ayele hegena anabo-indigenous people rights and protected area management

UNIVERSITY OF KENT

2010

Implementation of Indigenous People Rights and

Convention on Biological Diversity in Ethiopia:

the Laws and Practices in Awash National Park A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of

Requirement of the Degree MSC Conservation and

International wildlife trade Ayele Anabo prepared under supervision of Professor Stuart

Harrop

Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent


Convention on Biological Diversity in Ethiopia: the Laws

and Practices in Awash National Park

1

Abstract

Arguably, the protectionist Model for national park management has been replaced by the

sustainable use model which entitles indigenous people to participate and share benefits from

the national parks management. However, various sources disclose that its implementation is

poorly managed in Africa.

The Ethiopian government has ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity, which to an

extent protects the rights of indigenous people in the management of protected areas.

However, its harmonization and the extent of its implementation are not yet explored in

Ethiopian national parks management. This research attempts to find out the gaps in legal and

policy instruments that are affecting implementation of indigenous people rights in the

Awash National Park management.

This study discloses that the Ethiopian constitution and some national laws enshrine

fundamental human rights protection. They give recognition to the rights for local people

participation, land holding and benefit sharing, while government running the development

projects, however, there is no legislation giving special treatment and criteria for the

identification of indigenous people. The indigenous people living in and around Awash

National Park do not have secured land rights. There are not specific guidelines that entitle

them to participate in the national park management. Moreover, the government has not yet

adopted schemes that enable them to share benefits from the national park. Indigenous people

are not enjoying constitutional guarantees due to lack of detailed rules and strategies for

implementation.

Key words: Awash National Park, Benefit sharing, Indigenous people, Land tenure right,

indigenous people Participation




2

1. Introduction

Before the 1960‟s, there was no „modernized‟ wildlife conservation schemes in Ethiopia

though the country was rich in flora and fauna.1 Due to this, there were no comprehensive

natural resources conservation laws and institutions that were designed to protect wildlife and

other natural resources from uncontrolled human encroachments.2

According to Brown (1965), within the years 1964-65, UNESCO appointed five foreign

conservationists who have developed possible recommendations that have assisted in

identifying the areas that deserve preservation of wildlife in the country.3 These foreign

experts had also a mission to train Ethiopian staff that were handled the task when they

finished their assignment.4 In the mean time, these wardens developed a proposal for the

establishment of national parks and game reserves including Awash National Park.

During its establishment, maximum care was not taken to balance the social impact of the

Awash National Park on the local communities living in the areas. The wardens and local

government forcefully moved indigenous people and resettled them elsewhere.5 The 1997

“Ethiopian National Action plan for Conservation” confirms the marginalization and

displacement of the local people living in the areas which were designated for the national

park. The past governments failed to give recognition for local people‟s participation in the

governance of the park.6 The main purpose of the establishment of this park is to preserve

wildlife from human encroachments.7 Proclamation No. 192 of 1980 makes it clear that any

unauthorized taking of natural resources from the protected area is illegal.8 This legislation

also reveals that during the establishment of this national park, the country had adopted the

1 See Brown, 1965, reports Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.

2 Ibid

3 Ibid

4 Ibid

5 Ibid

6 See the preamble of the Ethiopian National Action Plan for the Conservation Natural Resources, 1997, and

Box one interview with Afar elder, pp. 16 7 See the preamble of ANP Establishment Order NO.54/69

8 Proclamation No. 192 of 1980 Article 22 and 24




3

protectionist model of national park management. The community members did not

participate in its designation.

However, currently, international communities have re-examined the assumptions of the past

laws and policies in the national park management and adopted a number of international

conventions and soft laws that give recognition for the protection of indigenous people rights.

These legal and policy instruments promote the use of indigenous people inclusive approach

in the protected areas governance. The ILO.169, Convention on Biological Diversity and

various international soft laws impose obligations on the Member states to secure land tenure

right, ensure indigenous people participation and benefit sharing in national park

management.9 Article 8(j) of Convention on Biological Diversity gives recognition for the

protection of traditional knowledge and its importance for sustainable natural resource

management, and its Article 10(c) makes it clear that member states to give protection of

access to natural resources for the indigenous people. These two legal provisions impliedly

give protection for secure land tenure right. The IUCN, and other international conservation

organizations are urging any international communities to give due regard to these rights and

adopt the indigenous people friendly protected area management schemes. By these hard and

soft laws, the old preservationist protected areas management framework has been eroded its

legal foundations, and arguably has been replaced by conservation through a sustainable use

model. However, International laws and policies by their very nature need national laws,

policies and effective strategies for their implementation. For these ends, member states have

an obligation to harmonize the national laws with the treaties, and create favorable legal and

institutional environments that enhance their enforcement.

