1 THE EVOLUTION OF KENYA’S LAND POLICY, LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ITS IMPACT ON PASTORALISM IN KAJIADO, KENYA AMINA AMAL MOHAMED A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY AND MANAGEMENT OF STRATHMORE UNIVERSITY MAY 2025 2 DECLARATIONS I declare that The Evolution of Land Policy and Legal Framework and its Implication on Pastoralism in Kajiado, Kenya Is my original work. Where other people’s work has been used, this has been properly acknowledged and referenced in accordance with the University of Strathmore’s requirements. Name: Amina Amal Mohamed Student Number: 111836 Degree: Master’s in Public Policy and Management STUDENT SIGNATURE: DATE: SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE: DR. MIRIAM W. OIRO OMOLO DATE : 9 APRIL 2025 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my deep gratitude to God Almighty for providing me with wisdom, strength, and inspiration to persevere throughout this study. I extend my heartfelt thanks to my supervisor, Dr. M. Omolo, for her invaluable guidance and contribution to the success of this research. I look forward to future collaborations. I am also profoundly grateful to my family for their unwavering patience and encouragement over the years. I would like to extend my thanks to Dr. Everlyne Makhanu for her support during the initial stages of this study. My sincere appreciation goes to Scope Impact, especially Jennifer Paavola, for granting me the time to pursue this research. I am also thankful to the County of Kajiado for their unwavering support and for providing access to crucial information for this study.. 4 DEDICATION I dedicate this Master’s dissertation to my family for their support and encouragement. 5 ACRONYMS ASAL - Arid and Semi-Arid Lands CEC - County Executive Committee GDP - Gross Domestic Product GRS - Group Ranch Scheme IBLI - Index Based Livestock Insurance KNBS - Kenya National Bureau of Statistics NIA - Neighbours Initiative Alliance MPIDO - Mainyoito Pastoralists Integrated Development Organization PID - Participatory Institutional Development TEV - Total Economic Value HSNP - Hunger Safety Net Programme CoK - Constitution of Kenya CLA - Community Land Act KFS - Kenya Forest Service KEFRI - Kenya Forestry Research Institute FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme HEA - Household Economic Approach CSO - Civil Society Organization UNDP - United Nations Development Programme 6 ABSTRACT The rise in population globally, the trend towards rapid urbanization, centralisation of land tenure, establishment of strict borders between previously open territories have all challenged the way of life for pastoralists around the world. These pose challenges to human’s connection to the drylands in a way that efficiently protects ecosystems, biodiversity and manages low fertility soils. In many countries, pastoralists are a large portion of the national population, often ethnic minorities numbering between 100 and 200 million people globally (IUCN, 2020). In this dissertation, I explore the possibilities within pastoral land use and management in Kajiado County of Kenya, for the purpose of shaping legislation and policies that capture the experiences and needs of pastoralists. This dissertation intends to: (1) undertake an evaluative study of the state of pastoralism in Kajiado, outlining its problems and prospects; (2) analyze the policy and legal land tenure system at the national and county level; and (3) determine the consequences of the examined policy frameworks on the future of pastoralism. Recognizing the effects of colonial and post-independence land policies on pastoralists, the study offers cross-generational approaches to realign policy to pastoralists’ lived realities and proposes frameworks that other ASALs could emulate. A qualitative research design was employed. Data were collected through ten semi-structured interviews (n = 10) and one focus group discussion involving ten participants (n = 10), all purposively selected from different sub- counties to reflect diverse pastoralist practices. Participants were selected based on geography, herd size, and experience with land access challenges. Thematic analysis, guided by the Gioia methodology, was applied to synthesize insights from narratives into conceptual patterns using both manual coding and Atlas.Ti software. Findings indicate a significant transformation in pastoral systems. Mobility is declining due to land fragmentation, fencing, and urban encroachment. Pastoralists are shifting from full nomadism to seasonal or semi-sedentary forms. Environmental stress—especially prolonged droughts—has contributed to herd size reduction and forced diversification into farming and informal trade. Digital tools, including mobile phones and climate-monitoring applications, are increasingly used for market access and pasture planning, although access is uneven. The study also highlights the tension between customary tenure systems and formal land governance. While communal grazing lands remain central to pastoralist survival, policies promoting private land titles have disrupted shared access. These institutional and ecological constraints have led to economic instability, rising land-related conflicts, and limited access to markets. The study concludes that pastoralism remains ecologically viable and socially relevant in Kajiado County, but its sustainability 7 depends on policy reform and institutional inclusion. Legal recognition of communal grazing lands, formalization of migratory corridors, and direct participation of pastoralists in land governance are critical. 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 DEDICATION iv ACRONYMS v ABSTRACT vi TABLE OF CONTENTS vii LIST OF TABLES x CHAPTER ONE 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 2 1.1.1 The concept of aridity 3 1.1.2 Pastoralism and land tenure 5 1.1.3 Pastoralism as a form of livelihood in ASALs 5 1.1.4 ASALs in Kenya 7 1.1.5 Pastoralism and colonial land policy 8 1.1.6 A profile of Kajiado county 10 1.1.7 Policy and legislative frameworks on Land in Kenya/Kajiado 13 1.2 Problem statement 16 1.3. Objectives 16 1.3.1 General objectives 16 1.3.2 Specific objectives 17 1.4 Research questions 17 1.5 Significance of the study 17 1.6 Organization of the Study 18 CHAPTER TWO 19 LITERATURE REVIEW 19 2.1 Theoretical Literature review 19 2.2 The evolution of policy and legal framework in Kenya affecting pastoralists 14 2.3 Empirical Literature review 15 2.4 Summary of findings from literature review 15 2.5 Conceptual framework 23 CHAPTER THREE 25 9 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 25 3.0 Introduction 25 3.1 Study Area and Description 25 3.2 Research Design 25 3.3 Sampling Process 25 3.4 Primary Data Collection 27 3.4.1 Semi-structured interviews 27 3.4.2 Focus group discussions. 28 3.5 Philosophy of the methodology 28 3.6 Study area and description 30 3.7 Validity and reliability 30 3.8 Data analysis and presentation 30 3.9 Ethical considerations 31 CHAPTER FOUR 32 RESEARCH FINDINGS 32 4.1 Introduction 32 4.2 Response Rate 32 4.3 Demographic Characteristics of the Participants 33 4.3.1 Interview Participants 33 4.3.2 Focus Group Discussion Participants 34 4.4 Thematic Analysis 34 4.4.1 Summary of results 38 4.4.2 Current status of pastoralism in Kajiado county 40 4.4.3 Implications of Land Policies for Pastoralist Livelihoods 54 CHAPTER FIVE 63 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 63 5.1 Introduction 63 5.2 Summary 63 5.3 Discussion 64 5.3.1 Current Status of Pastoralism in Kajiado County 64 5.3.2 Land Tenure Systems and Legal Frameworks in Kajiado County 66 5.3.3 Implications of Land Policies for Pastoralist Livelihoods 67 5.3.4 Supplementary Findings: Generational Shifts and Gender Roles 68 10 5.4 Conclusion 68 5.5 Recommendations 69 5.6 Limitations of the Study 72 5.7 Areas for Further Studies 73 REFERENCES 75 APPENDICES 83 Questionnaires For Pastoralists 83 Focus Group Questions For Pastoralists 85 Scripts for Interviews - One on one interviews 87 Scripts for Interviews - Focus Group discussions 126 11 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: Classification of Arid Zones Based on Aridity Index ..........................................14 Table 2.2: Effects of Grazing on Habitat, Soil, and Plant Species Richness .........................22 Table 3.1: Population and sampling frame…………………………………………………..26 Table 4.1: Demographic Details of the Interview Participants ..............................................33 Table 4.2: Focus Group Participants Details ..........................................................................34 Table 4.3: Summary of Themes and Subthemes ....................................................................35 Table 4.4: Themes, Subthemes, and Representative Quotes for RQ1 ....................................37 Table 4.5: Participant Quotes on Mobile Phones and Digital Tools ......................................43 Table 4.6: Themes, Subthemes, and Representative Quotes for RQ2 ....................................46 Table 4.7: Themes, Subthemes, and Representative Quotes for RQ3 ....................................52 Table 4.8: Themes, Subthemes, and Representative Quotes for RQ4 ...................................57 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Pastoralism is one of the oldest and most enduring human environment adaptation, especially in arid and semi-arid environments (ASALs) where it is not normally possible for farming. These drylands, from hyper-arid deserts to dry sub-humid environments, cover approximately 41% of the planet's surface and sustain between 100 million and 200 million pastoralists. In Kenya, ASALs occupy about 80% of the country and sustain about 70% of the nation's livestock. As precious as they are to rural livelihoods and food security, yet, pastoralist communities are constantly confronted by ascending dangers, specifically those of land fragmentation, growing urban settlements, and policy trends leaning towards settled agriculture at the cost of mobile pastoralism. Kajiado County, on the edge of Nairobi and occupying a semi-arid ecological belt, is a case in point. Over half the households here are pastoralist, but they are constantly under threat. The hurried subdivision of communal lands and growing real estate development have fragmented migratory routes that previously enabled herdspeople to roam freely in pursuit of grazing and water. This loss of mobility has also made it more difficult to maintain both environmental balance and economic balance that pastoral systems rely on. Whereas Kenya's legal framework—namely the 2010 Constitution and the 2016 Community Land Act—is there to provide protection for communal land rights, on the ground things are usually otherwise. Weak enforcement and competing interests have opened loopholes that expose pastoralists to land loss and resource conflict. This research examines the land policy contribution towards building the resilience of the pastoralist communities in Kajiado County with close attention. It addresses three concerns. To begin with, it investigates how pastoralism is transforming in the context of shifting land access and increasingly uncertain climate conditions. Second, it aims to determine if the currently applied land policies at both the national and county levels are reconciling with the currently prevailing needs and realities of pastoralist existence. Lastly, it reflects on how policy might be better coordinated to sit with the economic and environmental worth that pastoralism provides, not just in relation to animal production, but in relation to its capacity for carbon sequestration and biodiversity protection. 2 By charting land management history, coupled with contemporary legal and institutional arrangements, the research hopes to identify both problem and potential. The aspiration is to feed into policy debate beyond the paradigm of pastoralism somehow being primitive or under transition, and rather embracing it as a dynamic, adaptable way of life fully in tune with Kenya's drylands. 