Advertisement

Human Ecology

, Volume 33, Issue 6, pp 763–794 | Cite as

Multiple Methods in the Study of Driving Forces of Land Use and Land Cover Change: A Case Study of SE Kajiado District, Kenya

  • David J. Campbell
  • David P. Lusch
  • Thomas A. Smucker
  • Edna E. Wangui
Article

Abstract

This landscape-scale study combines analysis of multitemporal satellite imagery spanning 30 years and information from field studies extending over 25 years to assess the extent and causes of land use and land cover change in the Loitokitok area, southeast Kajiado District, Kenya. Rain fed and irrigated agriculture, livestock herding, and wildlife and tourism have all experienced rapid change in their structure, extent, and interactions over the past 30 years in response to a variety of economic, cultural, political, institutional, and demographic processes. Land use patterns and processes are explored through a complementary application of interpretation of satellite imagery and case study analysis that explicitly addresses the local–national spatial scale over a time frame appropriate to the identification of fundamental causal processes. The results illustrate that this combination provides an effective basis for describing and explaining patterns of land use and land cover change and their root causes.

Keywords

Kenya land use change patterns and processes remote sensing methodology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H. (1987). Land Degradation and Society, Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  2. BurnSilver, S. B., Boone, R. B., and Galvin, K. A. (2003). Linking pastoralists to a heterogeneous landscape: The case of four group ranches in Kajiado District, Kenya. In Fox, J., Rindfuss, R. R., Walsh, S. J., and Mishra, V. (eds.), People and the Environment. Approaches for Linking Household and Community Surveys to Remote Sensing and GIS, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA, pp. 173–200.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. J. (1984a). Community Participation in Field Research: An Example From Kenya Maasailand. Occasional Paper 4, Center for Advanced Study of International Development, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell, D. J. (1984b). Response to drought among farmers and herders in Southern Kajiado District, Kenya. Human Ecology 12(1): 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, D. J. (1986). The prospect for desertification in Kajiado District, Kenya. The Geographical Journal 152(1): 44–55.Google Scholar
  6. Campbell, D. J. (1987). Participation of a community in social science research: A case study from Kenya Maasailand. Human Organization 46(2): 160–167.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, D. J. (1993). Land as ours, land as mine: Economic, political and environmental marginalization in Kajiado District. In Spear, T., and Waller, R. (eds.), Being Maasai, James Currey, London, UK, pp. 258–272.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell D. J. (1998). Towards an analytical framework for land use change. In Bergström, L., and Kirchmann, H. (eds.), Carbon and Nutrient Dynamics in Natural and Agricultural Tropical Ecosystems. CAB International, Oxford, pp. 281–301.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, D. J. (1999a). Response to Drought among Farmers and Herders in Southern Kajiado District, Kenya: A Comparison of 1972–1976 and 1994–1996. Human Ecology 27(3): 377–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, D. J. (1999b). A Socioeconomic Perspective on Land Degradation and Linkages to GEF Focal Areas—Biodiversity, International Waters and Climate Change. Paper prepared for the Global Environment Facility, Scientific Technical Advisory Panel, Bologna, Italy, June 1999.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, D. J., Gichohi, H., Mwangi, A., and Chege, L. (2000). Land Use Conflict in S. E. Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Policy 17(4): 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Campbell, D. J., Gichohi, H., Ried, R., Mwangi, A., Chege, L., and Sawin, T. (2003a). Interactions between People and Wildlife in Southeast Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 18, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publications/Campbell_LUCID_WP18.doc
  13. Campbell, D. J., Lusch, D. P., Smucker, T. A., and Wangui, E. E. (2003b). Root causes of land use change in the Loitokitok Area, Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 19, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publicationsCampbell_LUCID_WP19.doc
  14. Campbell, D. J., Gichohi, H., Mwangi, A., and Smucker, T. A. (2003c). Globalization and Local Heterogeneity: An Overview of Land use Issues in Loitokitok Division, Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 21, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publications/Campbell_LUCID_WP21.pdf
  15. Campbell, D. J., and Olson, J. M. (1991). Environment and development in Kenya: Flying the Kite in Kajiado District. The Centennial Review XXXV (2): 295–314.Google Scholar
