food security (source of income and food in times of hardship)
off-season work (not competition with agricultural work)
activities have low entry costs (no capital needed to start) (cf. Ashley and LeFranchi 1997).

More details are given in the Salambala report (see Kamminga 2000).

Generally, these activities have a low level of commercialization due to lack of market opportunities. Most sales (or barter) take place within the own community or with communities in the flood plain areas. These relationships have usually also an important social dimension.

Furthermore, the majority of people interviewed did not perceive any problems in the availability of firewood or construction wood, or competition from outsiders (see Kamminga 1999, 2000). To illustrate the low pressure on the resources, the largest town, Katima Mulilo obtains its wood products from within a zone of 5 kilometres (firewood) and 20 kilometres (Mubiza) from town.

It is logical under these circumstances that people showed little concern about fire damage on trees. No difference was found between people spoken to in the Mopane Woodland zone and the Kalahari Woodland zone where wild fires would be more harmful from an ecological point of view (cf. Trollope and Trollope 1999). A survey by the Caprivian Arts and Crafts Centre in 1995 also arrived at the conclusion that most people were not concerned about the availability of wood resources and the effect of wild fires (Harrison 1995). Exceptions were the woodcarvers. They were worried about the effects of repeated fires on the regeneration and growth of their most favourite species, Combretum imberbe and Pterocarpus angolensis. These species are found in the Kalahari Woodland zones and are protected by law. The woodcarvers felt that future supply of raw materials is not assured under the current circumstances of uncontrolled utilization and fires.

Below two illustrations are given, one from the Kalahari Woodland Zone and one from the Mopane woodland zone:

Lebutu village is located south of Kongola in the Kalahari woodland zone. Cutline work started in 2000. The ten cut line workers are married and unmarried men of different age and educational levels. The workers explained that they only constructed 8.5 kilometres of cutline between May and July of 2000 out of dissatisfaction with the level of pay, the delay of the payment and the functioning of the contractor. They each received a single payment of N$ 100 in December of that year. From a discussion with the cutline workers and the local authorities it became clear that forest fires are not considered a serious problem, not for the cropland, not for the pastures and not for the trees. In their opinion fire control is primarily in the interest of the Government and conservation agencies. They used this as an argument why they deserve proper pay and working conditions. The feeling of “ownership in this case was very low. The dynamics in this situation are influenced by the following factors: 1) the village is member of the Mashi Conservancy and the supporting NGO (WWF/LIFE) is referred to as the “the company” (WWF/LIFE) and 2) the village is the home area of one of the IFFM team members. This seems to make contract negotiation and supervision even more difficult.
Ibbu village has been with the program since the beginning in 1996. The headman is very concerned about the problem of unemployed youngsters. He is also concerned about the behaviour of the Zambian herdsboys, who show disrespectful behaviour and also are careless with fire. Since 1996, several cutlines were built and maintained on the floodplain area. In 2000, on request of the headman new cutlines were constructed on the northern side of the community in the Mopane woodland zone. The question about the purpose of the cutlines was answered in different ways. According to the headman they protect the village from fires coming in from the Salambala core area. According to another community member who is the vice-chairman of Salambala Conservancy, these cutlines protect the Salambala core area from fires coming from the village. Foresters said that the danger of fire within the Mopane woodland zone is very small, which conforms to Trollope’s observation.

These examples illustrate that rural communities and the IFFM component have different agendas when it comes to fire, cutlines and the protection of trees. From the livelihood point of view, this means that the program does not respond well to the priorities of the local people.

3.3.3 Enhanced fire management by rural communities

In the IFFM model, improving controlled and prescribed burning is the final stage. The cutlines are expected to demonstrate to local people that fire control has advantages and can be done. People might choose to maintain the existing cutlines, make new ones or they might choose another technology or even indirect strategy (e.g. manipulating the fuel load through grazing pressure). In other words, the aim is to provide local people with the knowledge, skills and motivation needed to fully control and apply fire, both at the individual level and the community level. This means promotion of self-help and empowerment.

