Local Knowledge, Science

1
Local Knowledge, Science Dryland Environmental
Management Dr Andy Dougill -
www.see.leeds.ac.uk/research/sri/
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Personal Research Journey Experiences
• Multi- , inter- trans-disciplinary debates
  literature lessons for participatory adaptive
  management / sustainability science
• Botswana Case Study Links to Dryland Others

2
My Views Context !?

• Worked extensively with Kalahari pastoralists in
  Botswana since 1992
• Worked on DFID projects on Natural Resource
  Issues across Sn Africa Nepal
• Supervised Env Development PhD projects from
  across Africa Latin America (incl. with POLIS!)
• Taught Env and Development for over 14 years and
  now involved in various strategic initiatives at
  Leeds (e.g. Human Health Food Security in
  Sub-Saharan Africa Transformation Fund Project)
  advising UN, DFID, NERC etc.
• See also major IAASTD Report on Agriculture
  the Need for Change - http//www.agassessment.org
  /

3
Research vision The interface between plant
harvest and human health

• How do we feed the world?
• human population will increase from 6 billion now
  to 8.3 billion in 2030
• most population growth in 50 least developed
  countries
• we need 109 ha more agricultural land
• or improved productivity to reduce this land
  demand
• In most areas, primary food resource is crops
• Projected annual growth of world agricultural
  output is falling (FAO)
• was 2.3/y from 1961 until now
• down to 1.5/y by 2030
• falls to 0.9/y by 2050
• Both quality and produce range has important
  implications for both short and long-term health

4
Research vision Food security and future
harvests in Africa

• Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest proportion of
  the food insecure (32)
• Need gt50 increase in food production
• Africa lacks an appropriate science
  infrastructure in contrast to
• China
• India
• Populist perception one of pop growth, CC
  biofuel rush as key drivers gt oversimplified !

undernourished (FAO)
5
Research vision Climate change and food
security in 2030

• Climate change
• Ensures future food supply is an even greater
  challenge
• Prioritizing
• Crop choice as climate changes
• Improving plants to withstand increased stress
• Farmer adaptation capacity links to land
  degradation problems

Predicted world surface temperature change
6
Research vision the influence of climate
change on future yields of Africas main crops

• Large negative effects
• Millet in Central Africa (CAF)
• Cowpea in East Africa (EAF)
• Maize and wheat in Southern Africa (SAF)
• Crop research to mitigate these effects
• Increased dependence on resilient crops?
• negative consequences
• e.g. cassava based dependence
• Stressed plants
• less adequate for human consumption

Projected change to 2030
7
External landscape Africa is a major issue of
international concern
Source FAO

• No improvement in Sub-Saharan Africa
• Africa will have
• 35 share of population growth to 2015
• Only 6 of income growth
• Call for African crop improvement
• Kofi Annan
• A range of other stakeholders
• See http//www.new-agri.co.uk/07/04/pov.php

8
Transformative potential a University-wide
research opportunity

• Lead Faculties
• Biological Sciences
• Medicine and Health
• LIGHT Nuffield
• Environment
• Next phase
• Mathematics Physical Sciences
• Food Science
• ESSL
• School of Sociology Social Policy
• Centres for Development and African Studies
• Others?
• Recruit through champions

9
Research Question

• Do participatory approaches as currently
  formulated facilitate community empowerment on
  natural resource management issues?

10
Global Environmental Conventions / Protocols

• 1972 UN Conference on Human Development,
  Stockholm created UNEP
• 1987 World Commission on Environment
  Development published Brundtland Report, Our
  Common Future
• 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that
  Deplete the Ozone Layer
• 1992 Rio Earth Summit published Agenda 21,
• 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
  (UNFCCC) 1997 Kyoto Protocol
• 1992 UN Convention on Biological Diversity
  (UNCBD)
• 1995 UN Convention to Combat Desertification
  (UNCCD)
• 2000 Millennium Development Goals
• 2002 Johannesburg Declaration (WSSD), including
  MDG 7 ensure environmental sustainability

11
Environmental Mega-Conferences An Analysis
(Seyfang, 2003)

• UN Summits seek to perform
• Setting Global Agendas
• Facilitating joined-up thinking
  (interdisciplinary)
• Endorsing common principles
• Providing global leadership
• Building institutional capacity
• Legitimising global governance through
  inclusivity
• (they) do serve an important function even
  though they are not the panaceas that some had
  originally hoped they might be (Seyfang, 2003
  p.224)
• Task remains for UN to incorporate citizens and
  NGO views, and build on bottom-up activism, at
  the same time as top-down governmental
  decision-making
• UN undermined by USs stance on Kyoto?

