Abstract:

Background People in drylands are vulnerable to the effects of drought and climate change, particularly in the drylands of developing countries where high poverty levels limit their ability to cope. This is the case in the drylands of Eastern Africa, where the combination of endemic poverty and frequent drought have led to a situation where relief has overtaken development as the major area of investment. In recent years it has been realized that there is a need for development, which rebuilds the drought resilience of the region’s dryland economies. Trees can enhance resilience of livelihoods in drylands, but their exact contribution has been poorly explored. Approach and structure This book is the result of a consultative process, which brought together experts from Eastern Africa and beyond to synthesize and compile existing information on the role of trees in building resilience in the region’s drylands. The group consisted of a mixture of experts with backgrounds in research, academia, government, farmers and development practitioners, and the book reflects the knowledge and perspectives of these various groups. The book begins by describing the rationale behind the initiative followed by a clarification on the background and approach taken. Chapter three then describes the Eastern
African region and argues why there is a need to build resilience in the livelihoods of
communities living in drylands. Chapter four builds on this by introducing an ecosystem
services perspective as the conceptual framework to explore the resilience offered by
trees. Chapter five reviews the ecology, distribution and use of trees throughout the
Eastern African region. Chapter six uses an ecosystem service perspective to review
the various benefits that people derive from dryland trees. Chapter seven draws on
experiences gained in development practices and presents and reviews 11 case studies
of natural resource management. Chapter eight presents reflections of the write-shop
participants on how best practice in resilience-building could be scaled up. A review of
knowledge and information gaps regarding the contribution of trees in building resilience is presented in chapter nine, which is followed by a plan for possible follow-up action in chapter ten. Findings and recommendations
The consultative process resulted in the following findings. First, although many people
intuitively associate trees with resilience there is very little factual evidence on the role
of trees in building resilience and the Natural Resource Management (NRM) projects
that were reviewed rarely reported on or disseminated the resilience provided by the
project interventions. Currently, information on trees in dryland NRM projects focuses
on the possibilities for benefits through agricultural intensification. This reflects a wider
lack of information on project-based experiences in resilience enhancement, which
is understandable because the interest in resilience is relatively new. Given the need
for resilience, it is important to develop capacity in resilience thinking in research and
development. Second, the experts consulted suggested many possible ways through
which trees provide resilience. These are described in detail in chapters six and seven.
One common issue emerging from the review in these chapters is the need for an enabling environment, and the following three main areas were considered crucial: (i) the necessity of establishing secure tenure of land and trees, (ii) institutions to support an equitable and sustainable use and management of trees and (iii) partnerships among
community, public and private parties. Third, resilience is a relatively new concept, which is poorly understood and hence rarely included in monitoring and evaluation (M&E )frameworks. There is need to develop concepts, procedures and practices in implementing resilience in policy and project cycles and for monitoring and evaluation
of its impact. Fourth, while trees may offer resilience through supporting, regulating, cultural and provisioning ecosystem services, there is a tendency to ascribe the resilience-building effect of trees to the goods that trees provide while ignoring the other equally – if not more –important ecosystem services. Finally, local communities are the
key players in the implementation of strategies to enhance the resilience of their livelihoods. They benefit from reliable information, enabling policies, better conceptualization and implementation and a more balanced approach to development efforts. As such their knowledge, perspective, vision and action form the basis of building greater resilience in the drylands. These findings lead to the following recommendations First, there is need for better information and knowledge management on the benefits that people derive from trees. Support is required for collecting, compiling and articulating evidence about the resilience-building role of trees. We recommend that special graduate-level study programs be developed among a consortium of universities and research organizations to address these knowledge gaps. Such information should be shared with as broad an audience as possible, perhaps by using mass media (internet/ YouTube, radio and broadcast TV) to share stories of tree-champions at work in the
drylands. Second, there is need to address tenure security, institutions and partnerships that support an environment which encourages land users to manage trees sustainably and benefit from the products and services that they provide. Third, there is need for capacity development in resilience thinking and its integration in the entire policy and project cycles including monitoring and evaluation. Such capacity development should aim at down-to-earth approaches, linking natural resources, resilience and livelihoods in a manner that ensures that the concept is understandable and operational among partners in drylands development. Fourth, there is need for a more balanced attention to all ecosystem services that provide resilience, because current attention focuses on direct benefits (e.g. the supporting services or goods provided by trees). Policy and projects are advised to pay particular attention to the frequently neglected indirect resilience benefits that trees provide (e.g. the supporting and regulating services). Fifth, there is need to promote leadership among local stakeholders to take the initiative in building resilience of their livelihoods, a premise that should be embraced by future development efforts.