Linking participatory and GIS�based land use

planning methods: experiences from Burkina

Faso

Jolanda van den Berg, Rudi Hessel, Oumar Kaboré, Arie van Kekem, Simone Verzandvoort, Jean�Marie Dipama & Binta Diallo

Introduction

� EU funded VINVAL project: Impact of changing land cover on the production and ecological functions of vegetation in inland valleys in West Africa

� Participatory Learning and Action: approach for joint learning and planning with communities. It entails a set of participatory tools and visual methods such as mapping, time lines, transect walks, problem trees, ranking and Venn diagrams

� Focus next 15 minutes: Combining PLA and GIS methods for land use planning in eastern region of Burkina Faso

Research area

� Sudanian climate zone

� < 100 mm rain/year

� Single rainy season

� Open savannas with forest

� Gourmantché, Yamaa, Mossi and Fulbe

� Agriculture and agro�pastoralism

� NTFP harvesting

Selected inland valleys

� Sambouali: NTFP collection/ nature reserve

� Diamanga/ Tanyelle: agricultural production

� Bounou: abandoned agricultural lands

Deforestation and soil degradation

� Irregular and lack of rainfall

� Population increase (lack of arable lands)

� Unsustainable agricultural techniques (bush fires, cotton�growing)

� Uncontrolled/ overexploitation of wood

� Uncontrolled grazing

Method for land use planning: three phases

1. Diagnosis:� Series of two rapid participatory diagnostic appraisals

� Collection of relevant physical data (land use, soils, vegetation and hydrology)

2. Village participatory land use planning:� Sensitization of community members

� Training of field staff

� Village workshop

� Feedback meeting

3. Return visit

Village participatory land use planning workshop

General aim:To support the four research villages to enhance their discussions about

alternative land use options

Specific objective:To develop alternative land use options to address priority land use problems

as perceived by the local people

Village workshop: four steps

1. Assess existing situation

2. Identify alternative land use options

3. Identify synergy/conflict between land use options

4. Map alternative land use options

Step 1: Assess existing situation

To learn about:

� Priority land use problems of different community members

� People’s understanding of causes and effects of their land use problems

� Local coping strategies

Tools:

� Pair wise ranking (focus groups)

� Flow diagram (focus groups)

� Problem analysis chart (plenary session)

Step 2: Identify alternative land use options

Building upon joint problem analysis in step 1:

Tools:

Group discussion/ all workshop participants

Step 2: Results (1)

•Agricultural intensification•Agricultural activities in the low season•Stone bunds•Manure pits•Sensitisation in relation to suitable agricultural techniques•Increased crop rotation•Agro-forestry activities, such as planting fertilizer species•Enforcement customary land use rules•Cultivation of smaller fields•Increased control of transhumance by governmental authorities

•Individual ceremonies for rain making•Individual training (agricultural extension officers) •Local fire brigades•Creation of livestock paths•Discussions between farmers and pastoralists•Crop rotation•Tree planting•Stone bunds• Ridging•Decrease of total area of individual fallow lands •Protection of certain tree species when clearing land

•Non-respect of rain making ceremonies•Population increase•Lack of of fertilizers•Unsustainableagricultural techniques•Bush fires•Overexploitation of (grazing) lands•Uncontrolled/ overexploitation of wood•Irregular and lack of rainfall•Lack of arable lands•Water erosion•Increase of parasite plant species (Striga a.o.) •Uncontrolled grazing•Disappearance of fertilizer plant species

Soil degradation

Land use optionsCoping strategiesCausesPriority problem

Step 2: Results (2)

•Increased acceptance of customary land tenure among local people•Delimitation and management of grazing areas•Security of land rights

•Negotiations between farmers and pastoralists•Search for other/ new arable lands•Sedentarisation of pastoralists

•Conflicts between farmers and pastoralists •Lack of arable lands•Decrease of total area of fallow lands•Transhumance