1.1 Background Aridity, as in temperature and patterns of rainfall, is the identifying characteristic of arid or semi-arid zones (ASALs). Drylands - hyper-arid, arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid zones - stretch across about 41% of the terrestrial portion of the world (FAO, 2019), which includes 4.2% hyper-arid areas, 14.6% arid areas and 12.2% semi-arid areas out of the entire 510.1 million km² of terrestrial land area (Pidwirny, 2006). These areas are marked by huge inter- annual climatic variability, unreliable regimes of rainfall, and largely sandy or rocky soils that make them generally unsuitable for conventional agriculture (PRISE, 2016). The challenges facing pastoral societies in Kenya's ASALs are mirrored in those facing similar ecosystems elsewhere on the planet. In Mongolia's Gobi Desert, centuries of sustainable grazing have been maintained by nomadic herders through highly mobile livestock systems (Fernández-Giménez, 2002). However, land privatization policies that have been implemented in recent years have restricted mobility patterns, leading to pasture degradation - a process that is very similar to Kenya's group ranch subdivisions (Upton, 2009). The Sahel in West Africa is another case in point. Research from Niger evidences pastoral mobility as a successful adaptation technique for responding to climate change under which herds range about 300-500km each year for pasture and water (Turner et al., 2016). This supports research in Kenya's Kajiado County in which mobility was hindered to increase exposure to droughts (Nkedianye et al., 2011). Even in Scandinavia, the indigenous Sámi reindeer herders also face comparable land tenure challenges. Mostly overlooked by law until now, alternative land uses like mining, forestry and tourism have appropriated significant grazing land (Brännlund & Axelsson, 2011). The aforementioned examples worldwide remind us of an underlying conflict present between mobile pastoral systems and boundary-based land policy models. 3 Pastoral systems across the globe have evolved extraordinarily convergent approaches to cope with environmental uncertainty. Tibetan Plateau yak pastoralists use seasonally mobile elevation (Miller, 1999) similar to Kenya's Maasai pastoralists' altitudinal transhumance. Andean pastoralists' multi-species livestock diversity (Valdivia et al., 1996) is similar to the multi-species herds typical of East African pastoralism. Comparative analysis yields useful policy insights. Botswana's 1975 Tribal Grazing Lands Policy (TGLP), similarly to Kenya's group ranch regime, intended to privatize land and commodity pastoralism, with the associated adverse effects on livelihood and rangeland health (Dougill et al., 2016). Ethiopia's recent recognition of communal grazing lands (Behnke & Kerven, 2013) presents possible lessons for Kenya in finding a balance between security of tenure and mobility requirements. These international experiences affirm that although pastoral systems are responsive to local environmental contexts, they all similarly grapple with identical challenges of modernization policies that misinterpret or ignore mobile livelihoods. The Kenyan experience must thus be understood within the wider global context of pastoral land rights struggles and climate adaptation policies. 1.1.1 The Concept of Aridity Aridity is expressed as a function of rainfall and temperature. It is calculated by dividing the average long-term water supply (precipitation) by the average long-term water demand (evapotranspiration). Three arid zones can be distinguished using the aridity index: hyper-arid, arid, and semi-arid. Except for a few sporadic shrubs, the hyper-arid zone (arid index 0.03) is made up of dryland regions devoid of vegetation. It is common to practice true nomadic pastoralism. Rainfall is little and rarely exceeds 100 millimetres per year. Rainfall is erratic and rare; there are instances when years go by without any rain at all. Pastoralism and the absence of any agricultural outside of irrigation define the arid zone (arid index 0.03-0.20). The native vegetation is often sparse, consisting mostly of shrubs and small trees, as well as annual and perennial grasses and other herbaceous plants. There is significant yearly variation in the amount of rainfall, which ranges from 100 to 300 millimetres. 4 Table 1.1: Classification of Arid Zones Based on Aridity Index and Associated Characteristics Arid Zone Aridity Index Characteristics Vegetation Type Annual Rainfall Human Activity Hyper- arid Zone 0.03 Dryland areas with very little to no vegetation except for a few scattered shrubs. Rainfall is extremely low and highly variable. Sparse vegetation (scattered shrubs) Rarely exceeds 100 mm True nomadic pastoralism Arid Zone 0.03 - 0.20 Pastoralism and little to no crop farming—apart from irrigation—are its defining characteristics. a sparse understory of tiny trees, shrubs, and annual and perennial grasses. Annual and perennial grasses, shrubs, and small trees 100 - 300 mm Pastoralism, no farming except with irrigation Semi- arid Zone 0.20 - 0.50 able to sustain both sedentary livestock production and rain- fed agriculture. An extensive range of grasses, shrubs, and trees make up the vegetation. Grasses, grass-like plants, half- shrubs, shrubs, and trees 300 - 600 mm (up to 700-800 mm in summer) Rain-fed agriculture, sedentary livestock production In the semi-arid zone (arid index 0.20–0.50), rainfed agriculture can be sustained at a comparatively constant production level. Additionally sedentary is livestock production. Numerous species are typical of the natural vegetation, such as grasses and plants that resemble grass, shrubs and trees, and fortes and half-shrubs. Annual precipitation varies from 300–600 to 700–800 millimetres during summer rains and from 200–250 to 450–500 millimetres during winter rains. ASAL ecosystems are maximised by mobile pastoralism by the opening up of pastures stimulating vegetation growth, soil fertilisation and enhancement of water filtration. Pastoralism reduces bush encroachment and improves nutrient cycling. In many East African regions, under grazing is evident: Bush encroachment has made huge parts of the drylands useless owing to drought or conflict-related grazing animal shortages. 1.1.2 Pastoralism and Land Tenure 5 Tenure is derived from the latin word tenere which means “to hold”. The western wording and concept of land focuses on land that can be held and owned. This study focuses on tenure in relation to land usage, specifically who is allowed to utilize it in the context of Kajiado pastoralists. Customary traditions provide the basis of the land tenure of pastoralists. Because they have communal ownership over their land, pastoralists have shared rights of access and the optimal framework for utilizing resources across a range of agro-ecological conditions, which lowers their vulnerability (Niamir-Fuller, 2005; Nori, 2007). A crucial component of pastoral production systems is the movement of seasonal resources. Pastoralists use their traditional ways to control access to necessary resources throughout seasonal movements. The rights of pastoralists to use resources during the dry season are predicated on reciprocal agreements between agriculturalists and pastoralists regarding the use of property rights; these agreements are influenced by a variety of factors, including social relations within the communities and the local climate (McCarthy et al., 1999). Because it fosters mutual expectations of resource sharing across groups, this flexibility offers some security during dry spells and other calamities (Meinzen- Dick et al., 2005). Because they were accepted by those groups, these customary rights to share seasonal resources—even across disparate tribes—came to be (Bruce and Migot-Adholla, 1994). Pastoralists' seasonal migrations preserve land rights. In this idea, pastoralists' seasonal land rights are spatiotemporal. The eleventh Concise Oxford Dictionary defines spatiotemporal as "belonging to both space and time". Spatial-temporal is defined as "having both spatial and temporal qualities" by Merriam-Webster and "having both spatial extension and temporal duration" by The Free Dictionary. These definitions span time and space. Dale and McLaughlin (1999) define land management as "the processes of regulating land and property development and the use and conservation of the land." Governments use land management to collect revenue from sales, leasing, and taxes and resolve land ownership and use disputes. 1.1.3 Pastoralism as a form of livelihood in ASALs Pastoralism is a response to environmental variability through the use of management strategies, such as increasing herd sizes as a safety net during hard times, dividing herds among several locations to spread risk, retaining a variety of species and breeds, and lending extra animals to friends and family (Humanitarian Policy Group, 2019). "The area of agriculture 6 known as pastoralism is focused on husbandry, which includes the rearing, feeding, and utilization of animals like sheep, cattle, camels, and goats" (Schoof, 2018). As early as 8000 BCE, people adjusted their social structures and methods of raising animals (Time maps Encyclopaedia, 2020). A strategy of raising cattle that makes the most of tough environments— where water and nutrients are limited and unpredictable—is known as pastoralism. It is a type of livestock husbandry that was formerly practiced by herders who were nomads. Numerous herding animals, such as cattle, camels, goats, yaks, llamas, reindeer, horses, and sheep, are among the species participating. Rainer (2016). The majority of pastoralist regions are those with aridity, poor soils, extreme heat or cold, and a scarcity of water, all of which make crop growth challenging or impossible. Pastoralism is associated with prestige, prosperity, dowries, and the resolution of family conflicts in societies where it is practiced (Nyariki, 2002). It is therefore a tool for connection and community building, insurance, wealth management, and bargaining. Due to the unfavourable climate for agriculture and scarcity of accessible water for irrigation, most communities inhabiting ASALs cope through pastoralism, which has become a way of life overtime. The most widely accepted theory of the origins of pastoralism is that it evolved from hunter and gathering communities who became knowledgeable about the movement of herds of animals and began domesticating them. Goats, sheep and cattle were domesticated in East Africa and also derived from Arabian progenitors as early as 7,400 years ago (Muigai et al., 2004). Four thousand years ago, the drying and expansion of the Sahara Desert put a strain on these herders who moved into Kenya (Barthelme, 1985). The Maasai community, in particular, moved into Kenya from South Sudan - their oral history traces their origin from the lower Nile valley, north of Lake Turkana (A. Okoth, 2006). Pastoral groups vary in mobility to adapt to the climate and seasons. Nomadic pastoralists typically move either daily or seasonally in search of fresh pastures and water sources for their livestock. Transhumance is the seasonal migration of both cattle and pastoralists between higher and lower pastures. In East Africa, animals are moved to seasonal precipitation locations (Angioni, 1989). Pastoralism serves humanity greatly and is a major component of the global green economic transition (UNEP, 2015). Pastoralism preserves soil fertility, carbon, water control, and biodiversity. Other products include high-value food. 7 Evidence suggests that pastoralists' efficient use of livestock grazing encourages the biomass production and biodiversity required to preserve carbon storage (Hassan et al., 2022). Herds carry seeds and insects while grazing on invasive grass species to do this. It is actually possible to sequester 409 million tonnes of CO2—roughly 9.8% of the carbon emissions caused by human activity—through improved grazing management. 