9 The Convention on Biological Diversity under paragraph 12 of the preamble gives recognition for the benefit

sharing, and its Article 8(j) makes it clear involvement of indigenous people and use of traditional knowledge

and Article 10(c) customary use of natural resources. ILO.169 Convention incorporates rules that promote

special treatment for indigenous people under article 4, right to participate in under Article 7(1), and ensuring

security of land tenure right under Articles 13, 14 and 15.




4

Therefore, it is appropriate to explore responses to the following queries as key issues in this

study:

1. Do Ethiopian laws and policies recognize indigenous people rights: including

specifically land tenure rights, indigenous people participation and benefit sharing

in the Awash National Park management?

2. If they give recognition for these rights, what is the extent of their implementation

and possible legal constraints that are affecting negatively their effective

implementation?

3. In response to the answers to these queries what recommendations ensue?

2. Study areas

This study has been conducted in the districts of the Awash-Fantale which is mainly

inhabited by the Afar ethnic group (Afar) and the Kereyu-Fantale which is the Oromo ethnic

group (Kereyu and Ittu) and the Awash National Park which is located between the two

districts. The two districts are located adjacent to each other and they share boundary with

the Awash National Park.

The Awash National Park was initially named as Mathura national park, but through its

establishment legislation it got the name Awash National Park. It is located in the southern

tip of the Afar regional State and the north East of Oromia regional state. It is situated 130

miles away from Addis Ababa the capital city of Ethiopia. It shares the rift valley and

remarkable topographical features: hot water, Awash River falls and catchments, diverse

landscapes and flora and fauna. The rural people who are living in this area mainly depend on

cattle herding for their livelihood. Some people use mixed agriculture. It is also a famous

archaeological site where early hominid relics have been discovered.

3. Methods

The main aim of this study is to explore legal and policy factors that affect the

implementation of indigenous people rights in and around the Awash National Park.

Accordingly, the researcher endeavours to identify the legal and policy gaps that affect




5

implementation of the indigenous people rights and Convention on Biological Diversity, and

forward possible recommendations as the objectives.

The study sought to answer the following three research questions: Do current Ethiopian

national laws recognize indigenous people rights; land tenure, participatory management and

benefit sharing in and around Awash National Park? If they recognize these rights, what is

their extent of implementation? And what are the possible legal factors that are affecting

implementation of indigenous people rights.

To explore these questions, the researcher has used Qualitative interviews (informal,

unstructured and semi-structured interviews), observation, reviewing current Ethiopian laws

and other relevant documents.

The research sample were identified by using chain referral strategies to conduct unstructured

and semi-structured interviews with 20 traditional elders, and targeted sampling to conduct

interview with 18 park authorities, experts and government officials. The use of open-ended

interview with these persons, in addition to the data generated through observation, reviewing

national laws and other relevant documents enabled the researcher to explore implementation

of indigenous people rights in the research site.

4. Recognition and implementation of indigenous people rights

Before discussing about the indigenous people rights, it is appropriate to identify the group of

people who are deemed as indigenous peoples in the Awash National Park and its vicinities.

The African Working Group policy draft document has listed some groups of people who are

deemed as indigenous people in African continent. Among these are Kereyu, Afar, Nuer,

Borena and a group of people who are engaged in cattle herding.10

The policy document

firstly lists the group of indigenous people, and it also assumes any group of people who

depend on cattle herding for their livelihood as indigenous people. However, this document

is not yet approved.

10

Indigenous peoples in Africa: The forgotten peoples?‟ African Commission Working Group on Indigenous

Populations Report, Banjul, Gambia 2006




6

Three-fourth of provisions in the current Ethiopian constitution seeks to protect fundamental

human rights. It gives recognition for both individual and group rights in order to avoid any

form of discrimination and marginalization that existed and developed by the past regimes.

Under Article 25, the right to equality and equal protection of the law is guaranteed for all the

Ethiopian citizens. This legal provision prohibits any sort of discrimination which may be

based on grounds, inter alia, of race, social origin, or „other status‟. Though the constitution

does not employ the phrase „indigenous people rights‟, there are a number of rules that

address recognition of indigenous people rights. For instance, the constitution under Article

39 further guarantees the nations, nationalities and peoples in the country to have

unconditional right to enjoy self determination.11

This provision clarifies the group of people

that are entitled to enjoy this right by providing its possible beneficiaries. It defines „nations,

nationalities and peoples‟ based on „common culture or similar customs, mutual intelligibility

of language, belief in a common or related identities, a common psychological make-up, and

who inhabit an identifiable, predominantly contagious territory‟.12

This statement is too

broad and it includes any societal groups who are indigenous to the specific localities.

