10 1 1 427 6104

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
CASE STUDIES FROM INDIA AND KENYA
By:
Lindsey M. Wood
A Thesis
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
College of Natural Resources
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
Stevens Point, Wisconsin
May 2009
APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE COMMITTEE OF:
Dr. Victor D. Phillips, Comrnitt e Cha1r

Director, Global Environmental Management Education Center
Professor ofForestry
~/}~
~
~/'--'?t~.eAZ /
Associate Professor
~-pl.; ct .
DI":Mai M.Philli~ ~
Program Coordinator, Conservation and Environmental Science Program-UW
Milwaukee

ABSTRACT
A sustainable community can be defined as a community that implements projects
aimed at long-term management of natural resources for ecological health, economic
growth geared towards supporting basic needs, and social equity. Sustainable community
development projects in rural areas of developing countries often begin with efforts
towards better ecosystem management and poverty alleviation. This is a result of the fact
that environmental degradation has reduced people’s capacity to even meet their most
basic needs, which are met through the use of surrounding natural resources. This
research project investigates two cases of sustainable community development in
Sanjadi-ka-badia, India and Nyumbani Village, Kenya to understand how these initiatives
have met the needs of community members and contributed to the development of a
sustainable community. A qualitative analysis of data collected in interviews, direct-
observations, documents and rapid resource assessments was used to write the descriptive
case studies.
Major findings from the Sanjadi-ka-badia case study indicate that the project was
successful to a degree in terms of helping community members meet basic needs and
initiating a move towards sustainability. The project, a collaborative effort between the
community, local panchayat government, and Foundation for Ecological Security,
restored fodder production on a common grazing land plot, which dramatically helped the
community improve the major economic and subsistence activity of animal husbandry.
The conduit for this success was the development of locally accepted institutions to guide
behavior, specifically regulations on the common grazing land plot to reduce overgrazing
and encroachment. The process of creating institutions also extended to other areas of
iii

community life, helping the community create more social cohesion by including women
and members of lower castes in decision-making processes and developing incentives for
universal primary education. The Foundation for Ecological Security project in Sanjadi-
ka-badia allowed a community that was struggling to take the first steps towards
sustainability by focusing on specific activities that were meaningful to the community,
generating incentives for collective action and implementing work that could be managed
by community members after the project’s conclusion.
The major findings from the Nyumbani Village case study indicate that it is
making headway in achieving its specific goals. Operated by a Catholic organization,
Children of God Relief Institute, Nyumbani Village is a fusion of humanitarian relief for
the ‘lost generation’ of HIV/AIDS victims and principles of sustainability. Currently,
Nyumbani Village is providing basic needs and education to approximately 300 Kenyans
who existed previously at the brink of despair and destitution. Also, members of the
surrounding community have been given the opportunity to receive employment and
skills for microenterprise and dryland farming, which are notable achievements. In terms
of sustainability, Nyumbani Village has made significant early steps and is pioneering
how to merge sustainability with its other goals related to humanitarian relief.
iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis would not have been possible without the support and guidance of
many individuals. First of all, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Victor D. Phillips,
for giving me the opportunity to complete a Masters degree and for providing the
expertise and knowledge to develop this thesis. I have learned many valuable lessons
from Victor, and for that I am grateful.
I would also like to thank the other members of my graduate committee, Dr. Anna
Haines and Dr. Mai Phillips for the time and efforts they willingly devoted to this thesis.
I would also like to acknowledge the Global Environmental Management
Education Center for support in funding my project and graduate research assistantship
via a grant from the United States Department of Agriculture- Natural Resource
Conservation Service.
Ron Tschida, ex-officio member of my graduate committee, spent many hours
discussing sustainability, research, writing and the graduate experience with me and I am
thankful for his insight, attention to detail, and ability to help me stretch my thinking
further. Ron also spent significant time reading, revising and offering comments on this
thesis, which helped me immensely as I delved into the writing process.
To the organizations I worked with on this thesis I am eternally grateful. The
Foundation for Ecological Security in India and Children of God Relief Institute in
Kenya were gracious and willing hosts, and I am amazed at their efforts to work towards
a better future for the people of their countries. In particular, I would like to thank the
v