2015 UNEP. Because pastoralism locks carbon deep in the ground, it protects healthy ecosystems and lessens the effects of degraded soils. Pastoralism brings benefit because of carbon sequestration from cattle activity (Behnke, 2018). Pastoral systems use livestock herds to do this because their mobility allows the soil to rest and because their trampling of the soil mixes manure with it to fertilize it and deposit organic matter. This opens up the soil, seeds it and allows plant materials to go deeper with no need of tilling or ploughing. Case studies around the world have shown that grasses, forbs and legumes that had disappeared slowly return bringing back with them wildlife such as bird species (L. Nargi, 2018). It was also found that this carbon sequestration more than offset methane and nitrous oxide in the environment. 1.1.4 ASALs in Kenya Since arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) make about 80% of Kenya's total geographical area, millions of people who practice pastoralism call these areas home (Amwata, 2015). In semi- arid regions, annual rainfall runs from 550 to 850 mm, while in these arid regions it falls between 150 and 550 mm. All year long, evapo-transpiration rates are high due to high temperatures. (2013, Katua).The range of mean annual rainfall in the Central and Western Highlands, as well as in the Central Rift Valley, is 950-3000 mm. Comparing this range to ASALs areas, it is noticeably greater. In these areas, crop production is mostly influenced by this environmental element (Musembi, 2006). Around 36% of the country's people and 70% of its livestock live in ASALs (UNDP, 2010). One of the 47 counties in the nation, Kajiado County is categorized as semi-arid due to its low annual precipitation of 500 mm. This is in contrast to extreme dry regions, where the annual precipitation reported is only 150 mm. Agro-pastoral, integrated crop/livestock production systems dominate arid areas, where people and their livestock move frequently. Arid and semi- arid regions make up 82% of Kenya's territory and home to 70% of its livestock and 25% of its people (Mwaura et al. 2015). 1.1.5 Pastoralism and colonial land policy 8 Colonization forced many pastoralists into settlements in most seasons in Kenya and other nations, reducing their ability to adapt to environmental change (Boone, 2012). British colonisation of Kenya from 1890 and 1963 brought socio-economic and political measures to integrate Kenyan societies into the colonial economy and commercialize pastoral pursuits. British practices of compulsory destocking, grazing limits, and movement restrictions undermined pastoral institutions (Guyo, 2017). The government implemented the Group Ranch Scheme (GRS) in Kajiado following independence to modernize nomadic pastoralists. This addressed overgrazing and land degradation. Ironically, colonial pastoral route restrictions caused this degradation. Limitation of routes meant that herds were concentrated in one place overgrazing resulting in the vegetation depleted, which in turn left soils bare and nutrients and moisture depleted. This sedentary pastoralism was deemed more progressive so as to be able to govern Africans better. Sedentary pastoralism is when pastoralists grow crops and improve pastures for their livestock (Plieninger, 2018). The GRS ignored the fact that sedentary pastoralism works efficiently where the land is suitable for crop farming and where precipitation may be relied on to improve pastures for livestock all year round. Furthermore, sedentary agriculture would mean fencing land that is inhabited by indigenous wildlife which leads to human-wildlife conflict due to the confinement of large numbers of livestock in one place and the barring of wildlife from land they naturally inhabit and travel. This defeats the purpose of and goes against conserving natural habitats and wildlife conservation. The GRS was seeking to solve a problem caused by the colonialist’s encouragement of nomadic pastoralists towards a more sedentary mode of livestock keeping. If left to their traditional nomadic lifestyle, lands would be seasonally replenished as mobility to other pastures is allowed. The GRS converted communal open lands to a group tenure regime which was expected to encourage the predominantly Maasai nomadic pastoralists to confine livestock within ranch boundaries and reduce their livestock numbers (Kimani, 1997). This may also have been to ease the formalization of land tenure in Kenya due to the fact that unmapped nomads across the country would complicate country planning for public services and needs. It was the first time the nomadic communities had security of land tenure since communities traditionally did not recognize the concept of land ownership. The land was for all and a part of nature as they were (Lengoiboni et al., 2010). 9 The spiritual symbolism of pastoralism - being at one with the environment meant that personal ownership did not resonate very easily. Some nomadic pastoralists settled into a sedentary livestock keeping livelihood while others sought from the community waivers to traverse communal lands in Kajiado and its environs continuing their nomadic tradition (Hassan et al., 2022). With the new idea of land as a commercial asset in early modern Kenya, communities that were under the GRS pushed for subdivision of land. In the 1980s, the Government supported this by facilitating subdivision of group ranches into individual saleable plots. There were attempts at crop farming which led to crop failures due to the nature of the soil and climate. This was documented by Kimani who noted that the disaggregation of lands available for nomadic pastoralism increased the “potential for land degradation and crop failures” (Kimani, 1997). The selling of land and subdivisions drastically reduced the number of purely nomadic pastoralists who now had the new challenge of mobility in areas obstructed by fencing and the unfamiliar charge of trespassing in routes they had trodden for centuries. Some pastoralists circumvented this challenge by having arrangements with owners of property to be able to move through Kajiado. Regardless of these challenges, pastoralism remains the main livelihood practised in Kajiado - with 52% of the population practising it. These livelihoods have been mapped as being practised in certain zones that will be discussed in paragraphs below. An assessment of the impact of privatisation of large expanses of land that held previous nomad migration routes shows that although the aim was to change traditional livestock production systems into commercial networks of monetary market economies, this largely failed (Lane, 1994). In Kajiado, sedentary livestock-keeping in these areas leads to ecosystem failure, nutrient depletion as well as predisposition to livestock diseases such as Foot and Mouth disease and East Coast Fever (Onono, 2013). The sedentary livestock increase soil compaction and alters the natural cycling of nutrients in soil. Behnke and Scoones (1993) explored the concept of a rangeland carrying capacity. Carrying capacity is the ability and extent that a particular land can withstand animal grazing pressure before it is depleted of nutrients. There is a need to balance grazing animal pressure against the natural generative nature of plants. This concept 10 of carrying capacity marks the stocking density at which this balance could be achieved. ‘By pushing beyond the carrying capacity, the balance that allows for regeneration is destroyed. The condition of the land progressively deteriorates.’ It is now accepted that nomadic pastoralism is the best use of land of ASALs. (Behnke and Scoones: Bovin and Manger, 1990; Ellis et al, 1993; Sandford, 1983). Free movement of pastoralists and their herds reduce this soil and vegetative depletion to allow regeneration as they move to new pastures and grazing areas (Galaty, 2013). In ASAL regions that are unsuitable for plant farming, the other alternative for livelihood which is sedentary farming or ranching livestock will deplete soil by continuously going over the carrying capacity and with no chance for soil and pastures to regenerate (Hemingway et al., 2022). When the Kenyan government converted land tenure from communal tenure to group ranches in Kajiado in 1960s it benefited the Maasai community as it gave them legal acknowledgement of ownership. However, the move threatened nomadic livestock production by decreasing mobility and carrying capacity of land, increasing the potential for land degradation and interference in wildlife migration patterns (Hassan et al., 2022). 1.1.4 A Profile of Kajiado County Kajiado County borders Tanzania to the south, Makueni and Taita/Taveta to the east, Nairobi and Machakos to the north, and Narok and Kiambu to the west in Kenya's Rift Valley. At latitude 2.0981S and longitude 36.7820E, the county has 1,117,840 residents according to the 2019 census. Ngong is its largest town and Kajiado its capital. It covers 21,902 km2. Wildlife is a major draw in the county. The seven administrative divisions of Kajiado are Isinya, Central, Loitokitok, Magadi, Mashuru, Namanga, and Ngong. Kajiado Central, Kajiado North, Kajiado East, Kajiado West, and Kajiado South are its five sub-counties, which are also constituencies. Most of the time, these sub-counties correspond with the constituencies defined by Article 89 of the Kenyan Constitution (CoK, 2010). There are not many distinctions between administrative and political boundaries as a result of this overlap. Kajiado County is characterized by four main livelihood zones: Pastoral (all species), Agro- Pastoral, Mixed Farming, and business-related activities. The pastoral zone accounts for 52% of the county's population, Agro-Pastoral 12%, and Mixed Farming 5%. Meanwhile, employment through formal, casual, and business engagements forms 31% of the county’s 11 economic activities. Urban centres such as Ngong, Isinya, and Kitengela benefit from their proximity to Nairobi, serving as hubs for trade and commerce (Ministry of Water and Natural Resources and the County of Kajiado, 2013). According to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS, 2019), Kajiado has a unique demographic profile, with a significant proportion of its population aged 0-14 years. In Kajiado Central, this age group constitutes 50% of the population, while it is 48% in Kajiado West and 49% in Kajiado South. The county's spatial structure includes both rural and urban areas. In 2023, Kajiado launched its spatial plan, which provides a framework for land use, encompassing human settlement, wildlife and livestock areas, agriculture, and modernized pastoralism. This spatial plan, running from 2019 to 2029, may be extended for another decade after review. The county’s administrative organization includes 25 wards, with each of the five sub-counties having five wards. The vision of Kajiado’s spatial plan is to promote sustainable development cantered on livestock, agriculture, tourism, industry, and commerce. In 2009, the county’s population was estimated at 687,312, and its growth rate stood at around 5.5%. Population density has also been rising, from 31 persons per square kilometre in 2009 to a projected 54 in 2019 and 92 in 2029. Historically, Kajiado County had 56 group ranches in the 1990s, but extensive sub-division and sale of land for settlement purposes have significantly reduced this number. Currently, only 10 communal grazing ranches remain, primarily in Kajiado South and West, designated for beef production. This shift in land tenure from communal group ranches to private ownership reflects a significant transformation. As of 2018, five group ranches remained in Kajiado West and another five in Kajiado South. The concept of group ranches was introduced by the government in the 1960s to commercialize pastoralism, enhance income, and deliver essential services. Group