Moreover, the constitution is novel in that it confers the right for nations‟ nationalities and

people to determine their identity by themselves13

. It also entitles each person to choose his

or her means of livelihood, occupation and profession.14

The right to self determination

includes; the right to speak, write, and develop their language, to express, develop and

promote their culture, and to preserve their history.15

It further incorporates the right „to a

full measure of self-government which includes the right to establish government institutions

in the territory that they inhabit and to have equitable representation at the local and federal

governments‟.16

However, neither the constitution nor none of Ethiopian laws and policy

instruments clearly defines or gives specific criterion for the determination of indigenous

people.

11

See the Federal democratic Republic of Ethiopia Constituion,1995, Article 39 12

Ibid Article 39 sub Articles (1) & (5) 13

Ibid Sub Article1 14

Ibid Article 41 Sub Article 2 15

Ibid 16

Ibid




7

The group of people living in and around the Awash National Park is not as such

homogeneous. The Kereyu, Afar and Ittu are the main groups‟ of people who are living in

the area for a long period of time. According to elders, these three groups of people have

strong attachment with land and other natural resources in the area. Most of them are

pastoralists, and they depend on the national park to herd their cattle particularly during dry

seasons.

However, indigenous people in the protected areas were highly marginalized throughout the

history of Ethiopia and were fenced off from involving the protected area management.17

4.1. Land tenure right

The right to own property could be said to be one of the fundamental rights for human beings.

Arguably, the recognition of this right under the legal and policy instruments is paramount to

implement other basic rights because it enhances and assists the enforcement other

fundamental human rights. Under Article 40, the Ethiopian constitution excludes land tenure

right from the scope of private ownership of property. According to this provision, every

Ethiopian citizen has the right to own private property. Private property ownership right,

however, does not include the right to land tenure and natural resources. It treats these rights

as separate from the above. Accordingly, the right to land and natural resources ownership is

exclusively vested on the State and the peoples of Ethiopia.18

Article 40 of the constitution,

on the other hand, enshrines land land-holding rights for Peasants and pastoralists. The

possible prerogatives that may be enjoyed, however, are limited, for example the right to

possession, use and fruit collection from a tract of land. They may use a plot of land for

themselves or collect civil fruits by renting the land. The right to disposal, which is crucial

under the sub- rights of ownership, is under government control. The constitution protects

pastoralists people like indigenous people living in and around the Awash National Park from

displacement.19

More importantly, the provision puts a condition for the enactment of specific

legislation to enforce the land tenure rights.20

17

Supra note 7 18

Supra note 12 Art 40 Sub Articles 1& 3

19 Ibid Article 40 Sub Article 5

20 Ibid




8

Traditionally, the indigenous people living in and around the national park can communally

possess and administer grazing land. All land and natural resources in the areas are divided

among the clans (Afar elder, 67). The source confirmed that each clan has its own traditional

rules, as how to control a communal land as a clan. They also give access to the people from

other clan, when there is shortage of grass for grazing in their localities.

Recently, the Ethiopian Government has issued rural land administration proclamation No.

456/2005. This proclamation is unique by its nature when we compare it with the past land

tenure laws. Particularly, it incorporates rules that give recognition to communal land

holding rights to the pastoralist people.21

On the other hand, the legislation stipulates the aim

of recognition communal land tenure right as to create “... a conducive system of rural land

administration that promotes the conservation and management of natural resources, and

encourages investors to pastoralist‟s areas where there is tribe based communal land holding

system...".22

This legislation assumes Communal land “as if common for all”, and seeks

communal land to be used for investment purposes. It also empowers the government

authorities to change the communal land holding to private holding, whenever there is a need

to do so.23

Moreover, the proclamation makes it clear that the pastoralists may not claim the

communal holding of land as a right to possess it; rather it will be decided by the government

authorities.24

The federal land tenure legislation further decentralizes the power for the regional states to

enact specific land tenure laws, and establish institutions to implement the possible rights and

obligation under the legislation.25

Accordingly, most of the regional states have enacted land

tenure legislations and established pastoralist‟s affairs institutions that are responsible to

enforce them. The Oromia regional state has enacted rural land administration proclamation

in 2007.26

This proclamation incorporates the rule that gives protection for communal land

holding, which is used commonly by the pastoralists for grazing their cattle.27

On the other

21

See Paragraph 5 of Ethiopian Rural Land Administration and Use proclamation no 456/2005 22

See Ibid paragraph three of its preamble 23


Ibid 25

Supra note 23 ,Article 17 26

The Oromia Rural land Administration and use proclamation no. 130/2007 27

Ibid Article 2 Sub Article 5




9

hand, this proclamation also makes it clear that protected areas and national parks are under

the State possession.28

Upon the establishment of parks, it pledges the local community to

participate.29

However, it does not incorporate rule about the role of the local communities

after the establishment of protected areas and in the protected areas that were established

before the adoption of this legislation.30

Moreover, it does not hold special rules that deal

with the protection of indigenous people.