following individuals from India: Vaibhav Bhatia, Chirangit Guha, Sanjay Joshie, Sohan
Lal, Suresh Parashar, Jagdeesh Rao, Ajay Sanxena, B.P. Singh, Kiran Singh, S.S. Singh,
Mayank Trivedi, and, lastly, Iva Pandee for many hours of relentless translating. I would
also like to thank the following individuals from Kenya: Sister Mary Owens, Maxwell
Kinyanjui, George Mirie, Millicent Musau, Phillip Ndichu, Nicholas Syano, Joseph
Munyao, Nicholas Makau, David Kilonzo, Magdalene Mwongela, and, finally, Nancy
Mutua, Mercy Ngumbi and Alice Mutisya for valuable translation assistance. All of these
people not only assisted me with my research, but became special friends who each
touched my heart in a different way. Meeting them has enriched my life in ways that I
cannot describe.
To all of the people I interviewed in Kenya and India, thank you for sharing your
experiences, perspectives, and thoughts with me and for so graciously allowing me to
come to your communities.
Staff from Global Environmental Management Education Center (GEM) have
also helped me along this journey. Rebecca Vagts was with me all the way, never
ceasing to provide help on both personal and business fronts. John Sheffy provided
helpful perspectives throughout my two years in Stevens Point and helped me weed out
the bad and put in the good and I am extremely thankful that he has provided me with
such insightful guidance. The GEM Student Ambassadors also deserve many thanks:
Joanna Bietka, Jesse Davis, Maria Holl, Hilary Meyer, Scott Reilly and Andrew
VanNatta.
vi

Many people in the College of Natural Resources made my graduate experience a
good one. Jennie Lane has been an integral part of my graduate experience and I am
thankful for her friendship and assistance in many aspects of my graduate career. Corky
McReynolds gave me invaluable advice and I will be ever mindful of his approach in
dealing with people, to which he brings wit, intelligence and kindness. I would also like
to thank Stacey Allen-Bannach for never failing to answer a question and always being a
friendly face on the 1st floor. The following individuals have also provided me with
guidance: Randy Champeau, Bobbie Kubbish, Brenda Lackey, Eric Olson, and Holly
Petrillo.
To my fellow graduate students and friends, thanks for the laughs, the support and
the memories. I wish you all luck and am eternally happy that the world has you in it. In
particular I would like to thank: Fran Blanchard, Sara Brewster, Ali Cordie, Susan Ermer,
Jenna Gatzke, Emily Hill, Elena Krieger, Angie Lemar, Martha Lippert, Daphne Mayes,
Stefanie Miller, Scott Reilly, Nicholas Syano and Sarah Windjue.
To Justin Jones, who has been a source of love, friendship, hope, confidence and
laughter- saying ‘thank you’ isn’t enough.
To my father, Denny Wood, who has given me the chance to find my own path
and as I explore the world and my place in it, thank you for supporting me in all that I do.
Finally, I dedicate this thesis to my mother, Annie Wood, who will always be in
my heart and in whose path I will always follow even as I carve my own.
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... V
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... IX
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... IX
LIST OF APPENDICES.............................................................................................................................. X
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1
IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................................... 1
RESEARCH STATEMENT............................................................................................................................. 4
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................ 5
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 5
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: HISTORY AND OVERVIEW OF THE CONCEPT ......................................... 5
Efforts towards sustainability at the community level ........................................................................... 9
ATTRIBUTES OF LOCAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ..... 21
Ecological factors ................................................................................................................................ 23
Economic factors ................................................................................................................................. 26
Social factors ....................................................................................................................................... 28
SUSTAINABILITY ATTRIBUTES CHECKLIST ............................................................................................ 38
Sustainability attributes ....................................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 42
RESEARCH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 42
GENERAL METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ............................................................................................. 42
Case studies ......................................................................................................................................... 42
Rapid resource assessment .................................................................................................................. 44
METHODOLOGY IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA .................................................................................................. 44
Interviews............................................................................................................................................. 44
Direct-observational data .................................................................................................................... 47
Documents ........................................................................................................................................... 47
METHODOLOGY IN NYUMBANI VILLAGE ............................................................................................... 48
Interviews............................................................................................................................................. 48
Direct-observational data .................................................................................................................... 50
Documents ........................................................................................................................................... 50
ANALYSIS OF QUALITATIVE DATA .......................................................................................................... 51
Formation of propositions ................................................................................................................... 52
Development of categories and themes from the interviews ................................................................ 53
How the case studies were written ....................................................................................................... 53
CHAPTER FOUR: SANJADI-KA-BADIA CASE STUDY .................................................................... 54
CASE STUDY OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 54
SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................... 56
PANCHAYATI RAJ SYSTEM OF LOCAL GOVERNANCE.............................................................................. 59
FOUNDATION FOR ECOLOGICAL SECURITY PROJECT IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA ...................................... 61
Project details ...................................................................................................................................... 61
Impacts of the FES project on Sanjadi-ka-badia ................................................................................. 68
Current needs and issues in Sanjadi-ka-badia .................................................................................... 73
viii

