rangeland policy and co- management in the tibetan plateau ......rangeland in the tibetan plateau...

中国科学院成都生物研究所Chengdu Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Rangeland Policy and Co-Management in the Tibetan Plateau

of China and Neighbouring Countries

YAN Zhaoli & WU Ning

CIB-CAS; ICIMOD

17-19 Nov.2014, Bishkek, Kyrgyz


Rangelands and Pastoralists in China

• A total area of 400 million ha or 41.7% of China’s land territory is covered by rangeland;

• Some 9700 plant species plus diverse ecosystem services provided to local inhabitants and downstream people;

• Pastoral and semi-pastoral areas cover 40% of land territory or over 80% of the nation’s rangelands, and support only 3% of Chinese population；

• About half of the country’s 26.1 million poor people live in pastoral or semi-pastoral areas.


Brief Review of Rangeland Management Regimes in China

• Before 1960s: tribal and monastery mgt.

• 1960s – 1981: communal management of both livestock and rangelands

• 1982 – 1993: private livestock Vs communal common access to rangelands

• 1994 – : privatization of rangelands to individual households


Realization of “the Tragedy of the Commons”

As a rational being, every herdsman seeks to maximize his gain on openly shared common pasture (Hardin, 1968)

-- maximum carrying capacity

-- individual commercial interest Vs common vision

-- effectiveness of community organization and action


5

Rangeland Status in China

90% of China’s rangeland degraded at different levels at the beginning of 21st, of which about half were significant in vegetation coverage reduction, soil erosion, desertification, and rodent/insect affection。

Atmospheric, soil, climatic effects; rodent, insects, fire,

and other natural disasters

Rapid increase of people andlivestock population; over grazing,

and over use of rangeland resources

Physical & Climatic Impacts Anthropogenic Impacts


Some key points of the Rangeland Law(1985, revision of 2002)

• To support rangeland protection, construction and proper uses, so as to improve ecosystem condition, maintain biodiversity, develop modern animal husbandry, and to ensure sustainable development.

• All levels of government should include rangeland conservation, management and proper use into the development plans.

• All state or collectively owned rangelands can be legally contracted to collectives, individual households or group of households for the purpose of pastoral production, environmental construction and conservation.


National Legal Rangeland Documents

• Rangeland Law of People’s Republic of China (1985, revisionof 2002)

• Animal Husbandry Law of People’s Republic of China (2005)

• Protected Areas Regulation of People’s Republic of China(1994)

• Prevention and Control of Sandification Law of People’s Republic of China (2001)

• Regulation on Preventing Rangeland Wild Fire of People’s Republic of China (2008)


Rangeland Management Related Points in the Animal Husbandry Law (2006)

• The nation supports fencing, irrigation, improvement, and establishing fodder and forage base on rangelands for livestock production

• There is a need for optimizing flock composition, rotational grazing and stall feeding in pastoral areas, so that to improve rangeland condition.


Local level Formulated Rangeland Regulations

• Provincial (autonomous Region) detailed regulation on implementing the national Rangeland Law

• Prefecture (district, county) complementary article to the provincial (autonomous Region) detailed regulation on implementing national Rangeland Law

• Local managerial guideline on collection and purchase of rangeland plants


National Rangeland Related Policy Documents

• State Council opinion on strengthening rangeland protection and construction (2002)

• Rangeland management master plan (2001 -2010)

• State Council opinion on promoting sustainable and healthy animal husbandry development (2007)

• Yearly No.1 Policy of the central government (recent years from 2004-)


Ministerial Rangeland Related Policies

• Managerial guideline on balancing forage and livestock production (MOA, 2005)

• Measure of supervision and authorization of rangeland requisition and impropriation (MOA, 2006)

• Order of MOA: instruction on agricultural administrative sanctions (2006)

• Managerial instruction on liquorice and ephedracollection from rangeland (2001)

• Stipulation for the levels of rangeland fire classification (2008)


Relevant National Programs Implemented in Last Two Decades

• Returning sloping croplands into rangelands

• Livestock grazing ban on degraded rangelands

• Ecological migration from headwater or severely degraded rangelands

• Fencing, forage production, and nomads settlement on rangelands


Why Is It Difficult in Individual Household Mgt. of Rangelands?

