A Regional Overview. By Michael Ochieng Odhiambo (With input from Fekadu Abate, Francis Kiyonga, John Boco Ngoya, and Sammy Lokadio) DECEMBER 2012

Transcription

1 Assessment of the Status of Traditional Institutions and Governance Systems and their Potential for Promoting Resilience in Pastoral areas of the Horn of Africa A Regional Overview By Michael Ochieng Odhiambo (With input from Fekadu Abate, Francis Kiyonga, John Boco Ngoya, and Sammy Lokadio) DECEMBER 2012 REGIONAL INITIATIVE IN SUPPORT OF VULNERABLE PASTORALISTS AND AGROPASTORALISTS IN THE HORN OF AFRICA RISPA

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY PASTORAL GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN THE HORN OF AFRICA: COPING WITH CHANGING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL CONTEXTS KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY: COMMON CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL AND REGIONAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: TOWARDS AN AGENDA FOR ACTION

3 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AU FAO IGAD PFS PIP RECONCILE SNNPR VICOBA WISP African Union Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Intergovernmental Authority on Development Pastoralist Farmer Schools Policies Institutions and Processes Resource Conflict Institute Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional State Village Community Banks World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism 3

4 INTRODUCTION This report presents a regional synthesis of the key findings and recommendations of a study of traditional institutions and governance systems among pastoral communities in the Horn of Africa, undertaken during the period September to December The study, which was commissioned by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) was coordinated by Resource Conflict Institute (RECONCILE). It involved case studies in four locations within the Horn of Africa among different pastoral and agro-pastoral communities. The case study locations were Amudat district in Northeastern Uganda, West Pokot district in Northern Kenya, Moroto district in Northeastern Uganda, Turkana district in Northern Kenya, Wajir district in North Eastern Kenya, Liben and South Omo Administrative Zones in Southern Nations Nationalities and Peoples Regional State (SNNPR) in South Western Ethiopia 1. The communities whose traditional institutions were studied in these locations are the Pokot of Uganda, the Pokot of Kenya, the Turkana, the Matheniko, the Somali in Liben and Wajir and the Dasenech in South Omo. The study sought to establish an inventory and status of traditional institutions and governance systems among these communities, and to analyse how they have fostered resilience of the communities to risks and shocks. FAO commissioned the study within the framework of the Regional Initiative to Support Vulnerable Pastoralists and Agro-Pastoralists in Horn of Africa and the Drought Cycle Management Project that they are implementing with other actors in the region and within the areas covered by the study, in order to generate ideas to inform the design of appropriate strategies to assist vulnerable pastoralists and agro-pastoralists to improve their resilience in the face of recurrent droughts and other disasters. For each of the case studies, a report has been compiled and presented to FAO. This regional report seeks to draw out the key findings, conclusions and recommendations that have both national and regional policy implications. Of particular interest in this regard is the current status of traditional pastoral governance systems and their interactions with formal governance structures of the state at local and national levels, the opportunities and challenges associated with such interaction, and the implications thereof for national and regional policies and frameworks that seek to promote resilience among these communities. These issues are considered with due regard to the fact that these communities interact across national borders and therefore the implications of these challenges for regional policy making and programming are also analyzed. The report is divided into six sections. Section 2 provides a background and context to the study, noting that the study seeks to inform the design of partnerships with pastoral communities that will ensure the sustainability of development interventions by building on their own institutions. Section 3 provides the conceptual framework for the study based on a review of literature, policies and laws. Section 4 presents a summary of the key findings of the study consolidated from the four study sites. Section 5 discusses the implications of the findings for national and regional policy development. Section 6 presents the conclusions and major recommendations of the study. 1 Designations of Kenyan districts have changed as West Pokot, Turkana and Wajir have been split to create new districts. Following the adoption of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, it is now more appropriate to refer to these locations respectively the counties of West Pokot, Turkana and Wajir 4

