OVERALL COMMENTARY

1. The true core of the policy. ‘Pillars’ are architectural elements that support a building. When used in a figurative sense, as in this case, the term refers to the principles that support a system, for example an organization or an institution. In this sense, ‘pillars’ are truths or statements that serve as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior, for example in phrases like ‘the pillars of good governance’ or ‘the pillars of the faith’. These two Basic Pillars are at the core of the policy, and are described as ‘the foundations for sustainable and accelerated development, peace and democracy’ (p. 31). Whereas the policy Vision, General Objective and five Specific Objectives are enunciated without explanation, and altogether dealt with in less than a page (200 words), the presentation of the Basic Pillars takes four full pages (1,290 words).
2. A logical analysis of the Basic Pillars. The two Pillars under section 2.2 of the policy are complex principles, each one embedding more than just one tenet. A simple principle would refer to doing something or behaving in a certain way. The pillars do more than that. They refer to doing something by doing something else. In the case of Pillar 1, (a) improving livelihoods by increasing animal production and productivity; and (b) improving livelihoods by improving living standards and income. In the case of Pillar 2, (a) improving livelihoods by implementing sedentarization; and (b) improving the living standards and income of people in pastoral areas by the diversification and commercialization of pastoral livelihoods.

When the complex structure of the two Basic Pillars is unfolded in the form of simple principles, these read as follows:

1. 1. increasing animal production and productivity is the way to improve mobile pastoralists’ livelihoods;
   2. sedentarization is the way to improve the livelihoods of people who live in pastoral areas;
   3. the diversification and commercialization of pastoral livelihoods is the way to improve livelihoods in pastoral areas;
   4. improving livelihoods means improving living standards and income.

The goal of livestock-based industrialization. Behind these principles there is a general goal (i.e. objective): livestock-based industrialization. Although not mentioned in the policy objectives, this goal is spelled out in the presentation of the Basic Pillars (see commentary for Pillar 1 and Pillar 2) as well as in Part 3 of the policy document, in the presentation of the implementation strategies: ‘The central point of the Pastoral Development Policy and Strategy is therefore the livestock resource; and improving livestock production and create a basis for industrialization that uses livestock and livestock products as input’ (p.31).

3. Contradiction and disconnection with the policy objectives. The four principles embedded in the Basic Pillars, as spelt out under point 3 above, appear to be in contradiction with policy objectives (a) and (b) and bear no evident relationship to the others.

Objective (a) aims at responding to pastoralists’ demand for growth and development in a holistic manner and based on their livelihood systems. Instead, principles b, c and d from the analysis above assume that development can only come from outside pastoral systems. Sedentarization, diversification, and the ‘commercialization of pastoral livelihoods’ are all processes that build outside pastoralism, respectively centering pastoral development on urbanization, on non-pastoral forms of income, and on the rules of the market. While this approach is not automatically the end of pastoralism, it is certainly in opposition to building pastoral development on pastoral systems.

Sedentarization vs. building on pastoral systems. In particular, taking sedentarization as key to pastoral development goes in the opposite direction to the policy objective of centering development on pastoralism. It is also the same mistake made in the past, and the object of strong criticism of the 2016 version of the policy by pastoralist civil society. It is therefore particularly surprising to see that, after the long process of revision, the sedentarization of pastoralists remains a fundamental principle of the policy.

A focus on income and productivity vs. a holistic approach to pastoral livelihood, knowledge, and ecology. Assuming a meaning of ‘growth and development’ with a narrow focus on ‘living standards, income and productivity’ is clearly not a holistic approach that builds on pastoral systems, not even with ‘production and productivity’ referring to livestock. This attention to animal production is focused on ‘maximizing and commercializing comparative and competitive advantages and potential’. Policies and programs focusing on livestock production and productivity while ignoring pastoralists and their livelihoods, as well as the way pastoral systems work, are a well-known cliché of pastoral development. The lesson from history – acknowledged in the policy document (p.16) – is that, unless pastoral development builds on a sound understanding of pastoral systems, efforts to increase animal production per se are likely to have negative outcomes for pastoralists as well as for their environment.

Squarely within the mistake of the past. Specific Objective (b) emphasizes that the changes envisaged by the policy are to be based on the livelihoods and ecology of pastoralists. The two Basic Pillars do neither. The focus on increasing livestock production and productivity in Pillar 1 is simply allied with the pastoral development legacy of treating the natural environment as an obstacle rather than as something to be worked with. Increasing livestock production and productivity has been a key objective of pastoral development in Ethiopia since the 1960s, and pivotal to the approach that this policy is intended to leave behind.[1]

[1] E.N. Gebremeskel, S. Desta and G.K. Kassa, Pastoral Development in Ethiopia: Trends and the Way Forward (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2019).

Pillar 1: Improving the livelihood standard and income of mobile pastoralists through increasing animal production and productivity; (maximizing and commercializing comparative and competitive advantages and potential) (p.27) »