Rethinking Forest Restoration in Cattle Country: Local Tenure Innovation in Madagascar

Presented at International Association for the Study of Commons June 19-24, 2023 Nairobi, Kenya

1. Rethinking Forest Restoration in Cattle Country:
Local Tenure Innovation in Madagascar*
Presentation by: Rebecca McLain1, Renaud Randrianasolo2, Patrick Ranjatson2
1CIFOR; 2University of Antananarivo/ESSA-Forêts
International Association for the Study of Commons June 19-24, 2023 Nairobi, Kenya
* Based on fieldwork and analysis by Randrianasolo (2020)Funding: BMZ, GIZ, IFPRI-PIM

2. Extensive Cattle Production vs Forest Landscape Restoration
•Cover roughly 17 million km2
•Livelihoods for 505+ million
•Critical pastureland
Many FLR initiatives in Africa
focus on tree-planting
•How do these initiatives affect
livestock producers’ rights to
pastureland?
•How are livestock producers
seeking to maintain their rights
to grazing commons targeted by
FLR initiatives?
Sub-Saharan Africa’s dry forests

3. •FAO (2021) estimated there were 9
million zebu in Madagascar in 2020
(likely an underestimate)
•Primary value
•Social status marker
•Ritual use
•Secondary value: meat and milk
•Despite the importance of zebu,
research on zebu production
systems in Madagascar is extremely
limited
Bos taurus indica (zebu)
Importance of Zebu in Malagasy Society

4. ResearchSite: MariaranoCommune, BoenyRegion, Madagascar
FLR and Tenure Context
•Madagascar’sFLR target=
4 million ha by 2030
•State doesnot recognize
communal rightsto rangelands
•FLR projectsoftenselect grazing
commonsfor restoration
•Tree-planting= typicalrestoration
approach
Mariarano
Commune
Mahajanga

5. Major Land Uses in MariaranoCommune
Savanna 82,850 ha (56%)
Dense forest 35,476 ha (24%)
Degraded forest 13,777 ha ( 9%)
Mangrove forest 5,300 ha ( 4%)
Cropland 1,530 ha ( 1%)
Water 1,573 ha ( 1%)
Other 6,370 ha ( 4%)
------------------------------------------------
Total 146,876 ha
State domain 98%
Private land (titled) 1.3%
Certified land <1%
Fokontany
Mariarano
Fokontany
Antanambao
Mariarano
Degraded forest
Water bodyCropland
Wooded savanna
Dense forest
Mangrove forestCommune Seat

6. Produc'on SystemMain Characteristics
Aomby soavaly
Zebu used for transportation and plowing; staked out in
fields close to village during the day; kept in corrals
(vala) in village at night
Aomby asesyZebu taken to graze in day pasture (tany firaofana)
during the day; kept in vala at night
Aomby trondraka
Zebu stay in areas designated as overnight pastureland
(kijana); but are gathered together periodically for head
counts
Aomby maliaZebu allowed to run completely wild
Zebu Production Systems in Mariarano

7. Forest islandSavanna
Watering point§Two types of grazing commons
•Kijana (overnight pasture)
•Tany firaofana (day pasture)
§A kijana consists of 3 elements:
•Grassland
•Watering places
•Small stands of trees
(kijan’aomby – cattle resting
sites)
§Mariarano fokontany’s kijana is
located in Ampapamena Sector
Key Features of Mariarano’s Grazing Commons

8. •Zebu producers (mpiray kija) become “owners” of
cattle gathering sites (kijan’aomby) in a kijana
through a ritual known as joro kijana
•Grazing of cattle in the kijana and completing the joro
kijana ritual indicates land is in productive use
•For local inhabitants, those lands are “owned”; with
management/grazing/exclusion rights held by the
mpiray kija.
•Members of the fokonolona (broader local
community) also have use rights to products, such as
firewood, fruit, leaves, etc.
Key Features of the Customary Tenure System for Grazing Commons

9. •Year 2000 - Zebu thieves (daholo) steal 400+
zebu from herds pastured in Mariarano
fokontany.
•Many zebu producers sell most of their zebu:
herds drop in size from several hundred to
several dozen.
•Zebu are taken to pasture during the day and
are brought back to the village at night.
•Villagers continue to exercise their rights to
harvest products in the grazing commons.
From Overnight Pasture (Kijana) to Day Pasture (Tany Firaofana)

10. §Project Eden’s director and team meet with mayor, deputy mayor, commune
land agent, and fokontany president:
2009 - Project Eden Comes to Mariarano
§Commune officials sign a written agreement with Project Eden to do restoration
activities in part of the Ampapamena kijana.
ØCommunity elders (sojabe) are not
included in the negotiations
ØProject Eden requests an area for
restoration activities
ØThey will pay villagers to plant trees
ØNo other uses will be permitted
ØThe land will remain the commune’s
property.