As yet, strategies, technologies and activities to reach this intervention stage have not yet been well elaborated. So far few communities have expressed interest in receiving a demonstration in the safe application of prescribed burning.

Two communities, Isuswe and Ibbu, have asked permission and assistance to burn their thatch grass areas. In the first community it was a women-group, in the second the induna who contacted IFFM. In both cases, traditional burns had been postponed in order to comply with the IFFM requirements. After the request, IFFM financed the construction of cut lines around the two thatch grass areas and then set the grass inside on fire. In the literature reference is made how external prohibitions on the setting of bush fire can undermine local people’s early-burning strategies, risking greater fire damage by late fires (Leach and Mearns 1996).

In terms of training and preparation, the IFFM team took a specialized course in South Africa on how to assess the grass-sward and how to apply controlled burning. The social aspects of fire management, however, have not received any attention at all. Do different user groups within an area (e.g. small livestock owners; large livestock owners; thatch grass cutters; herb collectors; cultivators etc.) have different fire needs? What are the conflicts in interest and differences in perspectives and how can they be addressed? How are decisions on burning arrived at? What is the role of the traditional leaders in fire management? Clearly, the use of fire cannot be isolated from broader resource use and management issues

3.4 Sustainability aspects

In the previous paragraphs the direct and indirect effects of IFFM on people’s livelihoods were discussed. How sustainable are these effects?

Economic sustainability

IFFM activities have a positive effect on the productivity of the natural resource base, on people’s livelihood security and on opportunities for market participation (cf. Shackleton et al. 2000). The strategy, however, heavily relies on one instrument, subsidization of cutline construction.

The cut line technology is relatively labour intensive. The benefits of making and maintaining cut lines in grazing areas that are characterized by extensive land use, a common property use regime and low level commercialization are low compared to the costs. It is unlikely that communities will construct cutlines on their own initiative, even if there would be strong social cohesion. A choice of alternative, lower-cost technologies has not been offered by IFFM. The chance that cutlines will be maintained without external financial support is slim.

The recent increase in market value of thatch grass (commercialization) has resulted in competition and conflict between user groups from different communities, since access rights are not well defined. Several IFFM communities have placed their firebreaks in a manner that they protect their thatch grass resources and also demarcate them from the neighbouring communities. Cutlines can be utilized as an instrument to strengthen control over resources.

Social sustainability

There is generally a low level of “ownership”. Fire was officially taken out of the hands of the Traditional Authorities during the South African administration. Nature conservation is considered the responsibility of the Government. Caprivians have been living with the risk of fire all their lives. Putting emphasis on fire reduction rather than fire management has also perpetuated the idea that the Government is in charge. The provision of uniforms and boots provides short-term incentives, but creates the impression that cut line work is special work that requires a special outfit. IFFM has also been keeping full control over the tools by taking them back from each community after every season.

Cutline construction is perceived as paid work not as self-help. The activities at community level usually start with the selection of a construction contractor, the drawing up of a contract to build a certain number of kilometres and the recruitment of workers. The program is perceived as an (improved) ‘food for work’ program. In addition, as one of the traditional leaders said: “If you start paying you can’t stop and expect the people to do the work for free”.

The IFFM approach has shown limited appreciation for existing fire management systems and practices. They have never been documented. The role of the traditional leaders is generally undervalued. The IFFM workers act like educators and fire control officers, and they are not afraid of using the law as a stick. Being in charge of the cutline contracts and payments also puts them in a powerful position. The relationship between the IFFM team and community members lacks in many cases mutual trust and understanding. There is no feeling of partnership towards the fire management objectives.

To which extent the program has had a long lasting development impact will have to be assessed at a later stage. Another socio-economic review is foreseen during the second phase of the Namibia Finland Forestry Program, where these issues could be assessed.