DISCUSSION OF SUSTAINABILITY ATTRIBUTES ...................................................................................... 76

Ecological attributes ............................................................................................................................ 76
Economic attributes ............................................................................................................................. 78
Social attributes ................................................................................................................................... 80
CHAPTER FIVE: NYUMBANI VILLAGE CASE STUDY ................................................................... 88
CASE STUDY OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 88
SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................... 89
NYUMBANI VILLAGE PROJECT ............................................................................................................... 90
Details of Nyumbani Village project.................................................................................................... 92
Impacts of Nyumbani Village on the villagers and outside community ............................................. 100
Current needs and issues at Nyumbani Village ................................................................................. 106
DISCUSSION OF SUSTAINABILITY ATTRIBUTES .................................................................................... 110
Ecological attributes .......................................................................................................................... 111
Economic attributes ........................................................................................................................... 113
Social attributes ................................................................................................................................. 115
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................... 122
DISCUSSION OF NEEDS ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 122
Sanjadi-ka-badia................................................................................................................................ 122
Nyumbani Village .............................................................................................................................. 124
DISCUSSION OF COMMUNITY-LEVEL SUSTAINABILITY ........................................................................ 125
Sanjadi-ka-badia................................................................................................................................ 126
Nyumbani Village .............................................................................................................................. 130
EXTRINSIC HYPOTHESES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES ........................................... 137
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ................................................................................................. 137
STUDY LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 138
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 140
DEFINITIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 152
ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 153
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITIES MAKING EFFORTS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY ................................ 12

TABLE 2. ECOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ATTRIBUTES IMPORTANT TO SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 40
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. RAJASTHAN, INDIA (NATIONAL PORTAL OF INDIA, 2008) ............................................................. 56

FIGURE 2. LOCATION OF SANJADI-KA-BADIA VILLAGE, BHILWARA DISTRICT, RAJASTHAN, INDIA. .............. 57
FIGURE 3. SHEEP AND GOATS GRAZE IN A COMMON GRAZING LAND PLOT IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA.
PHOTO/LINDSEY WOOD........................................................................................................................ 59
FIGURE 4. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO LOW DEVELOPMENT IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA PRIOR TO A
PROJECT BY FOUNDATION FOR ECOLOGICAL SECURITY. ...................................................................... 63
FIGURE 5. RESTORED COMMON GRAZING LANDS PLOT IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA. PHOTO/LINDSEY
WOOD................................................................................................................................................... 67
FIGURE 6. PRIVATE LANDS SURROUNDING COMMON GRAZING LANDS PLOT IN SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA.
PHOTO/LINDSEY WOOD........................................................................................................................ 70
FIGURE 7. RAPID RESOURCE ASSESSMENT RESULTS FROM SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA, 29 AUGUST 2008. .... 75
FIGURE 8. WELL UNDER CONSTRUCTION NEAR SANJADI-KA-BADIA, INDIA. PHOTO/LINDSEY WOOD. ........... 85
ix