ranches operate as collective livestock production systems where individuals jointly own land, agree on stocking levels, and manage livestock collectively while retaining individual ownership of the animals (Ministry of Agriculture, 1968). The county's land is divided into zones designated for mixed urban use, agriculture, eco-tourism, pastoralism, conservation, and commercial activities. Kajiado has a high proportion of working-age individuals (15-64 years), especially in Kajiado North, where they account for 66%, and in Kajiado East, where they constitute 60%. This demographic composition is linked to the rapid growth of urban areas such as Ngong, Ongata 12 Rongai, and Kitengela, which attract migrants from rural regions and offer residential options for individuals working in Nairobi and surrounding areas. The rapid urbanization trend poses a challenge to the traditional nomadic lifestyle of pastoralists, as the rural-to-urban migration has been on the rise since independence. In 1964, only 8.5% of Kenyans lived in urban areas. This figure rose to 16.7% in 1990 and by 2015, one in four Kenyans resided in urban centres. The Ministry of Land, Housing, and Urban Development (2016) projects that by 2030, nearly one-third of Kenyans will live in urban areas, and by 2050, this figure will rise to 43.9% of the total population. This trend indicates a pressing need to address issues related to land use, ownership, and management, particularly as it pertains to pastoralists, whose mobility will be further restricted by the increased demand for land from the growing population. Rising land prices in Nairobi’s surrounding regions, such as Kiambu and Kajiado, coupled with a burgeoning middle class and heightened demand for property ownership, will likely lead to further subdivision and fencing of land, making it increasingly difficult to sustain traditional nomadic pastoralism. Rationale for the study focus in Kajiado Kajiado was chosen for this study for three main reasons. Firstly, the county is classified as Semi-arid and is at the epicentre of the discussions on the future and sustainability of pastoralism. The majority of Kajiado locals rely on pastoralism as a source of livelihood. The land tenure system that incentivises subdivision and sale of communal land is particularly glaring in this rapidly urbanising county. Its proximity to Nairobi offers strong infrastructure and road transport (Robinson & Flintan, 2022). This allows produce from Kajiado to easily reach Nairobi markets. The pastoralists’ view of urbanisation is of a double edge sword. On one hand urbanisation means closeness to the market for meat and on the other hand, their livelihood is threatened by the rapid urban developments, these include the increased encroachment on pastoral rangelands, shrinking grazing space and new administrative boundaries, all of which have restricted the movement of pastoralists in search of water and pasture (Unks et al., 2021). Kajiado is a key county to observe this tense relationship and would be a prime pilot model to test how policy can alleviate and enhance the livelihood choices of pastoralist communities in the midst of ever changing economic and social dynamics. The second reason, closely linked to Kajiado’s profile, is that it is one of the most urbanised ASAL regions and can offer a snapshot of the future for other ASAL counties that will follow 13 suit in urbanisation (Robinson & Flintan, 2022). As projected by the Ministry of Lands, the rate of urbanisation is on the increase nationwide. The way Kajiado can manage this impending and deepening crisis could offer a case study for other regions. Third, the diversity of land uses, actors, and tenures made this study region appealing. Pastoralism, crop farming, private or commercial ranching, urban land use, and conservation (wild animal parks and forests) are the principal land uses. 1.1.7 Policy and Legislative Frameworks on Land in Kenya/Kajiado Understanding how land policy affects pastoralism begins with a close look at the legal and institutional frameworks that govern land at both the national level and within Kajiado County, Kenya. These policies shape who can access land, how it’s managed, and how it changes over time—factors that deeply affect pastoralist communities whose way of life depends on mobility and shared land use. At the national level, the Constitution of Kenya (2010) lays a strong foundation for equitable land governance. Article 60 outlines key principles such as equitable access, sustainable land management, and the protection of marginalized communities, including pastoralists. Article 63(2)(d) goes further by explicitly recognizing the right of communities to own land collectively—an essential provision for pastoralist systems that rely on communal grazing lands. However, tensions arise with Article 66, which gives the state power to regulate land use in the public interest. While intended to serve broader development goals, this provision can easily come into conflict with pastoralist land practices and mobility. In addition to the Constitution, several other laws support the broader land governance framework. The Land Act (2012) classifies land as public, private, or community-owned but does not include clear protections for migratory corridors used by pastoralists. The Community Land Act (2016) was a step forward, offering a more robust framework for communities to formally register their communal lands. However, its implementation— particularly in counties like Kajiado—has faced significant challenges. The Land Governance Framework is significantly influenced by The Land Registration Act of 2012. Its impact, however, is more nuanced for pastoralist regions. For example, in Kajiado County, the focus on individual titles has exacerbated the rampant fragmentation of 14 group ranches. This has led to the subdivision of rangelands traditionally relied upon by pastoralists for seasonal grazing, thereby disrupting their ability to adhere to age-old mobility patterns. This policy, for the most part, has facilitated formalization at a cost to pastoralist pasturelands. The National Land Policy of 2009 appears to tell a different story. While it calls for equitable and sustainable land development, the policy overemphasizes settled agriculture with private land ownership, thus sidelining pastoralism which is regarded as a transitional phase towards modernity. Relying on this reasoning, the document fails to acknowledge pastoralism as a crucial livelihood option, especially in arid and semi-arid climates where crop farming is neither practical nor sustainable. At the county level, Kajiado’s Spatial Plan (2019–2029) outlines a vision for zoning land for different uses—including pastoralism, agriculture, and conservation. While the plan acknowledges the importance of balancing these sectors, enforcement remains a significant challenge. Designated grazing areas continue to shrink due to encroachment and competing land uses, often without consequence. Although the plan includes provisions for migratory corridors, these are rarely marked out on the ground, and there is little follow-through in protecting them. The Kajiado County Climate Change Policy (2021) is one of the few local documents that directly recognizes pastoralism as a climate-resilient livelihood. This recognition is important, especially given the region’s increasing vulnerability to climate shocks. However, the policy falls short in practice. It does not provide clear mechanisms to ensure pastoralists can access critical grazing areas during periods of drought. Without legal safeguards or emergency access plans, pastoralist communities are left to negotiate access informally, often with limited success. Group ranches, as marked by the Group Representatives Act of 1968 are aimed at granting pastoralists legal recognition of their land tenure. While this served its purpose for some time, there was a trend of speculative subdivisions of several group ranches in Kajiado around 2010. In places like Kajiado Central, this led to the privatization of over 80% of formerly communal lands, since policies are more favorable towards privatization. This shift has dire consequences on mobility and resource sharing. 15 Understanding the transformation requires exploring the historical context. Colonial era laws like the Vesting of Land Act (Cap 281) and the Trust Land Act facilitated government control over communal lands. Although these laws have since been abolished, they continue to affect contemporary governance of land. The administrative framework is dominated by a land titling system which undermines pastoralism reliant collective tenure systems. One may notice conflicts in the policy. Take, for example, the Community Land Act. It makes room for communal tenure, yet the Agriculture Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy (2019–2029) also seeks to encourage crop farming in ASAL areas. This is paradoxical in nature and confuses those on the ground, especially the county-level policymakers, and many times leaves pastoralist systems either unsupported or actively undermined. Finally, lack of enforcement and oversight has fostered opportunism. In some situations, elusive elites have used the community land registration processes as a means of acquiring land that was meant to be used communally. The Namanga Ranch disputes that arose in 2020 exemplify how communal land can become embroiled in elite capture, governance, and— most problematically—lack of governing transparency and accountability. Collectively, these describe county and national frameworks that respond to saddle pastoralists with an, at best, indifferent policy environment. The written law contains some hopeful provisions, but in Kajiado, where pastoralist communities face increasing fragmentation, limited mobility, and intensified multi-dimensional land pressures, the reality is different. This disparity is the focus of this research and brings to the forefront the critical inquiry on how land policy sustains or attacks pastoralist livelihoods in Kenya today. 1.2 Problem statement Despite pastoralism's importance to the food security of Kenya and its economic value, existing land policies do not address the structural issues confronting pastoralist communities in Kajiado County. Three basic gaps are: very few post-2010 studies of constitutional land reforms and pastoral consequences of land use have been conducted, pastoral livelihoods have been revolutionized through urbanization and market integration in the absence of policy feedback, and although very significant historical studies have been conducted, these do not represent climate change and present land fragmentation conditions. This study explores these 16 gaps in order to develop policy recommendations that reconcile pastoral mobility needs with Kenya's evolving land governance regime. This research aims to investigate and assess the untapped opportunities in land management in the pastoralist community to clearly advise land policy to benefit the lives of pastoralists in Kenya by understanding their current land use and challenges faced to better develop policy recommendations that reflect current evolving needs and the evolving environment that pastoralists live in. The choice of investigating the opportunities in pastoralism are several. First, there is limited recent material on pastoral land use, regulation and tenure. Studies on this topic were done before the CoK(2010) and subsequent legislation were passed and implemented. The gaps and loopholes in policy are more discernible as time has lapsed to see the laws in practice (Aktipis et al. 2011; Cronk 1991 and 2004; Herren 1988 and 1989). Secondly, there has been a rapid market integration in Kajiado County, the county boasts as being one of the wealthiest counties in the country, leading to widespread changes in the characteristics of the pastoralist lifestyle. This makes it difficult to contextualise the social, economic and ecological problems that have arisen in recent years. This necessitates a deep assessment of whether the opportunities in pastoralism have shifted. Lastly, the vast literature previously done on Kajiado provides a wealth of references to clearly track changes and emerging issues and opportunities. This study would add and update this literature and will be valuable to economists, policy makers and service providers of this large demographic in Kajiado. 