3.5 Conclusions

As was mentioned in 1.1, the overall objective of the IFFM component is to reduce the fires in East Caprivi in order to improve the living standards and the environment of the local people. The two main implementation strategies were provision of temporary employment through subsidized cut line work, and protecting people’s subsistence base and income earning opportunities by reducing the incidence of “wild” fires. Later a third strategy was added, increasing the productivity of the natural resource base by introducing enhanced techniques for the application of fire as a management tool.

The first two strategies aim at respectively “livelihood provisioning” and “livelihood protection”. They are applied from a kind of emergency and relief perspective. The third strategy aims more at “livelihood promotion” and has a longer-term development perspective, including elements of empowerment and participation. (Carney et al. 1999).

IFFM has put much emphasis on the first two strategies, which is consistent with the view that fires in East Caprivi are not only a local, but also a Regional, National and even global disaster. Furthermore, the socio-economic situation in East Caprivi is considered to be a crisis as well, particularly the high levels of unemployment among the youth and the effects of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Implementing the third strategy requires a different perspective and also different skills on the part of the implementers. The contribution to the enhancement of local livelihoods would have been larger when fire would have been addressed in a more integrated manner and cutlines would have been offered as one of the options from a whole package of techniques and strategies.

The issue of different costs and benefits of fire management according to tenure zones and (intensity of) land use has not been addressed at all. It is likely that areas or resources under a relatively extensive land-use system and a common property (e.g. silalo) tenure regime will benefit more from a holistic strategy aiming at reducing the possible impact of wildfire (e.g. by influencing grazing pressure; water supply). Areas or resources under more intensive use (e.g. thatch grass; pastures nearby village centre) on the other hand might benefit more from strategies towards the protection and more optimal use of fire (e.g. controlled prescribed burning).

From a livelihoods perspective, there is a need to move away from a blueprint approach focussed on forest fire prevention towards a more people-centred and broader resource management perspective. Only then will both the people and the forest benefit in an optimal and socially and economically sustainable manner. Hopefully the integration of the IFFM component within the new Community Forestry component will offer new opportunities in this respect.

Recommendations

4.1 Employment creation

Providing paid work in an area with high levels of unemployment, an economy that suffers from isolation due to political instability and geography, and one of the highest levels of HIV/AIDS infection in the country is a very effective way to contribute to poverty alleviation. This should be considered an objective in itself.
There must be a clear understanding and agreement between all actors concerning the character of the work. Is it (partially) community-based and thus voluntary or is it pure employment. If such clarity does not exist, disputes about wages will never end.
All communities need employment and social pressure on local IFFM staff is high. Nevertheless, cutlines should only be constructed in communities where a high risk of wild fires exists. Allocation of resources should therefore take place according to a priority plan and objectively verifiable and transparent criteria. Strong supervision is necessary (cf. Kamminga 1999).
To optimize the employment impacts recruitment procedures should favor the poorest categories of people, in particular female heads of households. Women should be allowed to work on cutlines closest to the village, while men can do the work further away in the bush.
Recruitment of female heads of households and married men should be encouraged, not only because they are usually more reliable and better workers, but also because there is better chance that earned money is utilized for the essential needs of the poorest household.
Recruitment of young male school leavers for subsidized cutline work has the advantage of providing work to otherwise idle boys and also giving them some work experience, discipline, technical skills etc. Emphasis must be put on recruiting youngsters from the resource-poorest households.
Cutline work is and should be timed outside the agricultural season in order to avoid competition with other household labour demands.
More frequent and timely payment of cutline work is crucial for optimizing benefits for the poorest categories of people. Especially poor women can not afford wasting their time on work that does not produce an immediate or at least regular income.

4.2 Community forest management and fire

IFFM has contributed to the enhancement of the productivity of the natural resource base and overall household security through a reduction of the risk of wild fires. These effects are primarily achieved through the subsidized construction (and maintenance) of cutlines. It is too early to assess the long-term development effects in terms of community members’ ability and willingness to better control and apply fire as a management tool. The expectations, however, should not be too high. Increasingly sustainable impact on livelihoods can be derived from a strategy in which the issue of fire is incorporated in a broader land-use management or community forestry program.