FIGURE 9. LOCATION OF NYUMBANI VILLAGE IN KITUI DISTRICT, KENYA. .................................................. 89

FIGURE 10. CHILDREN PROUDLY DISPLAY THEIR DINNER AT NYUMBANI VILLAGE, KENYA. PHOTO/LINDSEY
WOOD................................................................................................................................................... 92
FIGURE 11. MAIN FARM TWO AT NYUMBANI VILLAGE, KENYA. PHOTO/HILARY MEYER. ............................ 95
FIGURE 12. HONEY SUPPLIED BY VILLAGERS FROM COMMUNITIES SURROUNDING NYUMBANI VILLAGE,
KENYA BEING SOLD IN AN ORGANIC SHOP IN NAIROBI. PHOTO/JOANNA BIETKA.................................. 97
FIGURE 13. RAPID RESOURCE ASSESSMENT RESULTS WITH RESIDENT GRANDPARENTS AT NYUMBANI
VILLAGE, KENYA, 24 JULY 2008. ....................................................................................................... 103
FIGURE 14. RAPID RESOURCE ASSESSMENT RESULTS WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO LIVE NEAR
NYUMBANI VILLAGE, KENYA 18 AND 24 JULY, 2008. ........................................................................ 106
FIGURE 15. RAPID RESOURCE ASSESSMENT RESULTS WITH STAFF MEMBERS FROM CHILDREN OF GOD RELIEF
INSTITUTE WHO WORK AT NYUMBANI VILLAGE, KENYA, 28 AND 30 JULY, 2008............................... 108
FIGURE 16. JOHN SHEFFY OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION CENTER
DEMONSTRATES HOW TO GROW MUSHROOMS TO A GROUP OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO LIVE ON THE
OUTSKIRTS OF NYUMBANI VILLAGE, KENYA. PHOTO/LINDSEY WOOD. ............................................. 116
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix One: Results from Sanjadi-ka-badia
Appendix Two: Results from Nyumbani Village
Appendix Three: Notes on Rapid Resource Assessment Methodology
x

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Importance of the Study
“Think globally, act locally”
Today’s global society is one in which citizens of all nations are deeply
connected. Direct and indirect networks among peoples of the world have been enhanced
by technological advances, wide venues of communication, free-market economics, trade
flows, and access to transportation. However, the globalization of networks has also
resulted in often unequal distributions of wealth and power, as well as over-exploitation
of global natural resources. It has been argued that, in order for future generations of
both human and non-human species to persist, current generations of humans must
change the practices that have resulted in degradation of human and ecological systems
(WCED, 1987).
Sustainable development is an approach that aims to secure a better future for
current generations, and those to come, by countering the misuse of natural resources and
reducing disparities in wealth distribution and social equity. The most widely accepted
definition of the term was developed during the 1987 World Commission on
Environment and Development: “humanity has the ability to make development
sustainable- to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987). Sustainability is
comprised of interdependent ecological, economic, and social factors (Agyeman &
Angus, 2003; ICLEI, 2002a; James & Lahti, 2004; and Roseland, Cureton, & Wornell,
1998), all of which must receive equal consideration in the implementation of sustainable
development initiatives. The importance of these three elements is widely accepted,
1

however, there is divergence of opinion on how to achieve sustainability, especially the
appropriate level of governance to carry out sustainable development initiatives. Many
initiatives have been top-down, macro-level efforts by national governments and
international institutions. However, there is currently a predominant push to make
sustainability local (FAO, 2006; Phillips, 2008b; and UNCED, 1992). It is argued that
macro-level efforts often negate the rights of local communities, disallowing them the
autonomy to govern themselves towards sustainability (e.g. Armstrong & Stratford,
2004) and that natural resources can be managed more effectively by the people who
derive direct livelihood from them (Agrawal & Gibson, 2001; Alcorn, 1993; and
Kijtewachakul, Shivakoti, & Webb, 2004).
Efforts towards local-level sustainability in developed countries differ from those
in developing countries (Redclift, 1993), especially in rural impoverished areas. In
developing countries rural populations often depend on their surrounding natural
resources for subsistence and livelihood, and many of these areas suffer from
environmental degradation, which causes a large impact on humans as well as the health
of native ecosystems (MEA, 2005). The causes of environmental degradation are many,
including exploitation of natural resources by outside actors and social inequity. When a
community’s source of livelihood is degraded, its capacity to provide sustenance is
greatly diminished, as well as its potential to maintain that capacity for future generation,
even if demand levels remain constant. Therefore, local-level sustainable development in
developing countries must address the most basic needs, often related to natural resource
management, in order to implement a sustainable vision for the future. The concept of
sustainability ultimately incorporates the long-term temporal capacity dimension to
2