5 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY Although huge sums of money have been invested in the pastoral areas of the Horn of Africa over several decades now, the impact of these investments are not apparent on the ground. Development actors are concerned about the limited impact as compared to the level of investments that governments and development agencies continue to put into these areas year in year out. These concerns have triggered reflections on how development is implemented in these areas. Among the reasons advanced for the failure of development is the type of institutional frameworks that development partners use to deliver development in the pastoral areas. There are concerns that development partners do not work with institutions that truly represent pastoral communities and their interests. Instead, they work with institutions and structures that are deemed weak and lacking the legitimacy, thereby undermining uptake of ideas, new technologies, transfer of information and sustainable management of infrastructure and investments put in place. Furthermore, the interventions undertaken while working with such institutions may actually not address the needs of the communities as perceived by themselves and their traditional leadership. In any event, working with such institutions leads to the creation of parallel systems that may not be linked to or embedded into existing traditional leadership and governance systems. The end result of this is that quality and impact of programming is adversely affected while traditional governance systems and lives of communities are systematically weakened. Hence the prevailing reality where pastoral societies in the African dry lands seem to be in a state of perpetual crisis, characterized by increasing vulnerability, poverty and food insecurity. In order to contribute to the search for solutions to this vicious cycle, FAO decided to commission a study to review the existence, status and possibilities of engaging with traditional institutions in pastoral areas of the Horn of Africa for increased impact and sustainability of its investments and those of its partners. The study was undertaken in the three countries of Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda, which share common challenges associated with the development of pastoral areas. The border regions of the three countries are populated by pastoralists of common descent as is evident from the four case studies. The Pokot of Kenya and the Pokot of Uganda are the same community only separated by the border between the two countries. Similarly, the Matheniko of Uganda and the Turkana of Kenya are closely related and share a common ecosystem only separated by the border while the Somali of Liben and Wajir are effectively the same community. Indeed, these communities traditionally organize their interactions without much regard for the national borders and are often taken aback when confronted with the idea that in the course of those interactions they are crossing international borders. The study comes at an opportune moment for pastoralists from the point of view of policy and programming, especially at the regional level. The adoption of the Pastoral Policy Framework 2 by the African Union (AU) in October 2010 heralds has raised the profile of pastoralism and its significance for 2 African Union Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture, Policy Framework for Pastoralism in Africa: Securing, Protecting and Improving the Lives, Livelihoods and Rights of Pastoralist Communities, October

6 national and regional economic development, and highlighted the regional character of the livelihood system. The Policy Framework commits African governments to develop national policy and institutional frameworks for pastoralism that are underpinned by principles that include: recognition of pastoralism as a legitimate land use and livelihood system; integration of pastoralists and their issues in political and policy processes; securing mobility within and across national borders; ensuring a regional approach to pastoral development; and managing risk. Among the strategies proposed by the Policy Framework for securing pastoral livelihoods is to acknowledge the legitimacy of indigenous pastoral institutions 3 In this connection, the Policy Framework underscores The challenge of blending tradition and modernity in pastoral policy development and calls for: 1. recognition by state and local authorities of the important role of traditional pastoral leadership and structures in governance, including conflict resolution, management of land tenure and mobility, and facilitation of interactions between pastoralists and other interest groups such as crop farmers; 2. the need to address age-old rigidities in traditional beliefs and structures which discriminate against women; 3. the need to build on and thereby improve indigenous rights to pastoral resources of land, pasture and water; and 4. the need to acknowledge the legitimate rights of pastoralists to pastoral lands by granting them communal land ownership on a priority basis. At the programming level, the Heads of State of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) resolved in September 2011 to end drought emergencies in the Horn of Africa by institutionalizing drought resilience. To this end, IGAD has launched the Regional Drought Resilience and Sustainability Platform to coordinate and monitor the implementation of the IGAD Initiative to end Drought Emergencies in the Horn of Africa. This initiative, which has elicited significant support from development partners, constitutes an acknowledgement on the part of governments of the region that the challenges facing the drylands cannot be addressed through purely national programmes and actions. The initiative advocates a regional approach to programming and delivery that builds on the livelihood systems and practices of the local pastoral and agro-pastoral communities. Although the initiative is understandably state-centric, having been conceived and designed by a regional framework, it acknowledges the need to involve all stakeholders, particularly communities. It thus provides an opportunity for strengthening traditional institutional and mainstreaming their role in the implementation of projects and processes that are to deliver the objectives of the initiative. 3 Strategy 1.4 6

