沙漠研究 24-1, 57-60 (2014)
Ἃ₍◊✲ 24-1, 57 - 60 (2014)
Journal of Arid Land Studies
Journal of Arid Land Studies－ DT11 Refereed Paper －㸫DT11 Refereed Paper㸫

The Tribe- Platform of Participatory Local Development and Managementof Communal Rangeland Resources Ali NEFZAOUI*1), Mohamed EL MOURID1) and Mounir LOUHAICHI2)
Abstract: Sustainable development of pastoral and agro-pastoral systems, dominated by collective and/or tribal ownership ofrangelands, is a key issue for the West Asia and North Africa region. These two systems are located in arid and semi-arid areas andare increasingly threatened by desertification process. The policy responses to tackle this complexity have been a sectorial andfragmented, “top-down” approach, putting forward technical solutions and neglecting the social context. In response to the frequent
failures, methods of “participatory development” emerged during the 1970’s within international development arenas. Adoption ofparticipatory approaches by national governments and its translation into actual implementation appears not only partial, but also
particularly slow. Recent experiences suggest that integrated and participatory approaches may lead to more sustainable resource
management and to more effective poverty oriented policies. Promotion of local/community development is the most recent
approach to face the challenges of rangeland development. It aims at organizing people on a decentralized basis and applying
participatory programming which could lead to effectively empowering the local people. In this context, the collaborative research
program conducted by ICARDA and IFAD in Southern Tunisia has led to the development of tools and methods adapted to thedevelopment of collective desert rangeland ecosystems based on the empowerment of local rural poor communities and using
innovative participatory approaches. The pilot action conducted showed that participatory natural resources management in suchareas can be instrumental in institutionalizing participatory approaches. In both democratic and non-democratic settings, theseapproaches foster inclusiveness, transparency and accountability of public services and policy making processes. The tools
developed play an essential educational role in changing bureaucrats and people’s mind-sets and communication patterns.
Key Words: Empowerment, Participatory approach, Pastoral community, Rangeland degradation, Sustainable development

1. Introduction
Previous development projects failed to adequately address
real community issues and concerns in agropastoral dry areas
in North Africa. Decision-makers and all research anddevelopment partners are increasingly aware that “the heart of
the rangeland sustainable management” is linked toinstitutional issues. Indeed, in the past the situation ofrangelands was relatively better not only because populationpressure and demand for meat were lower, but also because themanagement of rangelands was more strictly controlled bytraditional institutions (jmaas in Morocco, Myaad in Tunisia)that enjoyed effective power.
Numerous policy andinstitutional reforms have been carried out in several countries
of North Africa. In most cases, policy and institutional
reforms weakened pastoral institutions. These institutional
reforms can be classified into three main approaches: state
appropriation of rangeland resources, strengthening customary* Corresponding Author: a.nefzaoui@cgiar.org

tribal claims, and privatization with titling (Ngaido andMcCarthy, 2004). The major objective of this work is todevelop participatory methodologies and tools that empower
local communities and promote sustainable livelihood andconservation of agropastoral resources in dry areas.

2. Methodology
2.1. Research framework
ICARDA and IFAD worked together (2000-2005) todesign the IFAD-funded project PRODESUD (Programme deDeveloppement Agropastoral et de Promotion des Initiatives
Locales du Sud-Est Tunisien/ Program of Agropastoral
Development and Promotion of Local Initiatives inSouth-eastern Tunisia).
ICARDA support was requested to (i) identify beneficiaries,(ii) develop and validate a methodology of participatory
agropastoral development and to (iii) to train and backstop theproject team.
㸦Received, September 14th, 2013; Accepted, January 10th, 2014㸧

3 Rue Mahmoud Ghaznaoui, El Menzah IV, 1082 Tunis, Tunisia
1) International Center for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas North Africa regional program, Tunis, Tunisia
2) International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Jordan, Amman

58

The project has been implemented in the Governorate ofTataouine, Southeastern Tunisia that covers 38,889 km2
representing 24% of the country’s surface and covering 7
administrative districts. Tataouine also includes 90% ofcollective rangelands of the country where extensive small
ruminants and camel herding is the major source of income.
The total population is estimated to 9000 households with a
total number of 143,524 people.
2.2. Identification of beneficiaries
Collective rangelands have different land tenure status
distributed similarly to tribal composition that does not fit withthe administrative division. The first task was to convince
national and regional decision makers to build up the projectbased on the tribal division and not on the administrative
division.
Hopefully, the decision makers understood the issue andaccepted the challenge; indeed the “modern Tunisia” banned
the tribal facet since its independence in 1956.
To most appropriate way to identify beneficiaries is todetermine the different fractions of the tribes, named
socio-territorial units (STU). This has been achieved bybuilding up the tribal map of the target area. This task wascompleted by using the “old reports” of the French army whocirculated in the region in 1913 and the know-how of the eldersof the region who accompanied the research team during themapping of tribes’ lands using GPS.
2.3. Development of the methodology of participatory
local development
A methodology is developed through the joint inputs of all
stakeholders including community members, agriculturalspecialists, extension services, researchers, local institutions,and decision makers. The methodology consists of thefollowing steps: characterization of the community, diagnosis,planningandprogramming,institutionalset-up,implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. The final
product is the community development plan resulting from anegotiation process between all stakeholders.
Figure 1 summarizes the different steps of the wholeprocess that includes 5 consecutives steps: Characterization of
the community: this a learning process for both the researchteam and the community. It is implemented using household
surveys and the community map as perceived by community
members. The final product is a data base on the community
and the “community knowledge book”. Participatory diagnosis
and planning: Problems and potential solutions to alleviate
constraints to the development of the community are identified,negotiated and agreed upon by all stakeholders. The major
result of this phase is the development plan of the community;