  16. Emerton, L. (1999). The Nature of Benefits and the Benefits of Nature: Why Wildlife Conservation has not Economically Benefitted Communities in Africa. Community Conservation Research in Africa: Principles and Comparative Practice, Paper No. 9, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
  17. Ewel, K. C. (2001). Natural resource management: The need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Ecosystems 4: 716–722.Google Scholar
  18. Farina, A. (1993). Editorial comment: From global to regional landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology 8(3): 153–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fox, J., Rindfuss, R. R., Walsh, S. J., and Mishra, V. (eds.) (2003). People and the Environment. Approaches for Linking Household and Community Surveys to Remote Sensing and GIS, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA.Google Scholar
  20. Fratkin, E. (2003). Herders, farmers, and townspeople: A comparative approach to transition and social change among livestock pastoralists. Anthropological Science 111(1): 114–114.Google Scholar
  21. Fratkin, E., and Mearns, R. (2003). Sustainability and pastoral livelihoods: Lessons from East African Maasai and Mongolia. Human Organization 62(2): 112–122.Google Scholar
  22. Galaty, J. (1994). Rangeland tenure and pastoralism in Africa. In Fratkin, E., Galvin, K. A., and Roth, E. A. (eds.), African Pastoralist Systems: An Integrated Approach, Lynne Rienner, Boulder, pp. 185–204.Google Scholar
  23. Geist, H. J., and Lambin, E. F. (2002). Proximate causes and underlying driving Gross of topical deforestation. BioScience 52(2): 143–150.Google Scholar
  24. Geoghegan, J., Villar, S., Klepeis, P., Mendoza, P., Ogneva-Himmelberger, Y., Chowdhury, R., Turner, B. L, and Vance, C. (2001). Modeling tropical deforestation in the southern Yucatan peninsular region: comparing survey and satellite data. Agriculture, ecosystems and environment 85: 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Githaiga, J. M., and Muchiru, A. N. (2003). Survey of Water Quality Changes with Land Use Type in the Loitokitok Area, Kajiado District, Kenya. LUCID Working Paper, 35, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi.Google Scholar
  26. Great Britain. (1934). Report of the Kenya Land Commission, September 1933, HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  27. Gunderson, I., and Holling, C. S. (2001). Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  28. Guyer, J. I., and Lambin, E. F. (1993). Land-use in an urban hinterland: Ethnography and remote sensing in the study of African intensification. American Anthropologist 95(4): 839–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Homewood, K., Lambin, E. F., Coast, E., Kariuki, A., Kikula, I., Kivelia, J., Said, M., Serneels, S., and Thompson, M. (2001). Long-term changes in Serengeti-Mara wildebeest and land cover: Pastoralism, population, or policies? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98(22): 12544–12549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Haugerud, A. (1995). The Culture of Politics in Modern Kenya, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York.Google Scholar
  31. Huxley, E. (1935). White Man's Country, Lord Delamere and the Making of Kenya Volume II, Chatto and Windus, London.Google Scholar
  32. Jaetzhold, R., and Schmidt, H. (1983). Farm Management Handbook of Kenya, Ministry of Agriculture Kenya in Cooperation with the German Agricultural Team (GAT) of the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), Rossdorf, W. Germany.Google Scholar
  33. Jiang, H. (2003). Stories remote sensing images can tell: Integrating remote sensing analysis with ethnographic research in the study of cultural landscapes. Human Ecology 31(2): 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kimani, K., and Picard, J. (1998). Recent trends and implications of group sub-division and fragmentation in Kajiado District, Kenya. The Geographical Journal 164: 202–216.Google Scholar
  35. Kinzig, A. P. (2001). Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges. Ecosystems 4: 709–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kitching, G. (1980). Class and Economic Change in Kenya: The Making of an African Petite-Bourgeoisie, Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  37. Krugmann, H. (1996). Water management, use and conflict in small-scale irrigation: The case of Rombo. In Rached, E., Rathgeber, E., and Brooks, D. (eds.), The Kenyan Maasailand, Water Management in Africa and the Middle East—Challenges and Opportunities, IDRC Books, Ottawa, pp. 253–273.Google Scholar
  38. Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., Coomes, O. T., Dirzo, R., Fischer, G., Folke, C., George, P. S., Homewood, K., Imbernon, J., Leemans, R., Li, X. B., Moran, E. F., Mortimore, M., Ramakrishnan, P. S., Richards, J. F., Skanes, H., Steffen, W., Stone, G. D., Svedin, U., Veldkamp, T. A., Vogel, C., and Xu, J. C. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change-Human And Policy Dimensions 11(4): 261–269.Google Scholar