7 PASTORAL GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN THE HORN OF AFRICA: COPING WITH CHANGING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL CONTEXTS Pastoralism is a system with its norms and structures that enforce those norms. It is a traditional production system the sustainable operation of which long depended on traditional institutions of governance. The norms and their supportive institutional framework have evolved over time to become appropriate for the sustainable management of the drylands. In a six-country review of policy impacts on pastoral environments 4, the World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism (WISP) underscores the appropriateness of traditional pastoral institutions, asserting that while pastoralists have an intimate knowledge of the ecology that they live in, their knowledge works best when mediated by customary institutions, which play multiple roles, providing social support and managing natural resources. The review captures the complexity of traditional pastoral institutions and the critical role they play in the following words: Institutions facilitate social interaction by allowing individuals to cooperate and achieve common objectives for the common good. They are regulatory systems of formal laws, informal conventions and norms of behavior, and the relative strength and integration of customary systems and new forms of governance differs greatly between locations. Customary pastoral institutions are often not recognized by the modern state, but they remain as habitual ways through which society manages day-to-day affairs. These institutions are not simply traditions but they are adaptive responses that have evolved over time, often based on kinship or social classes. The effective functioning of customary institutions and their conservation outcomes relies on the ability of those with authority to impose sanctions on those who break the rules. Identifying common ground between customary and new systems of governance is a key development challenge for many dryland regions. 5 It is now generally acknowledged that the increased vulnerability of pastoral livelihoods has a lot to do with the weakening of these institutions that managed relations between the communities and their natural resource base and mediated relations within and between communities. This acknowledgement is based on the recognition that policies, institutions and processes are an integral component of a sustainable livelihoods framework. Institutions here mean not just structures but also culture, laws, customs and practices that communities use to manage their affairs and to interact with other communities. This is what Elinor Ostrom has characterized as institutions as rules of the game in Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. 6 4 Policies that work for Pastoral Environments: A Six-Country Review of Positive Policy Impacts on Pastoral Environments. The World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism (WISP), Nairobi p.8 6 Ostrom, Elinor Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 7

8 Sarah Pavenello has referred to this as the PIP element of the sustainable livelihoods framework. In a review of the literature the nature of pastoralists vulnerability in Horn of Africa 7, she stresses the importance of policies, institutions and processes (PIP) in understanding pastoralists vulnerability, stating that, the relationship between the PIPs and people s assets is mutually reinforcing. The assets that pastoralists own, access and control determine their ability to influence the PIPs; in turn, the nature of the PIPs both formal and informal influences the way pastoralist groups access and govern their livelihoods assets and the strategies that they adopt to pursue their livelihoods. Adverse policies and practices, unresponsive formal institutions and persistent negative perceptions of pastoralism have progressively weakened pastoralists livelihoods strategies. 8 Yet it is also clear that the context in which pastoralists live and operate in the Horn of Africa has changed drastically as a result of colonialism and the introduction of the modern state, which has its own institutions and norms for governance and management of natural resources and interactions within and between communities. The impact of colonialism on African societies, their institutions and systems of governance has been the subject matter of a lot of literature. The title of Walter Rodney s seminal work, How Europe underdeveloped Africa aptly captures this reality 9. In the book, Rodney contends that the greatest impact of the colonial experience in Africa was that it disrupted the evolution of these societies and transformed them from self-sustaining and self-reinforcing sociocultural systems to appendages of the capitalist economy at a time when these systems had not developed internal capacities for dealing with capitalism. This disruption was bound to be more marked for communities like pastoralists that had highly developed communal governance and resource management frameworks. The fact that the colonial project was a resource exploitation project meant that natural resource management institutions and systems that existed within pre-colonial communities had to be neutralized for the process to proceed unimpeded. That these institutions doubled as resource management and political governance frameworks made them all the more susceptible to colonial disruption. Thanks to this approach, the situation for communities at the end of the colonial period was markedly different. Although customary institutions survived colonialism, their capacities and influence had been greatly reduced. In many post-colonial societies, they existed outside the formal structure of governance and had no statutory recognition. The absence of a statutory framework governing customary institutions constrained their reach and effectiveness. They could not compete with statutory institutions which were backed with police powers of the state. They could not be effective outside the confines of the respective communities, and they no longer held the monopoly of power and authority to determine disputes with finality as those who were not satisfied with their decisions could refer the disputes to the formal systems. 7 Pastoralists vulnerability in the Horn of Africa: exploring political marginalization, donors policies and cross-border issues. Humanitarian Group, Overseas Development Institute, London, November p. 6 9 Rodney, W How Europe underdeveloped Africa. Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers Limited. 8