When fire management is integrated within Community Forestry, there will hopefully be more opportunities for an approach whereby people’s concerns, priorities and existing knowledge and practices are taken as a point of departure. The sub-khuta (silalo) seems an appropriate institutional entry point for community forest management, whereby fire management issues can be addressed as well. In the Salambala report more detail is provided on the potential of the silalo as a planning and management unit (Kamminga 2000).

A strategy that aims at mitigating the negative effects of wild fires on people’s livelihoods should probably include measures to secure access to alternative grazing (e.g. removing water supply constraints) (alternative options) and to multiple crop fields in different fire risk zones (strategy: spreading of risk).

Since crop fields are usually individually owned (ancestral rights) one can assume that the incentives to protect ones own crop field against fire are stronger than for the other land uses (grazing; harvesting of wood and non-wood products). Subsidy for protection of crop fields should only be provided in communities where repeated crop loss occurs due to indiscriminate fires that originate in Botswana or sub-surface fires. In other areas, indirect measures to cope with the effects of wild fires should be identified. Examples are addressing security of tenure; techniques that reduce labor inputs (e.g. access to drought animals; techniques that increase crop productivity; and system for food relief for particularly vulnerable households that loose their crops and have no other means to bridge the loss.

The actual costs of wildfires for livestock production and therefore the potential benefits of cutlines (or any other form of protection) depend on many situational factors. These can be the distance to alternative grazing; water supply; access rights to water and grazing; level of mobility in the existing livestock management system; the role of the traditional leadership; and the ability of individual households to cope with the additional costs. From the livelihood perspective, fire should not be addressed in an isolated manner but as an integrated part of the whole land-use system.

With increasing demand and the market value of thatch grass growing, the need to better define access-rights and use conditions is growing as well. When the benefits are assured people will be more likely to invest in the costs of fire management. The benefits of such an investment, however, must accrue to those people who carry the costs. Tenure is probably the key issue to be recognized in order to create incentives for fire management.

The IFFM model has been largely based on the assumptions that local people are careless with fire and that people’s livelihoods are very negatively affected by wild fire. In order to successfully and sustainably address the fire problem in East Caprivi, the costs and benefits of fire management in different tenure zones and for different land uses, need to be better addressed in their specific context. The approach should be community-driven and problem oriented. It can be expected that areas or resources under a relatively “extensive” land-use system and a common property (silalo)tenure regime benefit more from a holistic strategy aiming at reducing the possible impact of wild fire (e.g. by influencing grazing pressure; water supply). Areas or resources under more intensive use (e.g. thatch grass; pastures nearby village center; crop fields) will probably benefit more from strategies towards the protection and more optimal use of fire (e.g. prescribed burning).

IFFN / GFMC contribution submitted by:

Evelien M. Kamminga
Directorate of Forestry
Private Bag 5558
Oshakati
NAMIBIA

Fax: ++264-65-230552
e-mail: kamminga@iway.na

References

Arnold, M., and I. Townson. 1998. Assessing the Potential of Forest Product Activities to Contribute to Rural Incomes in Africa, ODI Natural Resource Perspectives No.37.

Ashley, C., and C. LaFranchi. 1997. Livelihood Strategies of Rural Households in Caprivi: implications for conservancies and natural resource management, DEA Research Discussion Paper No. 20, MET, Windhoek.

Ashley, C. 2000. Applying Livelihood Approaches to Natural Resource Management Initiatives: Experiences in Namibia and Kenya, ODI Working Paper 134, UK.

Ashley C., and K. Hussein. 2000. Developing Methodologies for Livelihood Impact Assessment: Experience of the African Wildlife Foundation in East Africa, ODI Working Paper 139, UK.

Behnke, R. 1999. Stock Movement and Range Management in a Himba community in North-western Namibia. In: Managing Mobility in African Rangelands: the legitimization of transhumance (M. Niamir-Fuller, ed.), IT Publications, London.