  39. Liverman, D., Moran, E. F., Rindfuss, R. R., and Stern, P. C. (eds.) (1998). People and Pixels: Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  40. Low, D. A. (1963). The Northern Interior 1840–84. In Oliver, R., and Mathew, G. (eds.), History of East Africa, Volume One, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 297–351.Google Scholar
  41. Lusigi, W. (1981). New approaches to wildlife conservation in Kenya. Ambio 10(2–3): 87–92.Google Scholar
  42. Maitima, J. M., Rucina, S. M., and Mugatha, S.M. (2003). Vegetation Survey in an Agro-Ecological Gradient in Embu – Mbeere, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 33, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi.Google Scholar
  43. Mbogoh, S. G., Munei, K., and Thornton, P. (1999). CRSP Study on Wildlife, Livestock and Human Interaction in Kajiado District, Kenya: Results of the Economic Study. Draft Report, Nairobi: Global Livestock Collaborative Research Project.Google Scholar
  44. Nightingale, A. (2003). A feminist in the forest: Situated knowledges and mixing methods in natural resource management. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 2(1): 77–90.Google Scholar
  45. Norgaard, R. B. (1989). The case for methodological pluralism. Ecological Economics 1(1): 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Norton-Griffiths, M. (1996). Property-rights and the marginal wildebeest—an economic analysis of wildlife conservation options in Kenya. Biodiversity and Conservation 5(12): 1557–1577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Norton-Griffiths, M., and Butt, B. (2003). The Economics of Land Use Change in Loitokitok Division of Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 34, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publications/Campbell_LUCID_WP34.doc
  48. Norton-Griffiths, M., and Southey, C. (1995). The opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation in Kenya. Ecological Economics 12: 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ntiati, P. (2002). Group Ranches Subdivision Study In Loitokitok Division Of Kajiado District. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 7, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi.Google Scholar
  50. Ole Katampoi, K., Genga, G. O., Mwangi, M., Kipkan, J., Ole Seitah, J., van Klinken, M. K., and Mwangi, M. S. (1992). Kajiado District Atlas, Kajiado: ASAL Programme Kajiado, Republic of Kenya.Google Scholar
  51. Peet, R., and Watts, M. (eds.) (1996). Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  52. Petit, C., Scudder, T., and Lambin, E. (2001). Quantifying Processes of Land-cover Change by Remote Sensing: Resettlement and Rapid Land-Cover Changes in South-Eastern Zambia. International Journal of Remote Sensing 22(17): 3435–3456.Google Scholar
  53. Rindfuss, R. R., and Stern, P. C.(1998). Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science: The Need and the Challenges. In Liverman, D., Moran, E. F., Rindfuss, R. R., and Stern, P. C.(eds.), People and Pixels: Linking Remote Snsing and Social Science, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  54. Rindfuss, R., Walsh, S. J., Mishra, V., Fox, J., and Dolcemascolo, G. P. (2003). Linking Household and remotely sensed Data: Methodological and Practical Problems. In Fox, J., Rindfuss, R., Walsh, S. J., and Mishra, V. (eds.), People and the Environment: Approaches for Linking Household and Community Surveys to Remote Sensing and GIS, Kluwer, Boston, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
  55. Rocheleau, D. (1995). Maps, numbers, text, and context: Mixing methods in Feminist political Ecology. Professional Geographer 47: 458–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rocheleau, D. (2001). Complex communities and relational webs—Uncertainty, surprise and transformation in Machakos. IDS Bulletin-Institute of Development Studies, 32 (4): 78–87.Google Scholar
  57. Rocheleau, D., Thomas, B., and Wangari, E. (eds.) (1996). Feminist Political Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experiences, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  58. Rutten, M. M. E. M. (1992). Selling Wealth to Buy Poverty. The Process of the Individualization of Land Ownership among the Maasai pastoralists of Kajiado District, Kenya, 1890–1990, Verlag Breitenbach Publishers, Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
  59. Schroeder, R. (1993). Shady practice: gender and the political ecology of resource stabilization in Gambian garden orchards. Economic Geography 69: 349–65.Google Scholar
  60. Serneels, S., Said, M. Y., and Lambin, E. F. (2001). Land cover changes around a major east African wildlife reserve: the Mara Ecosystem (Kenya). International Journal of Remote Sensing 22(17): 3397–3420.Google Scholar
