The political economy of livestock and pastoralism in Sudan

Abstract

IGAD LPI) and the Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative (PPLPI) of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations.The purpose of these papers is to explore strategic political economy issues that would facilitate or inhibit livestock policy reforms in the IGAD region that would benefit poor producers.Specifically, this paper seeks to understand how the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development's Livestock Policy Initiative (IGAD LPI), a project jointly managed by IGAD and the Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative of FAO (PPLPI), can assist the poor livestock producers in the greater Horn of Africa to improve their livelihoods through strategic policy or institutional interventions.Unlike many policy papers, however, this report specifically and explicitly examines the political context in which livestock are produced, and aims to identify entry points that are truly feasible given these political realities.The report identifies key national and international actors, institutions and processes that surround formal and informal policy-making relevant to livestock production, the institutional bases of existing policies, and finally, strategies and resources required to make the politically feasible changes and creations possible.The recommendations made in this paper are therefore based on strategic choices, and not the technical or economic merits of various policy options.Livestock is vital to the economies of many developing countries, and especially those of the Horn of Africa.Animals are a source of protein for human diets and can serve to provide income, employment and foreign exchange within a country.For many low income producers, livestock also serves as a store of wealth, provides draught power and organic fertilizer for crop production, acts as a means of transport, and serves as a vital component of social functions and exchange.Consumption of livestock and livestock products in developing countries, though starting from a low base, is growing rapidly.This sector growth could provide opportunities for the livestock-dependent poor to improve their livelihood, and this report aims to recommend politically feasible policy and institutional changes that can allow this to happen.To arrive at its recommendations, this report uses the analytic tools of political science to determine policies that will be truly feasible in a particular real-world political context.The author is neither an economist nor a specialist in livestock production and is not using the criteria of those disciplines in its suggestions.The report instead seeks to select on the grounds of political feasibility from among the recommendations that local and international experts have made on technical or economic grounds.Thus, the report identifies key national and international actors, institutions and processes and their role in policy-making relevant to livestock, the institutional bases of existing policies, and finally strategies and resources required to make selected changes and creations possible.Methodologically, the paper is based on several weeks of field work in the area, supplemented with a thorough review of government documents, newspapers and recently published research.The author relied foremost upon the informed observer method of research, conducting interviews with individuals and groups of people in a position to understand the political economy of the livestock sector, including the processes that shape its policies and their reform.Thus interviews were held with those in the government, the donor community, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the leadership of relevant livestock and other civil society organizations.These interviews were not a 'random sample' nor even necessarily 'representative'; the author sought those who had knowledge drawn from their own work and experience.Due to the sensitive political nature of this research, interviewees were offered anonymity and confidentiality for their statements, and very few people chose to waive this right.Even though this report cannot cite their names, the author iii subjected informants' statements to high standards of rigor.The author sought to be conscious of any partisan bias or rumor that informants might have had in their report and whether they were actually in a position to know on personal or very strong secondary authority what they reported.In most cases corroboration for key analytic points was sought as well, either from other informants or through quotable statements from academic literature.Where corroboration was impossible and the point was important the author generally has indicated the number of people who supported the point, so the reader can judge for him/herself the strength of the evidence.On occasion, the use of corroboration via academic literature may give the paper a 'desk study' veneer, but it is the understandings of the informants -analyzed with the theoretical tools of political science -that drive the conclusions.