Insecurity of land rights

•Awareness building in relation to uncontrolled wood exploitation

•Protection of fruit trees•Discussions between farmers and pastoralists

•Clearing trees and shrubs for agricultural aims•Activities of pastoralists•Fire wood collection•Production of medicines

Uncontrolled/ over-exploitation of wood

•Awareness building in relation to bush fires

•Local fire brigades•Discussions between farmers and pastoralists

•Hunting•Land clearing •Protection of homesteads•Production of energy sources and blacksmith’activities

Bush fires

Step 2: Results (3)

•Increased use of fertilizers

•Cutting parasite plant species•Organic fertilizers•Intercropping with groundnuts

•Decreasing soil fertility•Livestock dung•Time and labourconstraints for cutting parasite plant species.

Increase of parasite plant species (Striga a.o.)

•Search for other/new grazing lands•Awareness building among pastoralists•Security of land rights

•Periodically other locations for grazing livestock•No bush fires•Search for other/new grazing lands

•Lack of grazing and arable lands•Lack of fodder•Food needs of humans

Uncontrolled/ over-exploitation of grazing lands

Step 3: Synergy and conflict between options

To learn about:

� Interactions between alternative land use options

Tool:

� Synergy and conflict matrix (Focus groups: village elders, Fulbe and mixed ethnic background)

Different groups might want different options / have different wishes:� If such options can be combined, there is synergy

� If such options cannot be combined, there is potential conflict

Step 3: Results (Interactions between options )

Sacred place can only be preserved if not cultivated

C

Risk to use trees in agroforestry area as fuel wood

C

Agro forestry is not threatened by livestock

S

Agroforestry can be realized in fields used for cultivation

S

Agroforestry can be realized in fields used for cultivation

Sagroforestry

Sacred place can only be preserved if not cultivated

C

No relation between collection fuel wood and herding livestock

N

Collaboration in livestock activities

SRisk to damage crops

CRisk to damage crops

Cherding livestock

Sacred place can only be preserved if not cultivated

C

Collection of fuel wood mainly outside area used for food crops

NRisk to damage crops

C

Cultivation of food crop is More and more abandoned for cash crop

C

No security in landuse right for Fulbe

Ccultivation food crops

sacred placecollection fuel wood

herding livestockcultivation cash crop

cultivation food crops

Fulbe

Mixed ethnic group

Step 4: Map alternative land use options (1)

To learn about:

� Spatial implications of alternative land use options

Tools:

� Focus group discussion

� ArcView to digitize locations of land use options

Materials:

� Large print of topographic map

� Pictograms of land use options

Step 4: Map alternative land use options (2)

Each option was assumed to take place at a certain position (a point), and in the surrounding area.

The radius of a circle was used to define the extent of the surrounding area radius

Step 4: Results (land use options of village elders)

Step 4: Results (land use options of mixed group)

Step 4: Results (conflict/synergy map of village elders

and mixed group)

Feedback meeting

Aim:

� To discuss the outcomes of the village workshop with governmental officials and organizations working in the area.

Return visit

Aim:

� To assess what had happened around two priority problems (soil degradation & uncontrolled grazing) since the village workshop, why and with what impact.

Observations:

� Increased agricultural intensification (use of larger range of farm equipments & more fertilizers)

� Positive land use changes (increase in agro forestry, establishment of grazing zone)

Strengths

� Method is simple compared to other land use planning support tools and outcomes directly available

� Mapping process generates detailed information on resource use and problems and future land use aspirations for both local people, researchers and other stakeholders

� Maps are a powerful tool to facilitate discussions between local people and researchers, and between them and other stakeholders in the area

Weaknesses

� Time interval between diagnostic and land use planning phases too long

� No effort to create an enabling environment for the participatory land use planning process

� No effort to enhance the community’s capacity to use the maps for its own benefit

Future research

� Scaling up different participatory land use support methods:

� Influence on decision making

� Diversification: e.g. biodiversity monitoring, delivery of environmental services

Thank you!

© Wageningen UR