11. §The community is divided into two camps:
those who support Project Eden and those –
mostly livestock producers – who do not.
§Livestock producers’ perspective
ØProject Eden has taken away their
grazing rights to the kijana
ØProject Eden has also taken away their
rights to other uses of the kijana
§Livestock producers burn portions of the
restoration area to demonstrate their
opposition and affirm their customary rights
to the Ampapamena kijana
Note: Fire is an important pasture
management tool in the customary system.
Protesting the Expropriation of the Ampapamena Kijana

12. •Zebu producers in neighboring Antanambao
fokontany fear their kijana will also be
expropriated
•They call a meeting of mpiray kija from all the
fokontany in Mariarano Commune, along with
the mayor, commune land agent, and
community elders
•Purpose = Identify a solution to protect
customary rights to kijana in other fokontany
Commune’s position: Kijana occupy much of the commune, but zebu don’t
contribute to the commune’s revenues
Karinen’aomby: Demonstrating the Value of the Grazing Commons

13. ØHerd owner
ØHerd size/data on each zebu
ØKijana where herd is located
ØFees paid to commune
§Karinen’aomby demonstrate
that kijana provide revenues
for the commune
§Locally, the karinen’aomby
constitutes evidence of a valid
claim to the holder’s kijana
Zebu Producers’ Solution: Karinen’aomby (Zebu Notebooks)
§Modeled after existing commune land tax notebooks; include information on:

14. The PLAE team asks local authorities to allocate land
for forest restoration
ØCommunity elders (sojabe) included in discussions
ØPLAE’s restoration approach:
oSupport for groups to plant trees
oLand certificates issued to participating individuals
ØCommunity elders allocate land for PLAE’s activities in Ampapamena: they see
certification seen as a way to stop future projects from expropriating more land
ØBut the community remains divided: Some feel that the former kijana belongs to
the fokonolona (community as a whole) and mpiray kija and should not be
allowed to become individualized property.
2017 - A New Threat Emerges (Programme de Lutte Antiérosive - PLAE)

15. 2009 – Commune officials allocate land in Ampapamena to Project Eden
ØProject Eden acquires all rights except alienation rights (backed by state)
ØCommune has alienation rights (backed by state)
ØFokonolona and mpiray kija lose customary rights
2017 – Commune officials (in consultation with elders) allocate land in
Ampapamena to PLAE
ØParticipants in tree planting can apply for individualized land certificates
ØIndividuals who obtain land certificates acquire all rights (backed by state)
ØFokonolona and mpiray kija lose customary rights
•In both scenarios, zebu producers lose customary management/grazing rights
•In both scenarios, community members lose customary use rights
Summing Up: Impacts of FLR Projects on Customary Rights in Mariarano

16. Conclusions
1.FLR initiatives that encourage tree-planting on lands
incorrectly presumed to be unowned or unused pose
a real threat to grazing commons and zebu
producers’ (and other community members’)
livelihoods.
2.The practice of linking individualized land
certification with FLR initiatives in contexts where the
state views grazing commons as “unoccupied”
exacerbates the threat to customary rights to those
spaces.

17. Potential Pathways Forward
1.National land law and regulatory reforms that
recognize collective ownership of grazing commons:
•Flexible; locally-based; non-bureaucratic
2.Identification of, and support for local tenure
innovations, such as karinen’aomby.
3.In cattle country, include cattle producers when
designing FLR initiatives.
4.Work with cattle producers to identify and
implement FLR practices that are compatible with
extensive cattle production systems.

18. FAO. 2021. FAOSTAT. Crops and livestock products (Madagascar). Accessed 26 12 2021. [updated 2021 Dec 12].
hLps://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL.
Manasoa CGO 2021. Modalité de gesUon et de sécurisaUon des espaces pastoraux communautaires: Cas des
communes de Betsako et de Katsepy [masters thesis]. Antananarivo (Madagascar): Universitéd’Antananarivo,
Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Agronomiques.
Randrianasolo, R, Patrick Ranjatson, Rebecca McLain, Andrisoa Nomenjanahary & Claude Germier Oginot
Manasoa (2022): A cauUonary note for forest landscape restoraUon in drylands: CaLle producUon systems in
northwest Madagascar’s dry forests, Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, DOI: 10.1080/14728028.2022.2059706
Randrianasolo R 2020. Étude des modalités de sécurisaUon des espaces pastoraux – Cas des communes rurales
de Mariarano et d’Ankijabe de la Région Boeny [masters thesis]. Antananarivo (Madagascar): Université
d’Antananarivo, Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Agronomiques.
References
Photo credits: Renaud Randrianasolo, Ny Tolotra Razafimbelo, Fabrico Nomenjanahary
Maps by Renaud Randrianasolo

19. cifor-icraf.org | globallandscapesforum.org | resilient-landscapes.org
CIFOR-ICRAF brings more than 75 years of experience in harnessing the power of trees, forests, and agroforestry
landscapes to address the most pressing global challenges of our time – biodiversity loss, climate change, food security,
livelihoods and inequity. CIFOR and ICRAF are both international organizations and CGIAR Research Centers.
Thank youMisaotra/