4.1.1 Land tenure registration

Once the law is enacted, it needs institutions for its implementation. The legal and policy

entitlements may not solve the societal problems unless they are enforced. Accordingly, the

federal government has established pastoralist affairs department with in ministry of federal

affairs to enhance implementation of policies and laws that are enacted for the development

of pastoralists‟ people within the ministry of federal affairs. By the same token, the Afar and

the Oromia regional states have established special institutions called pastoralists affairs

offices which are responsible to facilitate the development in the pastoralists areas.

Moreover, the federal and the regional government land tenure legislations make it clear the

necessity of rural land registration certificate to demonstrate possessory rights.31

The land

tenure certificate is used as an evidence to protect the land tenure rights from any unlawful

interference. It is a tool that enhances security of land rights. Currently, most regional states

in Ethiopia are providing land tenure registration certificate to people who are living in the

rural areas. According to the local authorities working in Agriculture offices, in Afar and

Ormoia regional states, the governments‟ offices are not providing rural land registration

certificate to the pastoralist people who have the communal land holding right around Awash

National Park. The elders from the study area also confirmed that they have no formal land

entitlement, and their land tenure right is not yet secured. One of the sources disclosed that

they lost their land and were pushed by the government to establish large firms of sugar cane

plantation and also for the use of other investment purposes. He added the park authority

closed the areas and controlled them at gun point, and prohibits them to graze on their

28

Ibid Article 2 Sub 4 and Article 22 Sub Article 1 29


Ibid Article 22 31

Ibid Article 2 Sub Article 21 and supra note 13 Article 2 Sub Article 14




10

ancestor‟s land.32

The source further added the authority denies the natural relationship

among our cattle and wildlife. 33

4.1.2. Land tenure expropriation

The Constitution under Article 40(8) gives the government the power to authorize, to

expropriate private land holdings for the public purposes. However, this constitution limits

the power of government authorities by imposing an obligation on them to pay compensation

in advance for the victim parties. Moreover, recently the Ethiopian government adopted a

new proclamation No. 455/2005 which incorporates rules how to pay compensation for those

people who are displaced from their land. This legislation defines „Public purpose‟ as the

use of land in a way which ensures direct or indirect benefits for the people, and consolidates

sustainable development.34

Under this legislation, public purpose includes expropriation of

land for pubic entities establishment, private investments and other organizations, where the

worda or urban administration believes that the holding is used for a better development

project.35

Public purposes therefore are widened in its scope to include various societal

interests. This law empowers the local government authority to weigh the benefits of land

holding that deserves expropriation. However, the legislation does not set the process, and

the role of local communities is affected due to expropriation. By the same token, the

country has no land use plan that enhances security of land rights.36

Prominently, the law

gives absolute power to government authorities to determine what constitutes public interest

by their own discretion. Moreover, the decision made by the local government authority is

not subject to appeal to ordinary courts or any administrative agencies.37

According to federal rural land legislation, the holder of land tenure right is entitled to get

compensation for the property which is situated on the land,38

and for the improvement which

32

See Box two interviews made with local elders, pp.16 33

Ibid 34


Proclamation No.455/2005 Expropriation of land holding for public purposes and payment of compensation

Article 3 Sub Article 1 36

See Ethiopian 4th

country report of Convention on Biological Diversity, 2009 37

See Ibid Article 11 38

Supra note 41 Article 2 Sub Articles 1 & 2




11

is made permanently to the land escape39

. Here the law classifies permanent and non

permanent improvement of the plot of land for payment of compensation, though it does not

give the types of improvement that are assumed as permanent improvement. Nor the law

provides criteria for such categorization. These legal gaps may widen or give room for

discretion of the law enforcement agencies.

4.2. Significances of indigenous people participation in national park

management

ILO.169 Convention specifies that indigenous and tribal people have the right to participate

in the use, management, protection, and conservation of natural resources, as well as the right

to be consulted.40

In the 7th Conference of Parties (“COP”) , which was setup by the

Convention on Biological Diversity decided that “the establishment, management and

monitoring of protected areas should take place with the full and effective participation, and

the full respect for the rights of indigenous and local communities consistent with domestic

law and applicable international obligations.”41

Arguably the COP decision is legally binding

on member states of Convention on Biological Diversity, because it is an authoritative legal

interpretation of the Convention on Biological Diversity‟s provisions.42

The involvement of indigenous people as a partner enhances the success of natural resources

conservation.43

The use of local knowledge can enhance a more effective local steering, and

reduce transaction costs and help the partners to learn and use traditional knowledge for

conservation.44

It also assists to include the needs and aspirations of different societal group.

The participation of indigenous people is not a simple tool in conservation of biodiversity in

the protected area, but it is a crucial scheme.

