|
|
|
Previous
Next
|
| Property Rights, Social Organisation, and Resource Management in Northern Pakistan, in the Chipursan and Hoper valleys |
|
Reference |
| Buzdar, Nek: " Property Rights, Social Organisation, and Resource Management in Northern Pakistan.", East-West Center, Honolulu, 1988. |
|
Introduction to the Institution |
| This record describes the resource management systems set up in the Chipursan and Hoper valleys in Northern Pakistan.
ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT: Chipursan and Hoper are located in one of the most mountaneous areas in the world, close to the Pamir Plateau - " The Roof of the World." The floor of Hoper Valley is at about 2.800 m. with surrounding peaks exceeding 7.000 m. Chipursan Valley is at about 3.200 m. with surrounding peaks up to 4.000 m. The climate is dry. Both valleys lie outside the monsoon zone, in the rain shadow of the mountains. Mean annual rainfall is between 100 and 200 mm., a bit lower in Chipursan than in Hoper. At higher altitudes rainfall is more. Rainfall supports the growth of juniper, shrubs and alpine pastures at heights exceeding 3500 m. In the high mountain areas, above 6.000 m. at least 2.000 mm of snow will fall, providing a valuable source of water for the valley.
The area has large temperature differences during a year. In average 30 dgr. C is the difference between the coldest month, January, and the hottest, July.
Cultivation is practised on terraces and fans. The former is suitable for growing crops and the latter for forest and alpine pasture growth when water is available. Both valleys are single crop areas (NB: In the sense that in one year only one crop can be grown. Not monoculture). The active growth period extends from May till October, as soils are frozen the rest of the year. Crop raising depend on irrigation systems, where water originating from snowmelt and glaciers is diverted into channels ('Kuhls'). Mostly farmers practise mixed mountain agriculture. Crop land shas been developed adjacent to villages on river terraces and alluvial fans at the valley bottom or on the river banks. In Hoper Valley, the lower parts contain apricut and walnut orchards, and gradually trees are being planted in all other areas also. Because of the altitude, Chipursan is not well suited for fruittrees, but many farmers have planted some on their land. Cultivation in Hoper takes place at altitudes between 2500 and 3000 m. whereas in Chipursan crops are grown between 3000 m. and 3500 m. Therefore the growing season is longer in Hoper than in Chipursan.
For grazing their herds, people in Chipursan and Hoper practice what could be called vertical migration. That is, various microenvironments at different altitudinal levels are exploited. Some land in the lower areas, at the level of valley bottom crop lands, which are not irrigated are used as pasture or forestland. But most pastures (alpine pasture or forest land) are located at heights above 3500 m. None of these lands are supported by irrigation.
SOCIAL CONTEXT: The villagers claim a common ancestry, though Mongolian, South-Asian and Caucasian ethnic characteristics are found in all villages of the region. Chipursan valley has seven main villages and is inhabited by Waakhi speaking people who belong to the Ismailia sect og Islam and are followers of Aga Khan. With 186 households, the total population of Chipursan is app. 1500 people (mid-'80es). Hoper has five main villages and is inhabited by Brushaski speaking people who belong to Shia Islam. The valley has a total population of app. 3000 people.
The farmers are mostly subsistence farmers with small landholdings and small herd sizes. Based on surveys and interviews the average household ownership of cultivated land is reported to be 4.3 acres in Hoper and 2.7 acres in Chipursan. Corresponding figures for animals raised by a households are 18 and 35. |
|
Coverage of the Institution |
| It is not reported whether similar arrangements can be found elsewhere. The institutions are concurrent. |
|
Rules for Management
of the Institution |
|
(a) Boundary Rules |
| SOCIAL BOUNDARIES: The villagers in Chipursan and Hoper Valley.
SPATIAL BOUNDARIES: Private and common property belonging to the villagers. |
|
(b) Governance
rules |
| Traditionally the villages have been governed by the Mir. The main concern of the Mir was tax collection. The Mir appointed village heads, 'Trangpa''s, who were supposed to be good resource managers rather than administrators. The 'Trangpa's appointed a number of 'Oyom' to constitute village advisory councils called 'Oyoko'. All important resource management related decisions, as well as conflict resolution, were the responsibility of these village councils. The Mirdom was abolished by the Government of Pakistan in Nagar and Hunza States in '72 and '74. But the social organization of the village remained unchanged. Since then, village representatives have been elected at the local level under the government union council system, and the religous organization created branches at the village level in the Ismailia areas. The traditional organization, the newly elected leadership and the religous organizations are reported to work in harmony with one another.