12
Contemporary Environmentalism - Environmental
Social Stakeholders

• Global Citizens - as individuals, voters,
  scientists making informed ethical decisions
• Communities - Group action, political pressure
  and Community Based Natural Resource Management
  (CBNRM)
• Business Capability, if not corporate
  responsibility
• State - not a guardian angel - short-term and
  bureaucratic
• International Community - limited actual
  regulatory power - rhetoric as opposed to reality
  
• Links critical, especially from community upwards

13
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Further Information Sources on which talk today
  based
• 1. General Methodological Debates
• AAAS Sustainability Science - http//www.sustainab
  ilityscience.org/
• Resilience Alliance - http//www.resalliance.org/
• 2. My take on such debates
• Stringer, L.C., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G.,
  Hubacek, K., Prell, C. Reed, M.S. (2006).
  Unpacking participation in the adaptive
  management of socialecological systems a
  critical review. Ecology and Society 11(2) 39.
• Fraser, E.D.G., Dougill, A.J., Mabee, W., Reed,
  M.S. and McAlpine, P. (2006) Bottom up and top
  down Analysis of participatory processes for
  sustainability indicator identification as a
  pathway to community empowerment and sustainable
  environmental management. Journal of
  Environmental Management 78, 114-127.

14
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Further Information Sources on which talk today
  based
• 3. Case Specific Articles / Texts Used Today
• Reed, M.S., Dougill, A.J. Baker, T. (2008).
  Participatory Indicator Development What can
  ecologists and local communities learn from each
  other? Ecological Applications, in press.
• Stringer, L.C., Reed, M.S., Dougill, A.J., Seely,
  M.K. Rokitzki, M. (2007). Implementing the
  UNCCD participatory challenges. Natural
  Resources Forum, 31, 198-211.
• Reed, M.S., Dougill, A.J. Taylor, M.J. (2007).
  Integrating local and scientific knowledge for
  adaptation to land degradation Kalahari
  rangeland management options. Land Degradation
  Development. 17, 1-19.
• Thomas, D.S.G. C. Twyman. 2004. Good or bad
  rangeland? Hybrid knowledge, science, and local
  understandings of vegetation dynamics in the
  Kalahari. Land Degradation Development
  15215231
• Dougill, A.J., Twyman, C., Thomas, D.S.G. and
  Sporton, D. (2002) Soil degradation assessment in
  mixed farming systems of southern Africa use of
  nutrient balance studies for participatory
  degradation monitoring. The Geographical Journal,
  168 (3), 195-210.
• Stocking, M.A., and Murnaghan, N. 2001. Handbook
  for the field assessment of land degradation.
  Earthscan Publications, London.

15
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• My Trans-Disciplinary Research Profile
• BSc Geography
• PhD Soil Hydrochemistry Rangeland
  Environmental Change in the Kalahari, Botswana
• Ongoing Kalahari env change studies integrating
  ecological, soil, satellite, microbial social
  science approaches to ensure scientific advances
  social inclusion / empowerment
  policy-relevance
• Transfer of approaches into integrated studies in
  UK Europe (e.g. methods applied in RELU EU
  DESIRE studies)
• Integrated vulnerability assessments linking
  local level degradation / policy studies to
  broad-scale models / analyses of climate change
  (NERC QUEST)

16
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Multi-, Inter- Trans-Disciplinarity
• Despite numerous calls for inter-disciplinarity,
  much less consensus on what this means in
  practice (see Robinson, 2008 review in this
  months Futures)
• Typically viewed as hierachy from
  multi-disciplinarity (combining of disciplinary
  expertise), to inter-disciplinarity (some
  integration of disciplinary work) to
  trans-disciplinarity (new conceptual frameworks
  provided by synthesising ideas methods)
• Recent calls state that inter-
  trans-disciplinarity should be less about new
  theories and unity of knowledge, than with
  problem- solution-oriented research
  incorporating participatory approaches to address
  societal problems (Klein, 2004) ie. issue-driven
  interdisciplinarity rather than
  discipline-based interdisciplinarity