39


Martinez-Cobo, J.R. 1986 41

See the COP Decision VII/28,the 7th

Conference parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity 42

Ibid 43

Aziz MA. 2008 44

Ostrom, E .1990




12

4.2.1. Indigenous people participation in Awash National Park governance

under Ethiopian Laws

Awash National Park was established in 1966, and it was legally publicized in 1969. The

park establishment law prohibits any local people interference and use of the park

resources.45

This law gives absolute power to government agencies to govern and mange the

resources. It makes illegal the poaching, the use and any unauthorized use of the park

resources.46

The solutions for any interference were sought and given from the government

authorities, but it was not from the local people.

In 1991, with the overthrow of the centralized government, the country started new ways of

economic, social and political systems. The transitional government charter clearly gave

individual and groups the rights that paved a way for the local community participation and

consultation in matters that affect their interests.47

The document gave recognition to the

protection of traditional values and cultures of nations, nationalities and people of the

country.48

With the end of the transitional period in 1995, the Ethiopian people adopted the constitution

that clearly recognises the local people participation, and consultation on the government

measures that affect them.49

Under Article 43, it reads that “National have the right to

participate in national development and, in particular, to be consulted with respect to policies

and projects affecting their communities”.50

This provision gives recognition to the right of

consultation to any community, who are potentially going to be affected by the development

programmes and policies.

Moreover, in 1997 the Ethiopian government issued a comprehensive environmental policy.

This policy document remarkably gives emphasises on the importance and necessity of

participatory development. It recognizes the local people participation in all stages of

45

See the objectives of ANP establishment from Order no.54/69 46

Ibid 47

See the preamble of Ethiopian transitional government charter 1991 48

Ibid 49

Supra note 12 1995 Article 43 Sub Article 2 50

Ibid




13

environmental and natural resource development and management programs. The local

people participation starts from project conception and continues through out planning,

implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the final output of the project.51

It reaffirms

that the participation is genuine enough through involvement of the local people at grass root

level.52

This aims to prevent the outsiders‟ imposition of their need without the local people‟s

involvement. However, the policy document does not separately give special treatment and

recognition for the participation of indigenous people. It fails to protect the needs and

interests of indigenous people, though one may argue that indigenous people may be included

within the set of local communities.

Recently, the Ethiopian federal government has enacted a proclamation to conserve

wildlife.53

This legislation aims to conserve, manage, develop and properly utilize the

country‟s wildlife resources.54

Its preamble reaffirms the importance of inclusion of the local

communities to achieve the objectives incorporated under the legislation.55

This proclamation

is unique in mentioning indigenous people participation while defining the wildlife reserve

management. It defines „wildlife reserve‟ as an area designated to conserve wildlife, where

indigenous local communities are allowed to live together and conserve natural resources.56

The proclamation however does not state clearly the involvement of indigenous communities

in other types of protected areas, except wildlife reserve areas. By the same token, the

wording of „wildlife reserve‟ may be interpreted as an area which is designated only for

wildlife protection. The word „reserve‟ implies an area that is isolated for specific purpose

with exclusion of any form of human encroachment. On the other hand, one may construe

and argue that it as an area which is reserved for wildlife with exception to indigenous people

involvement. According to an expert from the national park, currently, the Awash National

Park does not formally involve the indigenous people in its management. The source further

confirmed that there were no staff members from indigenous people, and recently, however,

fifteen scouts were employed from the Afar and kereyu local people.

51

Supra note 7, pages 19&20 52

Ibid 53

The proclamation Development, conservation and utilization of wildlife proclamation no. 541/2007 54

Ibid Article 3 55

Ibid Preamble Para 3 56

Ibid Article 2 Sub Article 10




14

The above mentioned proclamation also fails to give specific elements or characteristics,

which may be used to identify indigenous local communities to confer the rights. Moreover,

it does not clearly mention the inclusion of the right to use traditional values and the pursuit

of a way of life associated with the use of land and natural resources.

The other proclamation that deals with the local community participation is the Forest

Development, Conservation and Utilization Proclamation No. 542/2007. This proclamation

is a unique legal instrument that gives recognition within its preamble, both participation and

benefit sharing to the communities who are living in or around the forest areas to maintain

sustainable utilization of forest resources.57

It also includes a special rule that recognises the

necessity of participation of local communities in the designation and the demarcation of the

protected and productive forests areas.58

Interestingly enough, the proclamation, only as an

exception permits eviction of local communities.59

It imposes an obligation on the

government authorities to take in to account the best interest of communities concerned,

whenever they intend designation and demarcation of the protected areas.60

However, this

legislation does not incorporate the criteria for determining communities‟ interest and the

manner of its implementation.61

On the other hand, most importantly, this proclamation entitles the local communities to

participate in the development, conservation and utilization plans.62

It promotes local

communities inclusive approach.63

The legal instrument further imposes obligations on the

government authorities to facilitate the continuity of habitation of the local communities who

were formerly residing in the forests whenever feasible, without obstructing its

development64

and as a last resort the inhabitants should be resettled in areas which are

suitable for their living.65

This legal right enables the local communities to use natural

resources within the forest in a sustainable manner without separating them from the areas