Carney, D., M. Drinkwater, T. Rusinow, K. Neefjes, S. Wanmali, and N. Singh. 1999. Livelihoods Approaches Compared: a brief comparison of the livelihoods approaches of DFID, CARE, Oxfam and UNDP, DFID, UK.
DFID 2000. Sustainable Livelihoods Toolbox.

Fisher, R. J., and R. Dechaineux. 1998. A Methodology for Assessing and Evaluating the Social Impacts of Non-timber Forest Product Projects. In: Incomes from the Forest: Methods for the Development and Conservation of Forest Products for Local Communities (E. Wollenberg, and A. Ingles, eds.), CIFOR/IUCN, Bogor, Indonesia.

Forest Act, Namibia. 1997.

Fosse, L. 1992. The Social Construction of Ethnicity and Nationalism in Independent Namibia, Discussion Paper # 14, NISER, Windhoek.
Farrington, J., D. Carney, C. Ashley, and C. Turton. 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods in Practice: early applications of concepts in rural areas, ODI Natural Perspectives No.42.

Goldammer, J. G. 1998. Development of a National Fire Policy and Guidelines on Fire Management in Namibia, draft, Fire Ecology and Biomass Burning Research Group, Global Fire Monitoring Center, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, c/o Freiburg University, Germany.
Goldammer, J.G. 1999. Namibia Round Table Meeting on Fire (10-11 November 1999, Draft Report, Windhoek-Freiburg (see also this volume of IFFN).

GRN. 1995. Traditional Authorities Act.

GoN/GoF. 1999. Mid-term Review of the Namibia-Finland Forestry Programme, Mid-term review report, Governments of Namibia and Finland.

GoN/GoF. 1996. East Caprivi Fire Control Pilot Project, revised draft project document

Groot, W. de, and E. Kamminga. 1995. Forest, People, Government: a policy-oriented analysis of the social dynamics of tropical deforestation, main report of the project “Local Actors and Global Tree cover Policies”, Report no. 120, Programme Environment and Development, Leiden University, Netherlands.

Guyt, I., F. Hinchcliff, and M. Melnyk. 1995. The Hidden Harvest: The Value of Wild Resources in Agricultural Systems, A Summary, IIED, UK.
Harrison, A. 1995. Participatory Assessment of Natural Resources Used in Craft Production in Eastern Caprivi, Caprivi Arts and Crafts Association, Katima Mulilo.

Hay, R., J. Pell, and C. Tanner. 1990. Household Food Security in Northern Namibia, main report prepared for UNICEF, International Development Center, University of Oxford, UK.

Hinz, M. 1995. Namibia: customary land law and the implications for forests, trees and plants, FAO/University of Namibia, Windhoek.

Jurvélius, M. 1999. Community-based Forest Fire Control: a case study in North-eastern Namibia, NFFP, draft report, Katima Mulilo.

Kambinda, M., and N. Sitenge. 1997. The Role of Gender Disaggregated Data in Agricultural Extension Services, Caprivi Region, Namibia, MSc thesis University of Reading, UK.

Kamminga, E., and M. Gachago. 1997. Gender Impact Assessment on National Minor Roads Program in Kenya, Ministry of Transport/ Netherlands Government, Nairobi, Kenya.

Kamminga, E. 1999. Socio-economic appraisal of the Integrated Forest Fire Management Project in East Caprivi Region, Namibia, Oshakati, Namibia.

Kamminga, E. 2000. Opportunities for Community Forest Management within Salambala Conservancy: a sociological assessment, Environmental Forestry Component, NFFP, Oshakati, Namibia.

Kivikkokangas-Sandgren, R. 1996. The Role of Fire and Forests in the Socio-cultural Setting in East-Caprivi, Draft Field Study Report, Department of Geography, University of Helsinki, Finland.