17
www.see.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands
Related Contextual Framings

• Sustainability Science Indicators new ways
  of doing inter-connected science (Kates et al.,
  2001) providing measures of sustainability
  (Reed et al., 2006) www.sustainabilityscience.org/
  
• Participatory Adaptive Management embeds
  Learning from the South approach of learning
  from developing world participatory rural
  development experiences (Chambers, 1983 Dougill
  et al., 2006)
• Conceptual Mediated Modelling need for
  integrated models addressing social, economic
  environmental futures (Prell et al., 2007)
• Social Learning Behavioural Change
  co-evolution of environment human behaviour
  (Blackstock et al., 2006) culture (Zimmerer,
  2007)
• Participatory Governance need for national
  international environmental policy to include
  local scientific knowledge (Stringer et al.,
  2007) to ensure local relevance of policy
  interventions

A joint Research Councils Research Project
co-sponsored by DEFRA SEERAD
18
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Participatory Adaptive Management
• Combines iterative learning from adaptive
  management with stakeholder participation to
  foster more robust governance of
  social-ecological systems in which strategies
  contribute to system resilience and
  sustainability, and are sensitive to feedbacks
  from social and ecological systems (Resilience
  Alliance)
• A focus on learning-by-doing
• Integration of different knowledge systems
• Collaboration and power-sharing among
  stakeholders from different groups and across
  different spatial scales to enable management
  flexibility
• Recognises the role of social capital, meaningful
  interactions and trust as the basis for
  governance in social-ecological systems

19
How we learn
Concrete experience
Reflective observation
Active experiment-ation
Abstract conceptual-isation
Kolb (1984)
20
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring
Methods for Reed et al., 2006 etc.
21
School of Earth and Environment FACULTY OF
ENVIRONMENT

• Enhancing Participation in Environmental Research
  Learning from the South More widely across
  Regions
• Growing recognition in EU US-based
  Environmental Literature that best practice
  examples of community participation in natural
  resource management decision-making (whether
  land, water, forest etc.) applied research can
  be found in the developing world
• Participation been a central theme in Development
  research for over 20 years (e.g. Chambers, 1983
  arguments on development biases)
• Formalised in UN Conventions that environmental
  management must be developed from the bottom-up
  increasingly central to research funding

22

• Bush encroachment problematic in Botswana

23

• Gullying erosion problematic on Swazilands
  rangeland

24
Weeds problematic in Swazilands arable areas
25
Global Environmental Conventions / Protocols
School of Earth and Environment

• United Nations Convention to Combat
  Desertification (UNCCD)
• International agreement
• Views land degradation as a sustainable
  development issue
• People-centred - sees land users as part of the
  solution
• Promotes local level decision-making
  community participation
• All countries produced a National Action
  Programme (NAP) national control still
  paramount
• Involves long-term integrated strategies that
  focus simultaneously, in affected areas, on
  improved productivity of land, the
  rehabilitation, conservation sustainable
  management of land water resources, leading to
  improved living conditions, in particular at the
  community level.

26
School of Earth and Environment

• Role of UNCCD UNEP Funds
• Technical financial support provided to
  National Action Programmes in 28 African
  countries to sub-regional programmes
• Provision of catalytic funding to local level
  community projects (e.g. UN IVP described later)
• Thematic support provided for projects on
• Promoting farmer innovation
• Drought preparedness and mitigation
• Environmental information systems (EIS) support
• Local community level initiatives
• New funding to be provided for Land Degradation
  Assessment in Drylands (LADA)?

27
School of Earth and Environment

• Example NAP - Botswana
• Finalised in 2006 after 9 years in draft form
• Priority issues are poverty alleviation
  community empowerment (NAP 2006 p.2)
• Stakeholder engagement / participation conducted
  through stakeholder workshops co-ordinated by
  Government gt
• the main constraints of NAP development so far
  have been inadequate capacity amongst
  stakeholders, inadequate consultation at the
  village level inadequate research information
  on desertification drought issues (NAP, 2006
  p.3)
• More on this later!

28
Global Environmental Conventions / Protocols
School of Earth and Environment

• Institutional Challenge How to Empower Local
  Communities to Enable Sustainable Land Management
  ?