9 Thus, although customary institutions continued to operate in the post-colonial era, they were nevertheless being transformed by the changing social, cultural and political context of the respective countries. In effect, at the moment, there are hardly any pure customary institutions operating solely on the basis of community norms and values and driven solely by community imperatives. What exist are hybrid institutions, which though their origins lie in custom, have integrated in their operations ideas and practices from the formal system, creating a mixture of the formal and the informal, the traditional and the modern. Indeed, it may well be argued that in the circumstances, it more accurate to speak of local rather than customary or traditions institutions, even while arguing for local institutions to be founded on norms that are traditional to the communities. However, the mixture of the formal and the informal is increasingly seen as an effective way of bridging the gap between communities and governments by ensuing that institutions build on customary foundations, but are attuned to the reality of modernization and are thus able to subscribe to emerging imperatives of human rights, democracy and good governance. Yet the hybrid institutions have not always functions optimally as they are in effect neither customary nor modern. Moreover, the policy and legal context in which they operate is often decidedly modern, creating stronger incentives for modernization of the customary than for promoting the co-existence of the two systems. The push for modernization, founded on Western institutional models is so strong post-colonial societies that entire policy and legal frameworks are devoted to transforming customary systems. What this means, unfortunately, as Tache and Irwin have demonstrated, is that modernization of customary institutions is equated with westernization 10. Modernization of traditional institutions is important in order for them to adapt to new or changing environments. But for such adaptation to empower rather than emasculate traditional institutions, its content and pace must be controlled by communities themselves as the principal stakeholders. The role of policy and law as well as any external support has to be the facilitation of the process of adaptation through providing support by way of technical skills, comparative influences and an enabling environment. Constitutional imperatives are critical for providing such an enabling environment. In this regard, the Constitutions of Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda contain provisions that if properly used could support such adaptation. The main provisions in this connection are those on self-determination, sovereignty, devolution and community control of land and natural resources. The Constitutions of the three countries 11 have strong provisions on decentralization/devolution of power to the local level, with stipulations for public participation in decision-making, that provide openings for customary institutions to play active roles in governance. But in all the three countries, the positive constitutional provisions get watered down either by the absence of appropriate implementing frameworks that would ensure that customary institutions are properly integrated in 10 Boku Tache and Ben Irwin, Traditional institutions, multiple stakeholders and modern perspectives in common property: accompanying change within Borana pastoral system. Securing the Commons No. 4. IIED, April Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, 1994; the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; and the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda,

10 governance. Where implementation frameworks are established they often create modern institutions that operate on the basis of norms that are foreign to pastoral communities. A final constraint to the operation of customary pastoral institutions has to do with the transboundary character of the communities and their systems, which defy the logic of nation-states defined by reference to national borders. According to Markakis 12, the fact that the mandates of pastoral institutions extend across national borders is often used to deny them acceptance in the countries as they are accused of divided loyalties. In any case, the institutions are required to deal with multiple national policy and legal systems, which are subject to varying national power and other dynamics. KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY: COMMON CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES KEY FINDINGS: 1. Traditional institutions and governance systems exist and function in all the communities studied 2. Traditional institutions and governance systems are organized around age-sets and along gender lines 3. The most influential institutions are those comprised of male elders and those that play military roles 4. Seers, diviners and prophets play important roles in management of access to pastures and in conflicts 5. Functions and powers of traditional institutions are defined largely by the demands of pastoralism as land use and livelihood system 6. The powers, reach and influence of traditional institutions and governance systems are increasingly constrained as result of divers influences 7. Traditional institutions and governance systems continue to be important and relevant for community mobilization 8. Increasingly, new policies and laws in the region are recognizing the importance of traditional institutions and governance systems and integrating them into governance In all the case study communities, there was clear evidence of strong identification with traditional institutions and governance systems. Age and gender are key factors in the definition of these institutions, with roles and responsibilities allocated by reference to age sets and gender. Even though youth and women have clearly defined roles and responsibilities, it is nevertheless male elders who exercise the greatest influence in the communities, as they also oversee the functioning of other groups. Warriors and other institutions associated with the security of the community are also quite influential, but they too are traditionally subject to the direction of elders (see Table 2 for the major traditional institutions in the case study areas. 12 Markakis, J Pastoralism on the Margin. London: Minority Rights Group International 10