The 'Trangpa' coordinates the key agricultural and pastoral activities within the village and between villages. The activities are more or less the same each year, but due to the unstability of the weather, timing of activities is very important. A few days' delay in sowing may affect the crop yield and maturity. In Chipursan, the crop rarely gets the sunshine required for complete maturity. Earlu in the agricultural year (April\May), the 'Oyoko' meets in continous sessions to decide the timing of field operation, sowing and herd departure from the village. When the final decision is made on the date of departure and field sowing, it is conveyed to all the villagers. Generally, each village has more than one pasture subdivided into different altitudinal levels. Therefore, the 'Oyoko' assigns each village member to a specific pasture and determines the length of the stay and departure from different altitudinal levels. Schedules can be changed if weather conditions require it. The animal departure date is enforced at both ends of the crop year. No animals are allowed to stay in the village after the departure date and no animals are allowed in the pastures before the appointed dates. If animals remain in the village and tresspass into someone elses field, the violator will be fined 3 - 10 rupees (depending on the type of animal. Fines for subsequent violations are progressively raised. Taking a herd to a common pasture before the agreed date is also heavily punished. At one such incident a shepherd, who had taken his herd to the common pasture before the agreed date, had three of his goats slaughtered on the spot, and the meat was distributed among the residents of the six villages who had ownership rights over the pasture.
MAINTENANCE: Channel construction and maintenance of the irrigation system as such are based on village households, irrespective of holding size. Customary rules require each household to provide equal labour time for 'kuhl' (channel) maintenance. |
|
(c) Resource Allocation |
| Mwethyas primarily help their members with agricultural work, but they also build and repair bench terraces and dig cut off drains on private farms. Sometimes they will join for public works such as repairing roads, developing water systems and building schools and churches. Normally the groups will work two mornings a week throughout the year. From October to July, agriculture related activities are emphasized, such as hoeing, sowing, weeding and harvesting. In August and September the groups will work on community and resource management projects. Before the short rains, the land is dry, and terrace construction is allowed. Much of this conservation work will be done on private land, but 6 - 12 days a year the groups will work on communal land - usually on Saturdays. Each member will have the benefit of the group labor force three or four times a year. The group will set specific rotation schedules and enforce individual members' participation. If a member misses two or three work session she might be fined or the group might skip her farm during the rotation. |
|
Conflict Resolution Mechanism |
| Villagers and the Mwethya groups have been struggling with Nairobi business men to gain control of the area's abundant river sand deposits, which are vital to conserving dry-season water. Water is retained in the deep sand deposits of the Kalala river and feeder streams. Thus, it provides dry season water for animal and household use. Since 1974, the Nairobi construction business has removed sand from the Machakos district. The removal of sand decrease the long term water retention capacity of the river beds and increases the likelihood of water shortages. As the sandscooping is perfectly legal, the people of Katheka have found themselves in a weak position. For a period, women dug trenches across the roads, which discouraged the sandscoopers for coming for a period during the mid - '80'es. But as resistance grew in other communities too, the sandscoopers came back to Katheka and resumed their sand loading. |
|
Problems Faced by Institution |
| The worst problem was the level of soil erosion due to the overexploitation of land. Accordingly soil conservation was one of the first tasks taken up by the women in the Mwethya. Earlier, bench terraces had been built due to government coercion. When coercive measures stopped in the 1960'es, bench terrace construction also came to a halt. In the early 70'es when the people of Katheka organized themselves to solve the problem, they realized that the techniques they mastered were insufficient. Most of the knowledge on how to built bench terraces had been eroded. They asked the agricultural extension officers to come to Katheka and train them, but this was not done, 4 Mwethya group leaders were appointed by the leaders of Katheka to attend a soil conservation workshop in Machakos Town. The knowledge obtained from this workshop became the basis of soil conservation in Katheka together with what knowledge was left in the village on how bench terraces had been built before the 1960'es. |
|
Changes in the Institution over time |
| Historically, the farmers of Katheka constructed bench terraces during the colonial period when the work was forced on them and more recently through local initiatives. The first effort was never popular and collapsed at independence. The second appears more stable and consistent. The reasons for this are reported to be partly the awareness of the erosion of the resource base since independence. But more important in an institutional context is that the efforts have developed from a local initiative housed in traditional institutions which function in acceptable social contexts. Terracing activities conducted by the Mwethya groups do not disrupt social continuity, they fit well into the seasonal calendar of activities and they lead to a better distribution of benefits. |
|
Other Features of Institution |
| In 1981-82 a donor organisation provided an agricultural assistant and funds for 18 months of local wages for soil conservation work in Katheka. Women were paid to construct bench terraces. However, disputes quickly developed between women and managers about the wage level, hours worked and work quality. When the program ended, no provision was made for wages from alternative sources and the work languished for several months. As resource problems began to increase, the women gradually returned to their voluntary work status and today the payment for conservation work is considered unescessary.
Generally, the interest of foreign donors in the roles of women in development has enchanced the proliferation of the concept of Mwethya groups. Eventhough such aid has not been guided directly to Katheka, this interest has improved the visibility and legitimisation of the role of Mwethya groups in development. |
|
Purpose |
| Resource Management. |
|
Country |
| Pakistan. |
|
Region |
| Hunza and Nagar States, Northern Pakistan. |
|
Date Of Publication |
| TroB 010496 |
|
| |