Oba et al., 2007
29
Global Environmental Conventions / Protocols
School of Earth and Environment

• Management Challenge How to Empower Local
  Communities to Enable Sustainable Land Management
  ?
• Many issues highlighted in recent Ecology
  Society (v.11, issue 2)
• Matches pervasive difficult cross-scale
  cross-level interactions in managing (any aspect
  of) the environment (Cash et al., 2006)
• the advent of co-management structures
  conscious boundary management that includes
  knowledge co-production, mediation, translation
  negotiation across scale-related boundaries may
  facilitate solutions to complex problems that
  decision makers have historically been unable to
  solve (Cash et al., 2006)
• In identifying successful case study research it
  is essential to unpack the links between
  science, institutions, knowledge power .. to
  show how stakeholder engagement may contribute to
  adaptive management (Stringer et al., 2006)

30
School of Earth and Environment

• Challenges for Land Degradation Research
• Requires a completely new way of doing research
  to match holistic view of farming systems and
  farmers livelihoods
• Soil science has been brilliantly informed by
  reductionist physics and chemistry, poorly
  informed by ecology and geography, and largely
  uninformed by the social sciences
• Swift (1998) quoted from Scoones et al., 2001
• Land degradation cannot be judged independently
  of its spatial, temporal, economic, environmental
  and cultural context. Evaluations are therefore
  almost infinitely variable and very dynamic
• Warren, 2002 p.49.
• Key aspect is that Environmental Change ?
  Degradation
• Global / regional / national estimates contain
  major uncertainties / oversimplifications making
  local scale, holistic, case study research vital

31
Key Features of Successful Projects
School of Earth and Environment

• Key Features of Successful Projects
• van Rooyen (1998) suggests a perfect project -
  where rural communities can apply the information
  received in partnership with researchers to
  improve their environment
• Termed Participatory Technology Development -
  move to train extension workers in such
  approaches across Africa (Reij Waters-Bayer,
  2001)
• Approaches need to be institutionalised and
  supported by policy frameworks land tenure
  security aimed at livelihood diversification and
  sustainability
• Stocking Murnaghan (2001) provide good overview
  of simple methods of arable farming systems BUT
  recognised that information on rangelands remains
  vastly different between local and scientific
  knowledge (e.g. Thomas Twyman, 2004)

32
School of Earth and Environment
Facilitating Participation in Monitoring
Evaluation
POL Policy development, sector planning, and
programme formulation ID Programme and project
identification PREP Programme and project
preparation APP Programme and project appraisal
and approval IMP Implementation and monitoring
OP Operation and monitoring NEXT Extensions or
Next phase programme and project identification
EVAL Evaluation
33
Key Features of Successful Projects
School of Earth and Environment

• But whats still missing?
• Clear reporting of case studies on how to ( how
  not) integrate participatory research with
  environmental change assessments for improved
  problem identification, project implementation,
  policy advice community empowerment
• Case study analysis of assumed trade-offs
  between meaningful participation scientific
  rigour to include assessment of tools required to
  integrate findings from different approaches /
  disciplines / scales of analysis
• Assessment of how institutional / policy tools
  (e.g. UNCCD) can be used as a guide to influence
  community participation engagement in problem
  definition, assessment rehabilitation (see
  Stringer et al., 2007 for analysis from
  Swaziland, Botswana Namibia)

34
School of Earth and Environment

• Different Methods, Different Problems The Case
  of Botswana
• Context of UNCCD its links to UNCBD
  UNFCCC - National Action Programmes (NAPs)
• Institutional Steps from Global to Local (see
  Stringer et al., 2007)
• Problem Definition Example of Dryland
  Degradation Assessment in Botswana (see Handout
  based on Reed et al., in press )

35
Kalahari Participatory Environmental Research

• Work presented here links to National Policy
  recognition (NAP) International Project Funding
  (UN GEF support of Indigenous Vegetation Project
  IVP)
• Methodologically our work complements similar
  initiatives across Southern Africa (Dahlberg,
  2000 Ward et al., 2000 Hoffman Ashwell, 2001
  Friedel et al., 2003 Esler et al., 2006
  Stringer et al., 2007 Klintenberg et al., 2007)
  in other regions
• Links to UNCCD Policy Implementation Debates
  (Stringer et al., 2007)
• Transfer of approaches developed now being
  undertaken in UK uplands, Europe China