11 KEY TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS AREA ELDERS (MALE) WOMEN YOUTH OTHERS Filtu Council of elders Membership of village and clan level committees Dasenech Wajir Turkana, Matheniko Pokot (Kenya) Council of elders (includes women) Council of clan elders Ekitoe e Ngikiliok, Akiriket, Eikiko Membership of council of elders Women groups, formal and informal Ekitoe a Ngaberu, Alogita a Ngaberu Age sets Age sets Age sets Alogita a Ngisorok Kokwo Mboy (Women s Parliament) Age sets, Kaworok Waberki, clan chiefs, Peace Committees Peace Groups Chiefs, District Peace Committees Ngimurok, Ekokwo/Ekokwa Werkoyon, Pkwanyan, Pkweghon, Kapolokion, Kirworkin Pokot (Uganda) Kriiket, Sapana Gurwo Koor (women s shade) Age sets Prophets, seers Traditional institutions and governance systems play multiple roles, being responsible for social, political and cultural organization as well as controlling access to and use of natural resources that are essential for the livelihoods of the community. Thus, in the pastoral communities that were studied, these institutions control access to strategic pastoral resources. This latter role is shared with seers, diviners and prophets who operate as advisers to the elders. These groups are also major players in decision making related to conflicts. Many of the functions of traditional institutions and governance systems are defined by the demands of pastoralism as a system. Thus, the institutions have powers and functions for managing access to water and pastures by organizing mobility; negotiating access in times of drought through interactions with other communities; managing relations with neighbouring and other communities with regards conflicts and competition for resource, including cattle raids; mediating intra-community disputes; and overseeing major cultural events such as initiation and marriage. The powers, reach and effectiveness of traditional institutions and governance systems are no longer what they used to be. They have been constrained as result of the changes and influences arising from the introduction of the modern state and other institutions such as the church and civil society, all of which have intruded into areas of life that were the preserve of traditional institutions. Moreover, thanks to modernization, education, urbanization and other influences, there is increased differentiation within the communities, with the emergence of elites that no longer feel bound by traditional norms and values to the same degree as those who are still living in rural areas and fully engaged with the pastoral production system. The spread of small arms and light weapons has had an adverse impact on the authority of elders over warriors and undermined their control over processes associated with the management of conflict. Traditional authority over the organization of cattle raids for was always vested in the elders, who 11

12 directed how and when this would be done taking into account the advice of seers, diviners and prophets. However, the easy availability of small arms and light weapons has changed all this, with warriors organizing cattle raids without reference to elders, leading to a situation where such raids have become commercialized and no longer undertaken on the basis of traditional values. The authority of traditional institutions has also been adversely affected by the introduction of administrative boundaries and borders, which have split up communities, in some cases placing different portions in different countries, as in the case of the Pokot. Within countries, administrative boundaries bring with them new institutional arrangements controlled by the state and backed with its police powers. These new state institutions render traditional institutions redundant as they take over most of their roles and are deemed more effective since they have the backing of national laws. IMPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL AND REGIONAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT In order to secure the place of pastoralists in development processes and thereby secure their livelihoods, it is imperative that their institutions and norms are integrated into the planning and implementation of development processes. For this to happen, national and regional policies must provide an enabling environment for pastoralists and their institutions to be meaningfully and effectively engaged in processes of governance and development. This calls for the development of enabling policies, the establishment of appropriate institutional arrangements and the implementation of strategies that enhance the informed participation of pastoralists in development. The AU Pastoral Policy Framework has identified clearly the foundations on which appropriate national policies and institutions can be built to secure the participation of pastoralists and their institutions in development. This involves the integration of a set of principles, objectives and strategies (see Summary below). DESIGNING APPROPRIATE POLICIES FOR PASTORAL DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES 1. Recognize the rights of pastoralists 2. Integrate pastoralists and pastoral issues into political and policy processes by addressing representation and voice, including pastoral institutions and women in decision making 3. Recognize pastoralism as a way of life and production system and support it through policies and programmes 4. Provide appropriate frameworks to facilitate strategic mobility 5. Adopt a regional approach to policy development and programming 6. Promote risk management rather than emergency response for pastoral areas OBJECTIVE 1 Secure and protect lives, livelihoods and rights of pastoralists to ensure political, social and economic development of pastoralists and pastoral areas Strategies 1. Recognize the role of pastoralism in development 2. Commit to development of pastoral policies OBJECTIVE 2 Reinforce the contribution of pastoral livestock to national, regional and continent-wide economies Strategies 1. Strengthen rangelands governance 2. Provide policy support to mobility within and between countries 12