57

See Preamble, Para 2 of Forest development, conservation and utilization proclamation No. 542/2007 58

See Ibid Article 2 Sub Article 7 & Article 8 59

Ibid 60

Ibid 61



Ibid Article 9 sub Article 8 64

Ibid 65

Ibid




15

where the natural resources are situated. 66

Here however, the sustainable level of resource

use is determined by the appropriate government authorities. This provision imposes

obligations even on the local communities to seek permission from government authorities

for any use of natural resources. It also makes illegal any temporary or permanent settlement,

grazing domestic animals or hunting without a written permission from the Ministry of

Agriculture and Rural Development.67

The permit is given with the discretion of concerned

government authority.

Moreover, this legal instrument does not confer special recognition and protection for the

indigenous people, though one may argue that the phrase local communities also include the

indigenous people. Furthermore, the proclamation gives absolute power to the government

authorities to render decision without the involvement of local communities.68

This legal

provision entitles the government authorities to expropriate local communities without their

participation regarding large-scale farming, mining operations, construction of roads,

irrigation, dam construction and other similar investment activities that impact on forests and

its biodiversity.69

According to the experts working in the national park, there are no formal schemes that

enable them to involve in the national park management. Moreover, they confirmed that

indigenous people have well developed traditional culture and values in the conservation of

natural resource.70

However, the park authorities are not using these practices as inputs

through participation of indigenous people; rather they give more emphasis to the use of

protective approach.71

They don‟t consider indigenous people as part of ecosystem and a

source of solution finders.72

On the contrary, the authorities consider indigenous people as

the source of problem.73

66

Ibid Article 10 Sub Articles 3 & 4 67



Ibid 70

See Box Two interview made with elders from indigenous people, pp. 16 71

Ibid 72

Ibid 73

Ibid




16

Box one: Indigenous people involvement in the establishment of Awash National Park

Box two: Indigenous people participation in the governance of Awash National Park

4.3. Benefit Sharing

In protected area management, indigenous people are the preliminary societal group who

exert their efforts through different schemes for its development.74

They develop, sustain and

74

Harrop .2003. Human diversity and the diversity of life international regulation of the role indigenous and

rural human communities in conservation

We lived with the natural resources in the areas of ANP for centuries. Our ancestors shared

water and other natural resources with wildlife. We never have hostility with them. They

respect our animals and we respect them. During the imperial government, the local

government authorities came to our village and urged us to leave the areas where we were

living. We asked why we were losing our land and natural resources. They responded that

the area was demarcated for the preservation of wildlife. Before this day, they did not

discuss with us about the area and its boundary allocated for the establishment of the ANP.

We did not give our consent for its establishment. (Afar elder, 65 years old)

The national park is the only area that provides feed for our cattle during the drought

periods. We may not live without the national park. Cattle herding is the main livelihood

for us. Our cattle life depends on the existence of the park, particularly during the

drought periods.

However, from the start of its establishment, the community do not have any common

goal that set formal schemes to sustain natural resources. Even the park authorities

consider us as an enemy of the park, and we consider them the same. They chase us and

our cattle whenever they consider we are crossing the park. However, no one suggested

any possible alternative feeding ground for our cattle during the drought season. Natural

resources outside the national park are degraded. The park boundary was not clearly set

out with our involvement. On the other hand, some poachers violate the laws of the park

and norms of society; and negatively affect the natural resources. The park authorities

use weapons against us and shoot our cattle. The park has not developed schemes that

enhance participation of local communities in the governance of national park. We are

isolated from the governance of the park. (Kereyu Elder, 60 years old

(Kereyu elder, 61 years and Afar Elder, 71 years old




17

maintain landscapes, own natural resources and protect them from various encroachments.

Thus, indigenous people carry out a lion‟s share of the development of the protected area. By

the same token, a protected area may have a negative impact on the local people, who are

living in and around it. A protected area may limit the use of natural resources. The

Convention on Biological Diversity under Articles 15, 16 and 19 obliges member states to

establish laws and regulations that enhance benefit sharing to the local communities. Most

importantly, Article 10(c) of the Convention on Biological Diversity states that state parties

shall “protect and encourage customary use of biological resources in accordance with

traditional cultural practices which are compatible with conservation or sustainable use

requirements.” The indigenous peoples‟ conservation of natural resource is highly linked with

the use of natural resources. However, the 2009 4th

country report reveals that Ethiopia has

not yet developed benefit sharing schemes.75

Benefit sharing for indigenous people will

provide incentives for them to conserve rather than over-degrading and destroying the

concerned natural resources.76

The source expert from the national park stated that the main revenue source of Awash

National Park is tourists‟ entrance fee. The office collects 10 Ethiopian birr per individual

form Ethiopian nationals and 50 birr form foreigners. They confirmed that annual revenue of

the national park from entrance fee is very small and increasing substantially over the years.