1.3 Objectives 1.3.1 General objective The objective of this study is to examine opportunities in pastoralist land use and the practice of pastoralism in Kajiado, recommend and inform land legislation and policy aligned with the experiences and needs of pastoralists in Kajiado, aiming to develop a successful remodelling policy replicable in other ASALs, by understanding the negative effects of colonial and Kenyan post-independent governments on pastoralists and proposing long-term strategies to reverse these effects while harmonizing with pastoralism realities. 1.3.2 Specific objectives https://pastoralismjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13570-017-0090-4#ref-CR1 https://pastoralismjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13570-017-0090-4#ref-CR13 https://pastoralismjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13570-017-0090-4#ref-CR14 https://pastoralismjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13570-017-0090-4#ref-CR32 https://pastoralismjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13570-017-0090-4#ref-CR33 17 i. To assess the current status of pastoralism in Kajiado County, including challenges and opportunities. ii. To appraise the policy and legal framework of land tenure at both the national and county levels in Kajiado County. iii. To establish the implications of land policy and legal frameworks on the potential for pastoralism in Kajiado County. 1.4 Research questions i. What is the current status of pastoralism in Kajiado County? ii. What policy and legal frameworks of land tenure exist at both the national and county levels in Kajiado County? iii. What are the implications of these land policies and legal frameworks on pastoralism in Kajiado County? iv. What policy recommendations can be instituted to mitigate the challenges or strengthen the opportunities experienced by pastoralists in Kajiado County? 1.5 Significance of the Study The study focused pastoralists who occupy large tracts on ASALs, who also form an important role in the meat value chain, therefore resolving the challenges they face supports the Government of Kenya’s objective of equity in wealth. The information generated by this study may be useful to other researchers to delve into the opportunities easily overlooked in the study of pastoralists. Study findings and detailed analysis will help to bring out the role of pastoralism in a modern nation/society. It may further help policy makers identify low hanging fruit in boosting this resilient economy and thereby assist them to formulate appropriate policies. 1.6 Organization of the Study This study consists of five chapters. The first chapter introduces the study with a contextual background of the definition of pastoralism and the widespread practice of pastoralism globally, continentally and locally. It continues to outline the problem statement and purpose of the study. The study then lays out the objectives of the investigation and its significance. Chapter two is a literature review of theories underpinning pastoral land use. This delves into the theory of the tragedy of the commons and land policy. This review goes deeper in reviewing academic thought and discourse on pastoralism and economic theory. The empirical review analyses the inputs of pastoralism in the Kenyan economy. Chapter three expounded on the 18 research methodology and how the study was designed to answer the research questions. Chapter four analysed the findings of the research and presented the results of the research study. The analysis described the data collected and the methods used to analyse it. The findings clarified the validity of previous assumptions and discussed any patterns or trends observed in the data. Chapter five summarized the main findings of the research study and their implications. This discussion highlighted how the results of the study contributed to the existing body of knowledge on pastoralism and the practical on-ground implications of current land policy frameworks, as well as any practical implications of the findings. The research also drew conclusions based on the results of the study and made recommendations for future research. Finally, the chapter discussed any limitations of the study and suggested areas for further research. 19 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.0 Introduction This chapter reviews theoretical literature and further reviews empirical evidence that support the theories relating to land tenure and pastoralism. This section commences defining key terms related to pastoralism and land tenure. It proceeds to explore the historical evolution of land tenure practices among pastoralists in Kajiado and how environmental, economic, legal and institutional frameworks have affected their land rights. The theoretical literature critically examines the theory of the tragedy of the commons and its application to pastoral communities, arguing that pastoralism is held together by networks of communication, support, and knowledge sharing. 2.1 Theoretical Literature Review Comprehending pastoralism in counties such as Kajiado takes more than policy analysis—it takes an understanding of how communities engage with their world, institutions, and one another. A number of theoretical lenses provide useful spectacles for that, allowing us to perceive both the resilience and vulnerability of pastoral systems in managing change. Resilience theory has come to the fore in comprehending pastoral livelihoods. In contrast to those systems that struggle to be stable and controlled, pastoralism thrives on flexibility. For Scoones (2020), pastoral system resilience is not resisting change but instead adapting and reorganizing in the face of uncertainty. Pastoralists coexist with uncertainty—ranging from rainfall to market trends—and their strategies adjust accordingly. In Kajiado, resilience manifests in day-to-day practice such as seasonal migration, maintaining mixed herds, and generating income through small trade or farming. These are not arbitrary reactions but educated decisions founded on profound comprehension of the country and community support systems (Dong et al., 2016; Unks et al., 2023). Second is the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework by Elinor Ostrom. The IAD framework assists in decomposing how institutional law and conventional agreement overlap in land management. In Kajiado, traditional land-sharing regimes—historically controlled by word of mouth, trust, and social responsibility—are increasingly at odds with state-led land reforms and formal titling. Ostrom's model can account for why these conflicts 20 emerge: where policies are not consistent with the ways in which communities have managed the land for a very long time, tensions arise. Kenya's 2016 Community Land Act attempted to close this gap by anchoring communal rights, but in practice, contentious frames and weak implementation tend to reverse the very mobility pastoralism relies on (Mwangi & Dohrn, 2008; Robinson & Flintan, 2022). Political ecology gives us a more critical eye, making us consider who gains from land reforms and why. Land in Kajiado has never been just geography—it's political. Colonial authorities and independent Kenya then tended to favor land use paradigms serving state interests or foreign investors. Such policies—zoning agriculture or urbanization—will tend to relocate or even overlook pastoralist peoples. As Peluso and Lund (2011) state, land tenure regimes are politically and powerfully formed, not just by administrative planning. This in Kajiado has led to the dislocation of numerous pastoralists from decision spaces, whose interests are secondary to commercial or conservation interests (Galaty, 2013; Hassan et al., 2022). Leveraging pastoralism using the Social-Ecological Systems (SES) theory better captures how communities manage ecological and policy pressures. This theory brings out the fact that human systems and ecosystems are highly interlinked, and it is in this interlink that pastoralists exhibit their adaptive potential. In Kajiado, most herders nowadays utilize mobile phones to get current weather forecasts or market prices, while others diversify livestock keeping with cropping or local trade to mitigate losses. These innovations show a remarkable degree of ingenuity and flexibility (Berkes & Folke, 1998; Nyariki & Amwata, 2019). There are limits, though. When state policy devalues or neglects local knowledge—imagining about pastoralism as non-adaptive and backward—these innovations have limits (Scoones, 2021). Finally, Common Property Resource (CPR) theory makes a compelling argument against the assumption that communal land leads to overexploitation and degradation. Ostrom's book notoriously broke with this view, demonstrating how communities do and can use common resources in a sustainable way—if the proper conditions are established. In Kajiado, oloshons, or traditional grazing pastures, did have well-defined boundaries, and group ranches once served as a model for cooperative management. Agnates and community leaders were also tasked with resolving conflicts over water and pasture, preventing conflict, and maintaining equal access (Rutten, 2008; Mwanyumba et al., 2015; Nkedianye et al., 2020). These institutions are deteriorating as land privatization increases. As communal norms decrease, new 21 tenure models will be required to balance formal recognition with flexibilities demanded by pastoralism (Robinson, 2019). Together, these theoretical points draw attention to the diversity—and potential—of pastoral systems. They remind us that resilience is not so much about surviving shocks as about having room to adapt, that institutions count not just in law but in practice, and that any debate about land is also a debate about power. If policy is to assist rather than undermine pastoralism, it must take heed of these points. 