36
Botswana NAP Ongoing National Policy Debates

• NAP recognises the link between poverty land
  degradation the need to adopt plans, strategies
  legislation aimed at addressing poverty at
  community level
• Recognises major problem of inadequate
  consultation at village level, inadequate
  co-ordination amongst stakeholders inadequate
  research information on desertification drought
  issues in Botswana (NAP, 2006 p.3-4)
• Notable policies cross many spheres / Depts
• eg. National Development Plan 9 Agricultural
  Resources Conservation Act, Forestry Policy, NR
  Conservation Development Policy, Wildlife
  Conservation NPs Act
• Institutional support now Ministry of Envt
  Wildlife

37
UN Project Support Indigenous Vegetation
Project (IVP)

• UN-funded IVP run from 2002 aims to empower
  pastoral communities to monitor manage their
  rangeland to develop, adapt apply traditional
  innovative rangeland management strategies
• Established Community Rangeland Committees in
  three degraded regions of Kalahari in an attempt
  to transfer community-based natural resource
  management initiatives away from a sole focus on
  wildlife management areas
• IVP aimed to co-ordinate efforts of Government
  (based in Ministry of Agriculture), local
  community groups NGOs as part of NAP
  initiatives of UNCCD
• Commissioned our research in 2 of its study
  areas, following success of our work in S
  Kgalagadi (Tshabong) Reed et al., (2007) Site
  1 Tshabong, 2 Mid-Boteti, 3 SW Kgalagadi

38
1. The nature of land degradation
multi-dimensional, contextual and dynamic
39
Methods for Assessing Land Degradation

• Expert opinion - e.g. Global Assessment of Soil
  Degradation (GLASOD) - Use Indicators
• Remote sensing - satellite monitoring e.g for
  green biomass cover
• Field monitoring - ecological or soil-based
• Productivity changes - crop yields, biomass
  production or livestock outputs (FAO statistics)
• Participatory approaches at household / farmer
  level

40
N
GLASOD map
41
Expert Views of Degradation in Botswana

• Combined Index from Expert Panel (10 respondents
  equally weighted)

42
Expert Views of Degradation in Botswana
43
Expert Views of Degradation in Botswana
44
Implications of Remote Sensing Studies

• However - Bots Govt / DFID-funded BRIMP produced
  widely displayed alternative map of degradation
  problem areas

Mid-Boteti region
Sn Ghanzi District
Sn Kgalagadi District
gt All in Kalahari, but includes wildlife areas,
shows rainfall / veg gradient
45
Productivity Changes

• Village-scale data shows v. variable livestock
  production
• Herd size tracks rainfall in 30 of villages
• Non-equilibrium dynamics? But also poor data
  quality

Villages in South Kgalagadi District
46
Productivity Changes

• Trends apparent when aggregate to district-scale
• No correlation with rainfall

South Kgalagadi District
Cattle (head)
47
Productivity Changes

• When aggregated to national scale, a decline in
  cattle but increase in goats is apparent over the
  last 20 years

48
Productivity Changes in Veterinary Districts

• Analysed cattle smallstock trends over 1980
  1998 to identify problem areas of declining
  productivity

Village district data came from here
49
Productivity Changes in Veterinary Districts

• Overall TLU trend shows little evidenceof
  degradation
• Data qualityuncertain will have changed
  intime

50
Field Monitoring Southern Kgalagadi

• Problems of the localised scale of environmental
  studies (e.g. Dougill et al., 1999) addressed by
  link to participatory analysis in collaboration
  with MoA UN IVP (Reed et al., 2006)

51
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring

• The only valid assessment (of land degradation)
  is by those who may suffer the consequences
• Warren (2002 p.457)
• Move to include pastoralists in assessments (e.g.
  Reed et al., 2006 Twyman et al., 2002) catching
  up work with arable farmers studies (Stocking
  Murnaghan, 2001)

52
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring

• Needs to involves pastoralists in identifying,
  evaluating applying indicators of rangeland
  condition
• Typically involves semi-structured interviews,
  focus groups, range walks evaluation between
  researchers, pastoralists extension workers
  (Dougill Reed, 2004)

53
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring
54
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring

• Maps produced for Tshabong Bray Bokspits
  Struizendam in Sn Kgalagadi District
• Now adopted by UN IVP at 3 study Districts, UB
  at 1, with view that MoA can adopt nationally
• IVP replicated in Mali Kenya
• Lessons disseminated widely to try to guide
  future UNCCD efforts UN Climate Change
  Adaptationassessments