Currently, the Ethiopian Government has decentralized the management of natural resources

for the regional states. They collect and use revenues from the protected areas. However,

the federal government manages natural resources in the protected areas which are located

between or among the regional states. The rationale for this mode of governance is to avoid

conflict of interests, while managing the protected areas. The Awash National Park is located

between two regional states. The Oromia and the Afar share its boundaries; therefore its

administration is handled by the federal government.

According to a park expert in Awash National Park, the total revenue generated from the park

entrance fee, fine, sale of natural resources and other related sources is submitted to federal

75

Ethiopia‟s 4th

country report , 2009, Addis Ababa Ethiopia, page 77 76

See supra note 74




18

government annually. Consequently, the federal government may use it to run its affairs or

allocate it to the regional states. According to experts in Awash National Park, in the case of

income from sport hunting, the protected areas which are governed by the federal

government, the total revenue of 85 percent is allocated for the regional states which share

such protected areas. Yet the regional states have the right to allocate this revenue according

to their priorities. They may not allocate it directly for the indigenous people who have

strong attachment with specific natural resources. Because of this, the indigenous people

living in and around the national park do not directly benefit from this revenue.




19

Conclusion

Current international laws and policy instruments include the Convention on Biological

Diversity which gives recognition to the protection of indigenous people rights such as the

right to secure land holding, participation, benefit sharing in and around the protected areas.

These treaties impose an obligation on the member states to respect, fulfil and protect these

rights.

The Ethiopian government ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1994.

Moreover, though the Ethiopian government has not ratified the ILO.169 Convention, the

indigenous people rights protection in the protected area management has already evolved

into a customary rule of international law. Thus, they have explicitly eroded the protectionist

mode of protected area management in the international arena.

The present Ethiopian constitution enshrines the right of local people to be consulted in any

development projects and policies that affect their interest. It further incorporates various

rules that are designed to protect individual and group‟s fundamental human rights. Though

the constitution and any other legislation fails to incorporate the criteria to identify the

indigenous people, and also fails to provide special treatment for indigenous people in the

protected area management, but the constitution enshrines the land holding rights for the

pastoralist people. It also prohibits displacement of this group of people. Moreover, the

Federal and regional land administration laws give recognition for nomadic people to have

communal land possession right and non-displacement from their land except for a public

purpose. However, the purpose of recognition of this right is not mainly to protect the local

people rather to promote investments and other uses of the land. Moreover, what constitutes

public purpose is determined by the discretion of government authorities. Besides, the

regional states around the park do not adopt the tools for registration and provide certificate

for communal land holding for pastoralist people. This document is vital for the pastoralists‟

people to defend their land from any unlawful intervention and eviction. Thus indigenous

people land tenure right is yet insecure. Therefore, the level of legal protection of land tenure




20

right is ill-protected and sub-standard when it is compared to international legal and policy

instruments.

The nomadic people in and around the Awash National Park traditionally consider land and

natural resources around the national park as their own property. They claim that the park

boundary was set without their involvement and consent. On the other hand, the land tenure

laws assume the communal land holding as if “the land common for all” and expropriate it

for various purposes. By the same token, the government authorities have legally empowered

to expropriate a plot of land without any consultation with local people. Even the local

people have no way to seek legal discourse before the court as due process of law. The

decision made by the administrative authority is final and can never be challenged before the

court of law.

On the contrary, the federal wild life protection law and environmental policy recognize local

community participation. They clearly disclose the importance of local community

participation in natural resources conservation. However, none of these instruments give

special treatment for indigenous people who are having strong attachment with specific

environment and protected areas. In practice, the Awash National Park is fenced off from

the local communities and indigenous people.

Moreover, the park management has not developed benefit sharing schemes for indigenous

people to provide incentive and strengthen community support for the conservation natural

resources as an institution. The park management was centralized by the federal government,

and the park revenue is submitted to federal government annually. There is no direct benefit

sharing schemes for the indigenous people.

The legal and policy recognition of fundamental human rights is not sufficient to protect

indigenous people rights. It may not meet international standards which are set out for the

protection of indigenous people rights under the ILO Convention and the Convention on

Biological Diversity. Therefore, the following recommendations are given to enhance

recognition and implementation of indigenous people rights which are incorporated under

international instruments in the Awash National Park.