2.2 The evolution of policy and legal frameworks in Kenya affecting pastoralists To understand contemporary issues in pastoralist land use, one needs to situate them within the broader historical and political arc of land administration in Kenya. Land regimes affecting pastoral people have changed significantly over time—evolving from adaptive community-based systems towards increasingly specialized, state-backed regimes. These transformations have had significant effects on pastoralists' livelihoods, mobility, and capacity for resilience in arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) such as Kajiado County. Pre-Colonial Era: Adaptive Customary Systems Prior to colonization, pastoralist communities like the Maasai, Samburu, and Borana had established land tenure systems that were ecologically adapted to the drylands conditions in Kenya. Land was owned by the age-sets or clans, and pasture and water utilization was managed by the customary rules used and interpreted by councils of elders. The elders regulated even access, kept social order, and resolved land conflicts. One of the salient characteristics of this tenure regime was mobility, which during the seasons tracked vegetation and rains over extensive rangelands. The boundaries were not static but dynamic, and dynamism in these boundaries allowed ASAL communities to respond favorably to variability in the environment. This informal system was firmly entrenched in the ecological and social systems of ASAL communities and maintained long- term sustainability through rotational pastoralism and negotiated access. These practices guaranteed ecological resilience and economic endurance in areas covering more than 80% of the Kenyan landscape. Colonial Period 1895–1963: Dispossession and Criminalisation of Mobility 22 This was a deviation from the traditional regime by the advent of British colonial rule. Employing the legal tools such as the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902, huge tracts of land utilized by the pastoralists were proclaimed "unoccupied" and appropriated by the colonial state as zones of land allocation to European settlers. They consist of the best grazing areas in Laikipia and Rift Valley and sections of central Kenya. The pastoralists were compulsorily settled in the Native Reserves, in marginal regions like Kajiado and Turkana, cutting short their historical migratory patterns. Colonial livestock policies like the Stock and Produce Theft Ordinance (1933) criminalized pastoral mobility and presented it as cattle rustling or trespassing. These policies diminished herd sizes, limited access to vital grazing lands, and undermined traditional knowledge systems and community governance mechanisms. Colonialism codified the description of pastoralism as disorderly, unproductive, and environmentally damaging. This ideologically informed description would go on to shape post-independence development policy, cementing an anticolonial prejudice against mobile pastoral systems. Post-Independence Period (1963–1990): Reproduction of Exclusion through State Privatization Following independence, the Kenyan state was left with much of the colonial land regime, reproducing pastoralist marginalization. The Land Adjudication Act (1968) facilitated the process of conversion of communal land into group ranches in regions such as Kajiado. Although the aim was to expropriate land rights and bring development, implementation soon deviated from this purpose. Group ranches were also elite-captured, with committee chairmen selling land to private developers, in some cases without the consent of the people. This resulted in extensive fragmentation of rangeland and disruption of customary land-sharing practices. By the 1980s, a conservative guess is that 60% or more of Kajiado's rangeland was subdivided, which restricted pastoral mobility and exacerbated land-use conflict. State policy at this time strongly supported agriculture over livestock, thus strengthening the image that pastoralism was antiquated. Top-down relief efforts, for instance, forced destocking and state-driven drought responses, often failed, as they took no account of ecological knowledge and adaptation strategies of pastoralist groups. 23 1990s–2010: Reforms and Grassroots Advocacy Emigrate In the 1990s, there was a growth in international pressure on pastoralists' rights, fueled by NGO action and global discourse on land rights and indigenous peoples. The Kenyan government therefore initiated gradual reforms, the first of which was the National Land Policy (2009), the first to legalize communal land rights. The ASAL Policy (2012) then attempted to integrate dryland areas into national development planning. Yet, both these policies lacked effective implementation and long-term underfunding. NGOs like ILRI, Oxfam, and RECONCILE filled the policy space—campaigning on community- based land registration, early warning schemes, and drought resilience programs. But policy provisions were still predominantly urban- and agricultural-centric, with pastoralist mobility and spatial logic of rangeland systems being insensitive to them. Displacement events, such as the 2004 Ngong Maasai evictions, underscored the ongoing vulnerability of pastoralist land tenure in the absence of legally enforceable protection. 2010 Constitution and Community Land Act (2016): A Watershed The passing of the 2010 Constitution and the signing of the Community Land Act (2016) was a policy revolution. The Constitution, in Article 63, classified the community land as separate land, giving powers to the communities to own lands which were formerly held lawfully. The Community Land Act made the above a reality by giving a framework to the communities to register land collectively as opposed to individually. Devolution also provided county governments with a direct stake in the management of land, with policies that will be locally suitable. In theory, this legislation was a victory for pastoralists. But the policy-practice gap has yet to be overcome. Less than 10% of eligible pastoralist communities have so far registered their land, held back by bureaucracy, ignorance, and elite interference as of 2023. In addition, inconsistencies between various legislations persist. While the Community Land Act advances communal land, privatization and titling are advanced by the Land Act (2012) and Land Registration Act (2012), resulting in legal ambiguity and the encouragement of land speculation. Institutional capacity remains short at the county government levels, and corruption has slowed down implementation, with continued sales and disconnection of land still prevailing in the Olgulului Group Ranch in Kajiado. 24 Recent Trends (2020–Present): Climate, Technology, and City Pressures Climate change and urbanization have been new drivers over the past few years, making pastoralist land tenure complex. The Climate Change Act of 2016 lists pastoralists among vulnerable groups entitled to special support, but support and finance are underprovided and policies badly managed. Rangeland recovery is still poorly established, and adaptation strategies like migration are still held back by loss of land as well as policy constraints. Urbanization is a rapidly growing threat. County spatial plans, such as the Kajiado Integrated Development Plan (2023), give precedence to infrastructure and commercial investment over grazing corridors. With peri-urban growth ongoing, customary pastoralist land gets incorporated into housing estates, commercial farms, and industrial development, herding people onto progressively degraded land. Digital reforms like the National Land Information System (NLIS) are designed to transform land management, but have the potential to lock out pastoralists through digital illiteracy, disconnection, and language. Further, disconnected policy programs — climate, land, and agricultural planning in silos — continue to undermine the comprehensive management of rangelands. Conclusion The historical development of land tenure in Kenya presents a consistent trajectory over time: from colonial dispossession, through post-independence privatization and bureaucratic complacency of the present day, pastoralist systems have been increasingly pushed to the periphery. Whereas gains have been achieved in legislation — most notably the 2010 Constitution and the Community Land Act — the inability to implement these policies at scale ensures that pastoralist livelihoods continue to be at risk. Unlocking this inheritance will take more than policy change. It calls for a conceptual reappraisal of land management, one which recognizes the ecological sense in mobility, reasserts community control, and incorporates pastoralist perspectives into planning. Less will not only deprive Kenya of a rich cultural heritage but also forfeit ecological services and adaptability pastoralism provides in a changing environment. 2.3 Empirical Literature Review 25 The KNBS (2018) reported a 4.5-million-kilogram meat deficit in Kenya, making cattle ranching an important economic opportunity for Kajiado County. Maximizing pastoral outputs can meet Kenya's rising livestock demand. When discretionary earnings fuel livestock products, the Livestock Revolution occurs. Increasing disposable income and other factors have led to record meat consumption. This has increased meat consumption in developing nations from 70 million metric tons between the 1970s and 1990s, with serious social, environmental, and economic consequences (Delgado et al., 1999). Livestock is becoming agriculture's most significant sub sector worldwide, and the drylands can help meet this need (ILRI, 2006). Increased earnings and urbanization increase the ratio of consumers to producers, their spending power, and their appetite for animal products. Pastoralism had a great chance to grow during the livestock revolution. Over the previous decade, African meat consumption has increased 50%, and this trend is anticipated to continue. The cattle revolution also increases consumer product awareness. Consumers are more concerned about livestock standards, life, and ethical value chains. Pastoralism produces ‘free- range’, healthy, and abattoir-slaughtering livestock. Kajiado has taken crucial steps to maximize potential. The county government founded the Imbirikani Slaughterhouse, its first export slaughterhouse. Pastoralism increases low-input output, which can meet rising consumer demand provided policy supports it. The effect of the pastoral economy on GDP and foreign exchange earnings is rarely recognized in official policy. Because pastoralism is undervalued and used as an excuse to not invest, it is no longer economically viable. Even with egregious underinvestment in farmers and the production chain, pastoralism stimulates national economies and exports. Government and outside investment in this field is hampered by a lack of data. Kibue (2005) asserts that although pastoralists only average 40% of terminal cattle prices, they should receive as much as 70% of them. Drought or pastoralist losses due to climate change restrict the market and lower national revenue. 2.3 Summary of Findings from Literature Review Literature studied concurs that pastoralism, especially in arid and semi-arid areas such as Kajiado, is a dynamic and persistent livelihood system whose policy and structural challenges are enduring. Resilience theory conceptual frameworks and Social-Ecological Systems (SES) 26 support the intrinsic adaptability of pastoralism, whereby its dependence on mobility, diversification of livestock, and mobile land use facilitates its survival against environmental uncertainty and political instability shocks. These theories bring home the importance of understanding pastoralism not in its fixed or antiquated form, but as a system having endogenous ways of coping with uncertainty. Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) theory offers a framework within which to understand the tensions between formalized tenure regimes and customary practice. This institutional misalignment model—between Kenya's constitutional doctrine of communal land and the practice of privatized model tenures—is recurring continuously in the literature as the primary barrier to pastoralist resilience. Political ecology adds depth to its criticism by querying beyond power relations behind land reform, demonstrating how indigenous policy agendas sacrifice wider commercial or political interests on behalf of pastoralist societies. Besides, CPR theory refutes pastoralist mismanagement myths by demonstrating that strong communal systems of governance have been sustaining rangelands for centuries. However, under subdivision and individual titling, traditional conflict resolution and mechanisms of resource distribution have been weakened. Empirical case studies elsewhere in pastoralist regions—e.g., Botswana, Ethiopia, and Mongolia—confirm these conclusions as well, demonstrating how externally imposed land regimes can undermine mobility and destabilize rangelands. In Kenya, such knowledge gaps have been found to be considerable by the literature, most notably on the long-term effects of the Community Land Act (2016), pastoral land use in urban expansion, and climate adaptation mainstreaming in land policy. In general, the literature is supportive of the fact that although Kenya's policy framework has positive elements, such as the formal recognition of community land rights, failure in implementation and incoherent sectoral policies still continue to hamper pastoralists' access to land and capacity to adapt. These observations highlight the imperative for inclusive, locally- adaptive, and mobility-sensitive land governance frameworks that value the ecological and economic benefits of pastoralism. 