55
Kalahari Results

• A wealth of local knowledge (140 indicators
  quoted), thinly spread (avg of 6 per farmer)
• Focus on bush encroachment problems animal
  health concerns (not soil erosion as per NAP)

56
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Holistic vegetation, livestock, wild animal and
socio-economic indicators soil indicators
57
Multi-criteria evaluation of indicators in
community focus groups
58
Quantitative evaluation of indicators
59
Overlap and adaptation of technical indicators
60
Meaningful participation and scientific rigour
61
Participatory Rangeland Monitoring

• Can produce rangeland maps at community scale
  which can be repeated to gain District level
  overview

62
Management

• What do we do with the information indicators
  local degradation maps provide us with?

63
Local ideas
64
Ideas combined and discussed
65
Decision-Support Systems
66
(No Transcript)
67

• Dissemination
• Linked indicators to variety of management
  options in manuals
• Farmers can monitor and record rangeland
  degradation indicators qualitatively using wheel
  charts

• And respond appropriately

68
Best Practice for Interdisciplinary Maps

• Multi-source multi-scale scale up from the
  local
• Community assessment of degradation problems the
  most legitimate starting point, given weaknesses
  in regional environmental economic assessments
• Pastoralist assessments need evaluation against
  local livestock data, community decision-making
  field ecological assessments to assess if changes
  have reduced resource potential
• Environmental process studies can determine if
  ecological changes are effectively permanent
• BUT results remain focused on local to
  sub-District scale would need significant
  funding to produce integrated maps on a national
  scale

69
Problems Remaining Challenges

• Dissemination of manuals ( summary / translation
  to Tswana) beset by delays associated with work
  of IVP their link to external researchers
• Problems in communication between IVP staff
  Government staff (both decision-makers
  extension workers in study sites)
• Staffing changes at IVP delay in commissioning
  of outreach work to hand-out evaluate
  decision-support manuals
• Findings focused on communal land management
  systems that remain threatened by Govt Policy
  Reform
• Research Methods show promise, BUT institutional
  political problems have prevented any real
  applied value
• Unless such deliverables produced such further
  studies unlikely

70
Challenges for UNCCD implementation in Botswana

• Consultations project experiences identify the
  following major challenges
• Need for formal Govt implementation of NAP
• Lack of clear framework for implementation at
  national level (e.g. which Ministry to
  co-ordinate?)
• Lack of co-ordination between Govt, NGOs, CBOs
  and research efforts
• Inadequate awareness among communities with
  regard to how to access money for projects
• Limited capacity and resources to implement
  community projects

71
However.

• Dont forget some of the problems with
  participation e.g.
• How can we make sure everyone is included?
• How can we manage local power dynamics?
• How can we make sure that participation is
  meaningful and not just a tick-box exercise?

72
Key Lessons

• That participation need not loss of scientific
  rigour (Reed et al., 2007) with sciences role
  key in explaining processes of change thus
  management priorities
• Need for greater role for participatory
  approaches in national desertification policy
  process, in terms of policy planning, monitoring
  evaluation and management decision-making (Reed
  et al., 2006 Stringer et al., 2007)
• Methodological approaches are transferable from
  the dryland south to the temperate north (e.g.
  Dougill et al., 2006) thus to other
  agri-ecosystems e.g. learning across regions
  agenda being explored with studies in Eastern
  Europe / Central Asia

73
Future Research Questions

• Many difficulties are highlighted that need to be
  addressed to ensure future rangeland research
  development projects are -
• Community-led ?
• Policy-relevant ?
• Fundable by suitable donors ?
• Conducted on an appropriate scale ?

74
Where Next ?

• For Botswana studies further outreach
  dissemination in local communities this July -
  but needs greater Govt institutional support for
  long term management changes to be enabled
• Wider African-scale national analysis on links
  between trends in food security, production
  climate change (NERC QUEST) with scope for future
  participatory analysis in vulnerability hotspots
  (ESRC) but needs greater integration of
  disciplinary funding processes
• Needs people like you to drive such sustainable
  development agendas forward in whatever sphere!
  but needs you !?
• Questions Now or to A.J.Dougill_at_leeds.ac.uk