  61. Smucker, T. (2003). Land Reform and Changes in Land Use and Management in Tharaka, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 11, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publications/Smucker_LUCID_WP11.doc
  62. Smucker, T., Campbell, D. J., Olson, J., and Wangui, E. (2004). Community workshops as a participatory component of field research: Examples from Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 22, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publicationsCampbell_LUCID_WP22.doc
  63. Southgate, C. R. J., and Hulme, D. (2000). Competition, cooperation and conflict: The dynamics of resource management in Loitokitok, Kenya. In Woodhouse, P., Bernstein, H., and Hulme, D. (eds.), African Enclosures? The Social Dynamics of Land and Water, James Currey, London.Google Scholar
  64. Spear, T. (1993). “Being ‘Maasai’ but not ‘People of Cattle’: Arusha agricultural Maasai in the Nineteenth Century.” In Spear, T., and Waller, R. (eds.), Being Maasai, James Currey, London, pp. 120–136.Google Scholar
  65. Spear, T., and Waller, R. (eds.) (1993). Being Maasai, James Currey, London.Google Scholar
  66. Stéphenne, N., and Lambin, E. F. (2001). A dynamic simulation model of land-use changes in Sudano-sahelina countries of Africa (SALU). Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 85(1–3): 145–161.Google Scholar
  67. Taylor, P. J. (1997). How do we know we have global environmental problems? undifferentiated science-politics and its potential reconstruction. In Taylor, P. J., Halfon, S. E., and Edwards, P. N. (eds.), Changing Life: Genomes, Ecologies, Bodies, Commodities, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  68. Turner, B. L. II., Skole, D., Sanderson, S., Fischer, G., Fresco, L., and Leemans, R. (1995). Land-Use and Land-Cover Change (LUCC): Science/Research Plan. IGBP Reprot Series, 35. HDP Report, 7. IGBP, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  69. Turner, M. (1999). Merging local and regional analyses of land-use change: The case of livestock in the Sahel. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89: 191–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Turner, M. (2003). Critical reflections on the use of remote sensing and GIS technologies in human ecological research. Human Ecology, 31(2): 177–182.Google Scholar
  71. Walsh, S., and Crews-Meyers, K. A. (eds.) (2002). Linking People, Place, and Policy: A GIScience Approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.Google Scholar
  72. Wangui, E. E. (2003). Links Between Gendered Division of Labour and Land Use in Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 23, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publications/Wangui_LUCID_WP23.doc
  73. Wangui, E. E. (2004). Links Between Gendered Division of Labor and Land use in Loitokitok Division, S.E Kajiado District, Kenya. PhD. Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.Google Scholar
  74. Western, D. (1976). Amboseli; Integration of people, land and wildlife seeks to end the conflicts which threaten this national park. Parks 1(2): 1–4.Google Scholar
  75. Western, D. (1982). Amboseli National Park: Enlisting landowners to conserve migratory wildlife. Ambio 17(1): 11–19.Google Scholar
  76. Western, D. (1994). Ecosystem conservation and rural development: The case of Amboseli. In Western, D., Wright, R. M., and Strum, S. C. (eds.), Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community-based Conservation, Island Press, Washington, DC., pp. 15–52.Google Scholar
  77. Worden, J., Reid, R., and Gichohi, H. (2003). Land-Use Impacts on Large Wildlife and Livestock in the Swamps of the Greater Amboseli Ecosystem. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Working Paper 27, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi. Available at: http://www.lucideastafrica.org/publicationsWorden_LUCID_WP27part1.doc
  78. Wu, J., and Hobbs, R. (2002). Key Issues and Research Priorities in Landscape Ecology: An Idiosyncratic Synthesis. Landscape Ecology 17: 355–365.Google Scholar
  79. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  80. Zimmerer, K. S. (1994). Human geography and the new ecology: The prospect and promise of integration. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84(1): 108–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zimmerer, K. S. (2000). The reworking of conservation geographies: Nonequilibrium landscapes and nature-society hybrids. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90(2): 356–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Campbell
    • 1
  • David P. Lusch
    • 2
  • Thomas A. Smucker
    • 3
  • Edna E. Wangui
    • 4
  1. 1.Geography Department, African Studies Center, and College of Social ScienceMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing
  2. 2.Geography DepartmentMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing
  3. 3.Program in Environmental Science, Policy and GeographyUniversity of South FloridaSt. Petersburg
  4. 4.Department of Geography and Human Environmental StudiesSan Francisco State UniversitySan Francisco

Personalised recommendations