21

1. Ethiopia should consider adopting a new law dealing with the rights of indigenous

peoples, such as participation, benefit sharing and land tenure explicitly in the

protected area management.

2. The Ethiopian legal and policy instruments should give criteria which make it easy to

identify who are the indigenous people in a given locality. Then, this group of

people could receive special treatment in the national park management.

3. Legal recognition of participation under Ethiopian laws could be enhanced by further

guidelines and formal schemes which enhance its implementation at grass root level

in and around the national park.

4. The Ethiopian government could come up with a system of registration of communal

land holding in the study areas to enhance tenure security and limit illegal

encroachments on the park natural resources.

5. The process of expropriation and the outcome of decisions‟ related to this matter

should be transparent, participatory and give a chance for the victim of expropriation

to seek remedies in the courts. The way of determining public interest, the role of

local people in its identification and the manner through which national and

indigenous people interests to be weighed should be done through clear standards set

in advance with local people participation. Moreover, measures affecting indigenous

people land holding right should be taken with full involvement of indigenous people

in decision making process.

6. Finally, adopting formal regulations that enhance benefit sharing to the indigenous

people is a vital means to have effective national park management. The present

centralized model of national park management approach and laws would be

enhanced by an amendment in the manner that enables indigenous people to involve

and share benefits from national park revenues.




22

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Christensen Fund and the Durrell Institute of Conservation

and Ecology. The writing of this thesis would not have been possible without personal and

practical support from numerous people. Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor,

Professor Stuart Harrop for his constructive professional support throughout my study.

Secondly, I would also like to thank Ethiopian Wildlife authority, Awash –Fantle and Kereyu

–Fantle districts, Awash National Park, and the indigenous people from the above study area

for their valuable contributions they made to this research. Finally, I would like to thank my

wife Wr/o Emebet Wolde Sellassie for her encouragement, advice, support and her personal

sacrifice throughout my study.




23

References

Adams and Hutton. (2007). People, Parks and Poverty: Political ecology and biodiversity

conservation. Conservation and Society 5: 147–183

Aziz, MA. (2008). Co-management of protected areas without local knowledge and

participation: A case study of Lawachara National Park. In: Fox J, Bushley BR, Dutt S,

Quazi SA (eds.), Connecting communities and conservation: Collaborative management of

protected areas in Bangladesh. USA: Accessed Apr10, 2010

Brown, L. H. (1965). Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources in Ethiopia.

UNESCO Report. Accessed March 12, 2010

Brown, L. H. (1965). Ethiopian Episode. Country Life, London. Accessed May 20, 2010

Ethiopia‟s 4th

country report, 2009, Addis Ababa Ethiopia, page 77, Accessed on March2,

2010

Harrop. (2003). Human diversity and the diversity of life international regulation of the role

indigenous and rural human communities in conservation, Malayan law journal xxxiii

Indigenous peoples in Africa: The forgotten peoples?‟2006. African Commission Working

Group on Indigenous Populations Report, Banjul, Gambia, and Accessed on may 10, 2010

Martinez-Cobo, J.R. (1986). Study of the problem of discrimination against indigenous

populations. New York: United Nations, Available

On: jpe.library.arizona.edu. Accessed Apr 6, 2010

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective

action, Cambridge Univ. Press. Available on: download-book.net/ostrom-governing-the-

commons-pdf-pdf.html. Accessed May 10, 2010

Wondolleck, M, and Steven. (2000). Making Collaboration Work: Lesson from innovation in

Natural Resources Management. California: Island Press. Available on:

books.google.co.uk/books? Accessed March 10, 2010

Legal and Policy instruments

1. Convention on Biological Diversity,1992

2. Development, conservation and utilization of wildlife proclamation of Ethiopia No.

541/2007.

3. Environmental pollution control proclamation of Ethiopia No. 300/2002.




24

4. Expropriation of landholdings for public purposes and payment of compensation

Proclamation of Ethiopia No. 455/2005.

5. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia: Environmental policy, 2 April 1997,

Accessed February 15, 2010.

6. Ethiopian Forest development, conservation and utilization proclamation No.

542/2007.

7. International Labour Organization. 2003. ILO Convention on indigenous and tribal

peoples, 1989 (No. 169).

8. Oromia rural land administration and use proclamation No. 130/2007

9. The Constitution of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia proclamation

No.1/1995.

10. The charter of transitional period of Ethiopia,1991

11. The 7th Conference of Parties (“COP”) to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the

COP Decision VII/28

12. Proclamation No. 192 of 1980 proclamation to provide for conservation and

development of forest and wildlife resources

ayele hegena anabo-indigenous people rights and protected area management

Documents

national laws

rights of indigenous

awash national park

awash national park1

local people participation

ethiopian national action

conservation natural

past laws