Leach, M., and R. Mearns. 1996. The Lie of the Land: challenging received wisdom of the African Environment, International African Instititute, London.

Makela, M. 1999. Gender Issues in the Namibia-Finland Forestry Program, Consultancy report NFFP.

Malan, J. S. 1995. Peoples of Namibia, Department of Anthropology/ University of the North, Rhino Publishers, Pretoria, South Africa.

Mendelsohn, J., and C. Roberts (1997), An Environmental Profile and Atlas of the Caprivi, Directorate of Environmental Affairs, MET, Windhoek.

Mosimane, A. 1996. Socio-economic Status and the Use of Natural Resources in the Proposed Salambala Conservancy, Windhoek.

Namibia Forest Development Policy, Draft 31 March 1999.

Naeraa, T., S. Devereux, B. Frayne, and P. Harnett. 1993. Coping with Drought in Namibia: informal social security systems in Caprivi and Erongo, Namibian Institute for Social and Economic Research (NISER), Windhoek.

NFFP 1999. Logical Framework Phase II, Directorate of Forestry/ Namibia-Finland Forestry Program, Windhoek.

Shackleton, S., C. Shackleton, and B. Cousins. 2000. Re-valuing the communal lands of Southern Africa: new understandings of rural livelihoods, ODI Natural Perspectives No. 62.

Terry, M., F. Lee, and K. LeRoux. 1994. A Survey on Natural Resource Based Craft Production and Marketing in Namibia, WWF LIFE Program and The Rössing Foundation.

Trigg, S. 1997. Fire Monitoring in the Caprivi, Report Environmental Profiles Project, Directorate of Environmental Affairs, MET, Windhoek.

Trigg, S. 1998. Fire Scar Mapping in Northern Namibia, Report on the Forest Fire Control Component of the Namibia-Finland Forestry Program, Directorate of Forestry, mimeo with satellite-derived maps dated 10/5/98
Trollope, W., and L. Trollope. 1999. Technical Review of the Integrated Forest Fire Management Component of the Namibia-Finland Forestry Programme in the East Caprivi Region of Namibia, University of Fort Hare, South Africa.

Trollope, W., C. Hines, and L. Trollope. 2000. Simplified Techniques for Assessing Range Condition for Controlled Burning in the East Caprivi Region of Namibia, Department Livestock and Pasture Science, University of Fort Hare, South Africa.

UNDP 1998. Namibia’s Human Development Report, Windhoek.
Virtanen, K. 1998. Survey on Attitudes, Namibia-Finland Forestry Program, student report.

Webb, D., and D. Simon. 1995. Migrants, Money and Military: the social epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in Owambo, Northern Namibia, NEPRU Occasional Paper no.4, Windhoek, Namibia.

White, J., and E. Robinson. 2000. HIV/AIDS and Rural Livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa, Natural Resources Institute, Greenwich, UK.

Wollenberg, E., and A. Ingles (eds.) 1998. Incomes from the Forest: Methods for the Development and Conservation of Forest Products for Local Communities, CIFOR/IUCN, Bogor, Indonesia.

Editorial Remarks:

This report is an output of the Namibia. Namibia-Finland Forestry Program and has been edited and slightly shortened for publication in IFFN in consensus with the author. The original report can be cited also as follows:
Kamminga, E. M. 2001. Impact of the Integrated Forest Fire Management Program on Rural Livelihoods in East Caprivi Region, Namibia. Namibia-Finland Forestry Program, March 2001, 29 p.
The Internet version of this IFFN paper provides examples of examples of design of visual aids and materials produced by the local Caprivian Arts and Cultural Association (CACA).

[1] “wildfires” are defined in this report as fires that are inadequately controlled either in space or in time depending on the management objectives of the person (groups) that uses the term. Natural resource user groups might have different and sometimes conflicting “fire needs”.

[2] Chivulamunda is a Subiya word that means the area that never floods

| IFFN No. 25 | Country Notes |

24. November 2017/by GFMCadmin