13 3. Integrate pastoral issues into decision making processes 4. Acknowledge the legitimacy of indigenous pastoral institutions 5. Strengthen the role and rights of women in pastoral communities 6. Mainstream pastoral issues in poverty reduction programs 7. Improve service delivery in pastoral areas 3. Protect pastoral livestock assets 4. Improve marketing of pastoral livestock and livestock products 5. Provide appropriate financial and insurance services to pastoral areas 6. Protect pastoral genetic resources and knowledge 7. Improve research extension support to pastoralism The key point to make here is that the strengthening of traditional institutions cannot be an end in itself. It has to be linked to the operations of pastoralism as a system, so that the institutions are strengthened by reference to specific roles and responsibilities associated with securing pastoral livelihoods and development. Thus the strengthening of traditional institutions will only make sense when it is part of suite of reforms aimed at promoting pastoralism and the development of pastoral people and areas. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: TOWARDS AN AGENDA FOR ACTION This report presents a synthesis and overview from a regional perspective of the results of four case studies undertaken in Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda to deepen understanding of the existence, status and operations of traditional institutions among pastoral communities, the challenges they face, and their potential for contributing to development processes. The report should be read together with the individual case study reports, which provide more detailed information with respect to each study site. The case studies have confirmed that in spite of serious challenges that they have faced since colonial times, traditional institutions continue to exist and exert significant influence on pastoral communities. The institutions are closely linked to the history and culture of the communities, and they play multiple roles that include political, social and cultural organization as well as natural resources governance and management. Consistent with the patriarchal nature of pastoral communities, the most powerful traditional institutions are those controlled by male elders, although women and youth also play important roles and contribute to governance decision-making in different ways through their own formations. Male youth in particular play an important role as warriors in ensuring the security of the communities. The youth are mainly organized around age sets, while elders operate mainly through councils. The introduction of the nation state and its institutions, modernization, education, urbanization, migration, and other changes that pastoral societies have been subjected to since colonial days have had serious impact on the way the societies are organized and on the operational effectiveness of traditional institutions. These changes have introduced institutions with competing and even contradictory roles and imperatives. Institutions of the state are supported by the national legal and policy framework and have the backing of the police powers of the state to enforce their decisions, thus making them much more powerful than traditional institutions. 13

14 Nevertheless, traditional institutions continue to exist and to have influence within communities. They are increasingly appreciated as important frameworks for mobilizing communities for development and other processes, and as effective mechanisms for generating legitimacy interventions aimed at promoting social, cultural and economic transformation. This recognition is manifested in emerging policy frameworks at both national and regional levels. In conclusion, the case studies lead to the following conclusions and recommendations: 1. Traditional institutions and governance systems are here to stay, albeit in a fast-changing context with serious implications for their roles, reach and effectiveness. 2. Traditional institutions are the most appropriate frameworks for mobilizing communities, securing their support and ensuring legitimacy for change interventions such as Village Community Banks (VICOBA), Pastoral Farmers Schools (PFS) and policy advocacy initiatives. 3. In order to work with traditional institutions, governments and development partners will need to invest in, among others: a. Deepening understanding of the institutions and communities, ongoing changes, challenges, and capacities; b. Recognition of the institutions as equal partners in conceiving, planning and implementing development interventions; c. Targeted capacity building support designed on the basis of consultations with them to equip them with skills to manage and interact with change; d. Government and other development partners need to coordinate interventions and interactions with traditional institutions to avoid overloading the institutions by competing/conflicting demands 4. Governments need to adopt policies and laws that recognize traditional institutions and secure their place and role in governance and development processes. 5. Political devolution and decentralization in the Horn of Africa provide viable contexts for more effective partnerships with traditional institutions in governance, development and natural resource management. Governments and development partners should promote the domestication of the principles and strategies set out in the AU Pastoral Policy Framework as the basis for national policy development. Equally, they should support the dissemination of the Policy Framework in the countries of the region in order for it to inform local and national level discourses on pastoral development. The IGAD Drought Resilience and Sustainability Framework provides a timely and appropriate entry point for pushing this agenda. 14