2.4 Conceptual Framework - Qualitative study 27 This research adopts a holistic method of examining how land policy and governance arrangements are building the daily reality of pastoralist communities in Kajiado County. Instead of breaking problems into strict categories such as dependent and independent variables, which are better suited to quantitative research, the conceptual framework emphasizes topics that capture the intensity and lived nature of pastoralism today. Central to this analysis is the pastoralist livelihood system, driven by land, people, and policy interdependence. Kajiado pastoralism is not just an economic survival strategy; it's an ecological and cultural existence based on mobility, sociality, and strong land attachment. However, pastoralists' capacity to maintain such an existence is being tested to breaking under converging pressures: land fragmentation, emerging governance institutions, urbanization, and climate uncertainty. The research examines the ways in which legal and institutional frameworks—e.g., Kenya's Community Land Act, county spatial planning policy at the county government level— facilitate or constrain access to essential pastoral resources such as land for grazing, water points, and migratory corridors. It also examines the impact of customary institutions and social networks, which previously played a critical role in land management, but are now operating in parallel or in competition with formal law. The second primary area of concern is pastoralist adaptation. Livelihood diversification and commercialization or smallholder farming, mobile phone use for climate and market information, or a change in the routes of migration due to restrictions on land access to name a few of these adaptations that show resilience inherent in pastoral systems despite policy regimes ever increasingly paying less attention to their requirements. Environmental sustainability runs throughout too. Pastoralism contributes to soil fertility, diversity, and climatic stability—but these generally go unaddressed in sedentarization- and commercial agriculture-focused policy discourse. The framework recognizes the value of preserving ecosystems and of promoting human livelihoods. Finally, this conceptual framework is intended to facilitate a detailed, empirically grounded analysis of how land decisions are influencing the future of pastoralism through the 28 mechanisms involved. It offers a model for grasping policy effects and pastoralist adaptation strategies for sustaining resilience amidst change. 29 CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 3.0 Introduction This chapter outlines the research methodology that was employed to explore the impact of Kenya’s land policy and legal framework on pastoralism in Kajiado County. It presents the research design, study area, sampling techniques, data collection methods, and analysis strategies that were used to achieve the study objectives. The study used a holistic qualitative method to investigate the pastoralist economy's current dynamics and future solutions with local stakeholders on board. This technique integrated multiple viewpoints to better understand Kajiado County pastoralist communities' difficulties and potential. The study engaged multiple stakeholders to make practical recommendations based on the lived experiences of individuals directly affected by land policy and governance changes. 3.1 Research Design The study used a qualitative research design to explore the experiences, perceptions, and perspectives of pastoralists and other stakeholders on land policy issues affecting pastoralist livelihoods in Kenya. Qualitative research was appropriate because it allowed for an in-depth understanding of the social and cultural contexts in which pastoralists operate, and the complex interactions between policy, practice, and the lived experiences of people. 3.2 Sampling Process This study sampled 20 participants for interviews. There was one focus group discussion with 10 participants and 10 one-on-one interviews with pastoralists. The study prioritized depth and richness of data over sample size, ensuring that the selected participants represented a diverse range of perspectives and experiences within the population of interest. 3.3 Population vs. Sampling Frame The study population within this research are all persons or groups who can best account for the impact of shifts in land policy on Kajiado County pastoralist livelihood. The major population in question are specifically Maasai community members involved in pastoralism in Kajiado County whose livelihoods have been affected by shifts in land tenure and control. They 30 constitute the target population because they directly rely on land mobility and access to ensure their livelihood. Sample frame — the functional subset upon which the study sample was selected — was also more specified thanks to the limitations of logistics and availability of data. For the pastoralists, the sample included household heads engaged in pastoralism in Kajiado East sub-county. They were sought through support from local leaders as well as social relations. While it succeeded in recruiting educated participants, the strategy may have inadvertently excluded nomadic or oppositional pastoralists from more remote or unregistered settlements. Table 3.1: Population and sampling frame Aspect Population Sampling Frame Scope All Maasai pastoralists and land governance stakeholders Accessible pastoralists in Kajiado East + listed government and NGO contacts Representatio n Theoretical (ideal/full coverage) Practical (may exclude marginal or less visible participants) Example Every pastoralist household in Kajiado 10 in-depth interviews with pastoralists + 10 focus group discussion participants One of the major concerns in this research was the sampling bias. The recruitment of participants using local leaders had the risk of excluding pastoralists who may have had opposing opinions or those less forthcoming owing to high mobility levels. To get beyond such a limitation, purposive sampling was used so that all participants personally and directly experienced land policy changes. Triangulation was also used in the study through mixing individual interviews and focus group discussions to gather broader variations of opinions and experiences. Finally, the adopted strategy is commensurate with the qualitative research study design, where statistical generalizability is secondary to depth and richness of insight. This makes the relatively small but targeted sample of 20 participants, who are purposefully sampled from within the accessible sampling frame, acceptable. 31 3.4 Primary Data Collection The study used semi-structured key informant interviews and focus group discussions to collect data. Semi-structured interviews allowed for in-depth exploration of participants' experiences, perspectives, and views on land policy issues, while focus group discussions provided an opportunity for group interaction and consensus-building on key issues. Data collection was conducted in the field and was audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed. Data were collected through focus group discussions (FGDs) to investigate overall perspectives of pastoralists in the locality and one-on-one key informant interviews (KIIs) to further probe any differential opinions, ideas, and outlooks on the pastoralist way of life. This format allowed for in-depth discussion on their work experience with pastoralist communities. Focus Group Discussions were conducted for pastoralists and representatives of CSOs and NGOs working in Kajiado on pastoralist support. Based on the literature review, questionnaires for each of the groups were presented in the annex. This application of multiple methods of data collection enriched the study. 3.4.1 Semi-structured interviews/ key informant interviews The study used purposive sampling to identify and select participants who had direct experience or knowledge of land policy issues affecting pastoralists in Kenya. Participants included pastoralists, community leaders, government officials, NGO representatives, and other stakeholders involved in land policy and governance. The selection criteria were based on their relevance and knowledge of the research questions. Data were collected from ten pastoralists who were conversant with land tenure issues affecting pastoralists. They were household heads selected based on the number of years they had spent in the location and their main source of livelihood, which was pastoralism. The sample size of pastoralists was arrived at based on the assumption that the information saturation point would be achieved after in-depth interviews with ten pastoralists living and practising pastoralism in the same geographical location and experiencing similar perspectives. Detailed and comprehensive accounts from ten pastoralists were considered sufficient to paint an overall picture of the experience of pastoralists in that particular location. The study also prioritised the depth of understanding over a larger sample size. Each participant’s narrative was carefully examined and analysed, allowing for a rich and nuanced portrayal of the pastoralist experience. 32 3.4.2 Focus group discussions. The focus group discussion served as a platform that allowed further interaction with community members, facilitating a bottom-up approach to capture verbal expressions and opinions about enhancing pastoralist livelihoods. One focus group discussion (FGD) was held with four men and four women from sampled wards. The discussion was conducted for the following purposes: to validate findings from one-on-one pastoralist interviews, and to identify the concerns of the most vulnerable populations and jointly develop relevant interventions and suggestions. Local leaders assisted in selecting the FGD participants. Focus group members were household heads chosen based on their length of residence in the area and their primary occupation in pastoralism. 3.5 Philosophy of the methodology This research was guided by an interpretivist research philosophy, which seeks to know how individuals live and make sense of their worlds in particular social, cultural, and historical contexts. Given the complex interdependence between pastoralist livelihoods and land policy in Kajiado County, an interpretivist stance was required to elicit the rich, lived practices of the Maasai community — how they understand, cope with, or contest changing land governance arrangements. At the center of this inquiry are some philosophical presumptions that directed research design and conduct: Ontology: A Constructivist Conceptualization of Reality Reality was not presumed to be objective or static but constructed through social engagement and mediated by political and cultural histories. Land policy is not thus experienced uniformly; its effects change according to issues like tradition, land use history, and relations of power. Through the application of this approach, the study aimed to elicit multiple realities — not only from pastoralists themselves, but also from government representatives as well as civil society actors involved in land management. These differing accounts were required to analyze how diverse groups negotiate and interpret the "truth" of land policies once they are enacted. Epistemology: Suggesting Subjective Knowledge and Meaning-Making In contrast to a search for generalizable facts or universal truths, this research adopted a more relational and contextual style of thinking about knowledge. Knowledge was built through active engagement with participants — giving precedence to local voices and allowing 33 meaning to be created organically. Semi-structured interviews provided pastoralists with the space to speak in their own voices, and focus group discussion told us how shared meanings