• Unfair water source accessibility;

• Constrained and unreasonable shifting routes;

• Unequal distribution of pastureland to individual households;

• Environmental fragmentation;

• Social, educational and marketing difficulties;

• Unnecessary in the increase of herder’s responsibility to rangelands


People & Rangelands in the Tibetan Plateau

• High (>4000 m), arid and semi-arid (<400 mm precipitation) environment

• Low human population density (averagely 1 person on every each sq km)

• Far away from central governmentdecision-makers

• Locally recruited governmentcadres with strong pastoral roots


Local Initiation of Co-management of Rangeland in the Tibetan Plateau

• All community members agreed regulations and managerial rules

• Equitable access to rangeland resources and markets

• collective uses of production means, labor forces and intelligence to enhance income and social security

• Community responsibility and equality to ensure sustainable use of rangeland resources

Advantages of Rangeland Co-management

• Multi-stakeholders of different rights to negotiate, define and guarantee amongst themselves for fair sharing of management functions, entitlements and responsibilities

• Multiple uses of rangeland resources for products, functions and services

• Securing stewardship of communities for sustainablemanagement of rangelands


What Have We Learned from the Tibet Case?

• Local communities can be and should be the custodian for rangeland

• Leadership plays an important role

• Legal/official encouragement and support count

• Wider coordinated efforts are needed to address new challenges


Rangeland Management in Nepal

Traditional rangeland management system:

• Management responsibility: unclear

• Rangeland ownership: MoFSC but defecto managed by traditional societies and used by local communities implicitly associates with the MOAC(DLS)

• Community pasturelands as common property: no identifiable entity to accept management responsibility and most of the community pasturelands are overgrazed and deteriorating.


Local Practice of rangeland Management System in Nepal

• Private livestock Vs. public or open access to land within villages. Strong and well respected village chief are able to provide reasonable levels of management, even rotational grazing but stocking rates are rarely regulated.

• Indigenous pasture management in high altitude area : The scheduling of the opening or closing time of the pasturelands by a community or group leader or by an assigned person (herder) is fixed within certain community. The users have to follow and the defaulters are fined .

• The animals are moved towards the alpine pasture during monsoon seasons and brought back to the lower altitude forest, shrub-land and croplands for winter grazing.

Key Stakeholders and Their RolesS.N Agency Roles

1 Herders/livestock owners Ownership for rangeland quality mgmt, utilization and

conservation

2 Traditional society/community Local participation for Co-mgmt. utilization and

conservation

3 Community Forestry user's groups Range mgmt. on Community Forestry based approach

4 Leasehold Forestry groups Range mgmt. on Leasehold Forestry based approach.

5 Village Development Committees Coordination & implementation at local grass-root level

6 District Development Committees Coordination & implementation at district level.

7 District Livestock Services Office Delivery of inputs & Program implementation

,Collaboration

8 District Forest Office Rangeland allocation and Coordination ,Collaboration

9 District Women Development Office Coordination with DLSO

10 NGO/INGO/CBO such as ICIMOD/KMTNC

etc.

Builds capacity of partner institutions

11 Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives Policy, planning monitoring and inter-intra coordination

12 Ministry of Forestry and Soil

Conservation

Policy, planning monitoring and inter-intra coordination

13 Ministry of Local Development Policy, planning monitoring and inter-intra coordination


Key Issues Identified in Nepal Range Mgt.

• Lack of national rangeland policy – currently in the process of formulation with ICIMOD support

• Inadequate grazing mgt : no controlled stocking rate or rotational grazing

• Low yield in the first and secondary productivities

• Winter feeding shortage and inadequate interventions

• High tax for pasture/rangeland

• Water resources shortage

• Lack of inter-sectoral policy or public awareness of rangeland values

• Poor infrastructure and Extension Staff

• Declining available resources on rangeland management

• Ineffective monitoring of rangeland status

Co-management of rangeland being highly encouraged

National Reorganization of Rangeland Management System in Bhutan

• To nationalize all rangelands in the country

• State government owns rangeland

• Lease base long-term use rights to communities Rangeland Fire Control and results


Implications to Central Asian Rangeland Management

• Rangeland policy should not be just one single document;

• Western or China conservation and development models are not necessarily ideal models to adopt;

• Land tenure security and grassroots leadership capacity are two pillars in effectively managing rangelands;

• Mobile pastoralism must be encouraged in one way or another ;

• Technologies are not going to solve all the problems but still need to be prudently tried;


Thank You!!