it reflects the vision of all stakeholders and particularly thecommunity members.
Participatory programming: This step determines what will
be implemented each year and where, and the source offunding. It clarifies the responsibilities and the duties of thedevelopment agencies and the community members.
Organization of the population and promotion ofcommunity based organization: this phase is crucial. The
community elects a body that is responsible for negotiation andimplementation of the development plan at the community level.
It is the first step toward empowerment and democracy.
Implementation of the community development plan andmonitoring and evaluation: This phase is the final step and theproduct is a set of agreements between the development
agencies and the community.
2.4. Promotion of local institutions
Traditionally tribes have their own informal local
institutions named “Myaad,” which is in charge of managing
communal natural resources (grazing sources and water points
mainly) and collective actions to be undertaken by thecommunity. The “Myaad” is composed of representatives/
elders of the different “fractions” of the tribe.
In order to be in full alignment with the “modern”
regulations and laws, two major changes have been made: (i)instead of tribe we use the “socio-territorial unit” and instead of“Myaad” we adapted new local institution, democraticallyelected and in full conformity with the law and named “GDA”(Groupement de developpement agricole/ agriculturaldevelopment association).

3. Results
3.1. Socio-territorial units (Tribes)
Twenty five tribes have been identified and the results
validated during a workshop with all stakeholders including
local and national decision makers (Fig. 2).
3.2. The community development plan
The pillar of the methodology is an effective
communication where all stakeholders negotiate community
development plan (CDP) on an equal basis and where all
sources of knowledge are explored, encompassing bothindigenous and research-based knowledge. So far there islittle integration of indigenous knowledge into development
planning, thus concerned communities are becoming more
powerless. It is suggested that development agencies should
use indicators extracted from local know-how of agropastors to
prepare relief instead of just relying on satellite imagery. Thisparticipatory approach has been accepted and embraced by

59Fig. 1. The five steps of participatory community development plan (Nefzaoui et al., 2007).

Fig. 2. The tribal map of Tataouine Governnorate, Southeastern Tunisia.

60

communities and development agencies in Tunisia, Algeria,and Morocco. It has been documented and disseminatedthrough different channels including: field manual in English
and Arabic, linkage with Karianet network, and specific websites(www.icarda.org; www.mashreq-maghreb.org).
3.3. Promotion of local institutions (GDA)
The community-based organizations (GDAs) are built up
on socio-territorial units that correspond to the traditional tribeboundaries. They are fully participating in the design andimplementation of their integrated local development. The
approach involves the real participation of agropastoral
communities, in a new bottom-up mode, for the establishmentof community development plan (CDP) that reflects the realissues and priority needs of the community. This isdeveloped through the joint inputs of all stakeholders including
community members, agricultural specialists, extension
services, local administration and state representatives.
Best-bet options for technical, institutional and policy issues
are jointly identified for implementation, monitoring andevaluation. The community is represented by a formal
community-based organization (CBO), directly elected bycommunity members and fully recognized by government
authorities as their equal partner for implementation of allactions set out in the jointly developed CDP. This includes
such crucial issues as management of communal pasture andrangelands (for example more than 50,000 ha of collective
rangelands are put under rest and fully controlled by thecommunities), as well as the procurement of funds andnecessary inputs and facilities, and the independent andtransparent contact with all stakeholders and similar CBOs in
the region for exchange of relevant information andexperiences (Nefzaoui et al., 2007).

4. Lessons Learned
Key lessons from this experience include: (i) participatory
characterisation of communities is essential for cooperationand trust among stakeholders; (ii) recognition of local

know-how is an important step for successful diagnosis; (iii)the preparation of annual and long-term development plansapproved by communities is an efficient tool to mobilize
resources and ease project implementation; (iv) not tounderestimate the ability of communities to identify
appropriate technical solutions, to solve internal conflicts
particularly relating to property rights and land use, and theimportance of additional-income generating activities; (v) thesuccess and the sustainability of the process depends on the
promotion of elected community-based organizations that playa key interface role between communities and other actors(government agencies and decision makers, non-government
agencies, donors, and other communities).

References
Nefzaoui A., El Harizi K., Mahjoub A., Saadani Y., Zghal R.,
Raggad N., Ghris N. (2006): Empowering the rural poor
under volatile policy environments in the Near East andNorth Africa Region. Tunisian Case Study. 300pp (tocomplete).
Nefzaoui A., El Mourid M., Alary V., Ngaido T., El
Harizi K. (2007): Empowering rural communities for better
management of desert collective rangelands- from concept
to implementation. In El-Beltagy A., Saxena M.C., Wang T.
eds., Human and Nature - Working together for sustainable
Development of drylands. Proceedings of the EighthInternational Conference on Development of Drylands.
25-28 February 2006, Beijing, China. ICARDA, Aleppo,Syria. pp. 620-632.
Nefzaoui A., El Mourid M., Saadani Y., Jallouli H., Ragad N.,
Lazarev G. (2007): A field manual for the preparation of aparticipatory community development plan. ICARDA
Aleppo (Syria), 116 pp.
Ngaido T., McCarthy N. (2004): Collective action andproperty rights for sustainable development. Institutional
Options for Managing Rangelands. Vision 2020 for Food,Agriculture, and Environment. Focus 11, February, 2004.