and internal tensions get translated in community dynamics. Axiology: An Ethical and Value-Laden Commitment The researcher did recognize their own positionality as an outsider to the Maasai culture. This reflexivity was crucial in maintaining ethical and equitable research. To prevent the possibility of bias, field notes were maintained in the style of a reflexive journal, and initial observations were reported to the participants to verify accuracy and suitability. The research laid a major emphasis on beneficence and justice — giving voice to marginalized voices, including pastoralist women, and returning to the people in a simple way. Methodology: A Qualitative Case Study Design A qualitative case study design was applied in order to investigate the "how" and "why" of the effect of land policy — not statistical generalizability but depth and context. The selected case was Kajiado East because it is of particular topicality regarding recent developments in land policy and pastoralist change. The study used triangulation to enhance credibility by utilizing multiple sources of data from pastoralists across the county, multiple methods (interviews, FGDs, document review), and ongoing reflexivity by the researcher. Sampling Philosophy: Purposeful and Theoretical Participants were recruited strategically — not to represent the population, but to offer rich, qualitative data and information. Sampling was done up to the point of saturation, and the final sample included 10 individual interviews and 10 focus group participants. I. Data Collection: Emic and Iterative Data collection remained open-ended. Interview questions were tailored in the moment to pursue emerging topics, including gender difference in land access. FGDs took place in Kiswahili and English and were moderated by community-verified members who attended to cultural awareness and participation. Functional sensitivities were also honored — for example, interviews were held around herding schedules to suit participants' day-by-day schedules. Data Analysis: Thematic and Narrative Approaches 34 Analysis was undertaken through thematic and narrative analysis. Thematic analysis was utilized to identify recurring patterns — for example, common experiences of dispossession or land insecurity — while narrative analysis maintained participants' tradition of storytelling, highlighting their agency, memory, and resistances. Overcoming the Main Research Challenges There were a number of challenges to research. The historical marginalization of pastoralists necessitated that their voices be actively brought forward, through participatory approaches and verification procedures. The pervasive policy intention-community reality divide was addressed most effectively through an interpretivist approach, facilitating in-depth, grounded understanding of policy as it is "experienced" at the local level. Across the board, researcher bias was avoided through self-awareness, community response, and methodological triangulation. 3.6 Study Area and Description The research was conducted in the southern rangeland of Kenya, which includes Kajiado, Makueni, Mwingi, Kitui, and Machakos Counties. The focus was on Kajiado County due to its significant Maasai pastoralist population and the ease of access to respondents. This location was ideal for the study as it provided a representative sample of the pastoralist community and their interactions with the changing land policies. The fieldwork specifically took place in Kajiado East sub-county, allowing for an in-depth exploration of the issues affecting pastoralism in the region. 3.7 Validity and Reliability To ensure validity and reliability, the study used multiple methods of data collection and triangulation of data from different sources. Member checking was employed to verify the accuracy of the data and analysis with the participants, and peer debriefing with other researchers was conducted to ensure the rigour of the research process. 3.8 Data Analysis and Presentation The study used a qualitative analysis technique to examine the information gathered from key informant interviews, focus groups, and interviews. Thematic analysis was employed to find, examine, and present patterns in the data. Using this approach, the researcher was able to 35 investigate and analyse the intricacies of how Kenya's legal system and land policies affected pastoralism in Kajiado County. The research questions and objectives guided the methodical coding and categorization of the qualitative data into major topics. To identify similarities, differences, and new patterns, all transcripts were first reviewed before the coding process began. The data were then categorized thematically into areas including the difficulties associated with land tenure, the influence of policies, modifications to pastoralists' movement, and their adaptive tactics. Recurring themes were investigated using this approach to comprehend the participants' viewpoints regarding the modifications to land management and how they affected their means of subsistence. Furthermore, a narrative analysis approach was employed to capture the narratives, experiences, and perspectives of the participants in the data. This method made it easier to comprehend how changing institutional and legal frameworks affected pastoralists' real-world experiences. From the perspective of the pastoralists themselves, the study highlighted the socio-economic issues, coping methods, and suggested solutions by examining the narratives and direct quotes from respondents. The results were presented in an organized manner, showing how the community's socio- economic dynamics had been impacted, traditional land usage disrupted, and pastoral traditions affected by changing land policy. This comprehensive study provided insightful information and contributed to the creation of context-specific recommendations for improving land management practices and supporting pastoralist livelihoods in Kajiado County. 3.7 Ethical Considerations The study ensured that ethical considerations were addressed, including obtaining informed consent from participants, protecting their privacy and confidentiality, and ensuring that participants were not harmed in any way. The study also ensured that the research was conducted in a culturally appropriate manner, respecting the local norms and values of the participants. 36 CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH FINDINGS 4.1 Introduction The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of land policy evolution, legal frameworks, and urbanization on pastoralism in Kajiado County. This chapter presents the findings of the study. It is based on the qualitative analysis of data collected from one-on-one interviews with pastoralists and a focus group discussion conducted in Kajiado County. This chapter is structured thematically, drawing on the lived experiences, perceptions, and narratives of a sample of pastoralists from Kajiado County. The findings provide rich qualitative insights into the challenges pastoralists face, their adaptation strategies, and their perspectives on the future of pastoralism in the region. 4.2 Response Rate The study achieved a 100% response rate, as all ten one-on-one interviewees and 10 focus group participants fully participated. I used a mix of cultural sensitivity, trust establishment, and methodological flexibility being attentive to the specific challenges of research among mobile and frequently marginal populations. Leaders facilitated participant identification and recruitment, according to cultural practices (e.g., refraining from conducting interviews during livestock grazing). I had to travel to where the participants were and was flexible in timings to ensure convenience. For the FDGs Offered transport reimbursement or refreshments during FGDs to compensate for time and lost labor. The high response rate was also attributed to prior engagement with the pastoralist community, ensuring willingness to contribute. Interviews and discussions were conducted in accessible locations, allowing participants to share insights freely. The diverse representation across different sub-counties in Kajiado enhanced the study’s depth, capturing varied perspectives on land tenure, policy impacts, and adaptation strategies in pastoralism. 37 4.3 Demographic Characteristics of the Participants For this study, data was collected from both individual interviews and focus group discussions. This section provides the demographic details of the participants, the study setting, and preliminary descriptive analysis. 4.3.1 Interview Participants In total, there were ten individual interviews that were conducted. Both semi-nomadic and fully nomadic pastoralists were among the participants, illustrating the community's diverse adaption tactics. Ownership of livestock varied greatly; some pastoralists kept herds of more over 200 animals, while others kept smaller herds that were adjusted to the shifting temperature and terrain. Although some individuals also raised camels and donkeys, cattle, goats, and sheep were the most common animal varieties. In order to provide a thorough understanding of how land policy evolution, legal frameworks, and urbanization have affected their livelihoods, the respondents were chosen based on their geographic distribution, the sort of pastoralism they practiced, and their involvement with land tenure issues. The demographic details of the participants are compiled in the table 4.1. Table 4.1: Demographic Details of the Interview Participants Interview Participant Ward Sub- County Number of Livestock Types of Livestock Pastoralism Type 1 Enkorika Kajiado Central 200 Cattle, Goats, Sheep Seasonal Pastoralism 2 Namanga Kajiado South 80 Goats, Sheep, Cattle Seasonal Pastoralism 3 Kitengela Kajiado North 95 Cattle, Goats, Sheep Semi-Nomadic Pastoralism 4 Namanga Kajiado Central 150 Cattle, Goats, Sheep Seasonal Pastoralism 5 Ilmarba Kajiado South 135 Cattle, Goats, Donkeys Semi-Nomadic Pastoralism 6 Ewaso Kajiado Central 205 Sheep, Goats, Cows, Camels Transhumance Pastoralism 7 Imbirikani Kajiado South 183 Cattle, Goats, Sheep, Donkeys Nomadic Pastoralism 8 Oloosirkon/Sholinke Kajiado East 225 Goats, Sheep, Cattle Seasonal Pastoralism 9 Entonet Kajiado South 135 Cattle, Sheep, Goats Hybrid Pastoralism 10 Ilmarba Kajiado Central 130 Cattle, Goats, Sheep Mobile Pastoralism 38 4.3.2 Focus Group Discussion Participants For the focus group discussions, one focus group was conducted, with a total of ten participants. The participants varied in terms of livestock ownership, geographical location, and pastoralism practices, providing a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and adaptations experienced by pastoralists in the region. Livestock ownership ranged from 105 to 380 animals, with cattle, goats, and sheep being the predominant livestock types. Some participants also kept donkeys, particularly those involved in mixed livelihood strategies. The distribution of participants across different sub-counties helped capture region-specific issues, such as access to grazing land, mobility restrictions, and the impact of urbanization. The table below presents the demographic details of the focus group participants. Table 4.2 Focus Group Participants Details Focus Group Participant No Physical Area Number of Livestock Types of Livestock 1 Kajiado Central, Olooloitikosh 250 Cattle, Goats, Sheep 2 Kajiado North, Ngong 255 Goats, Cattle, Donkeys 3 Kajiado East, Kiserian 105 Cattle, Goats, Sheep 4 Kajiado South, Namanga 300 Cattle, Sheep, Goats 5 Kajiado West, Magadi 280 Goats, Cattle, Sheep 6 Kajiado Central, Isinya 190 Cattle, Goats, Sheep 7 Kajiado North, Kiserian 190 Cattle, Goats 8 Kajiado East, Oloosirkon 350 Sheep, Cattle, Goats 9 Kajiado South, Kitengela 180 Goats, Cattle, Sheep 10 Kajiado West, Olkeri 380 Cattle, Sheep, Goats 4.4 Thematic Analysis In this study, the researcher adopted an inductive and interpretive approach, guided by the Gioia methodology, alt