development, and its relations to all of the ecological, economic, and social factors that
limit or promote it.
This study investigates how local-level efforts at sustainability have been
implemented in two communities: Sanjadi-ka-badia, India and Nyumbani Village, Kenya.
In order to protect the resources that impoverished areas depend upon, community
members often adopt sustainable development initiatives with the assistance of external
actors, as is the case in both of these communities. The goal of this study is to evaluate
how initiatives taken by these communities and organizations have met the needs of the
community members and have contributed to the development of sustainable
communities. The synthesis of information gathered in this study will aid the two
communities in evaluating current practices and deciding future action. The study will
also add to a wider body of research regarding local-level sustainable development
initiatives.
This study is a project related to a United States Department of Agriculture-
Natural Resources Conservation Service grant awarded to the Global Environmental
Management Education Center (GEM) at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.
The deliverables in this grant include case studies of sustainable community development
in developing countries. The two communities included in this study, Nyumbani, Kenya
and Sanjadi-ka-badia, India were selected by GEM because of their promise as models
for lessons to be learned in local-level sustainability and due to strong existing GEM
relationships with non-governmental organizations working with the communities:
Children of God Relief Institute (COGRI) in Kenya and the Foundation for Ecological
Security (FES) in India.
3

Research Statement
The purpose of this research is to develop two case studies of local-level
sustainable development initiatives in Sanjadi-ka-badia, India and Nyumbani Village,
Kenya to evaluate how these initiatives have addressed the needs of community members
and are contributing to the development of sustainable communities.
Research Objectives
Literature Review
1. Present the predominant themes in the literature regarding local-level sustainable
development initiatives in developing countries and develop a conceptual
framework of local sustainability.
Project History
Needs Assessment
2. Identify the needs of each community prior to initiation of the project.
3. Identify what needs were prioritized by each community.
Actions Taken by the Respective Communities/Non-Governmental Organizations
4. Describe what planning and work initiatives have been implemented to meet
prioritized needs of each community.
5. Determine if and how the initiatives taken by each community meet the
prioritized needs of the community members.
6. Identify the achievements and challenges of implementing the initiatives to meet
the needs of each community.
7. Identify what assessment techniques have been undertaken in each community by
either external or internal actors related to actions taken towards sustainability.
Current Status
8. Identify what are the current needs of each community.
Assessment of Actions
9. Describe how the actions taken by the respective communities are contributing to
the development of sustainable communities.
4

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The goal of this study is to develop two case studies of sustainable community
development initiatives in Sanjadi-ka-badia (SKB), India and Nyumbani Village (NV),
Kenya to evaluate how these initiatives have addressed the needs of community members
and have contributed to the development of a sustainable community. As a literature
review for this study, this chapter presents “theoretical perspectives and previous research
findings regarding the problem at hand” (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). As such, a conceptual
framework for sustainable community development in SKB and NV is created by
describing the broad concept of sustainable development and discussing ecological,
economic and social attributes of local sustainability initiatives in developing countries.
The attributes comprising the conceptual framework are used as a means of describing
how each community has made steps towards sustainability.
Sustainable Development: History and Overview of the Concept
Sustainability and sustainable development have been popular topics of
discussion on global, regional, national and community levels for over two decades. The
World Commission on Environment and Development’s release of Our Common Future 1
in 1987 is often cited as the catalyst to the recent trends in sustainable development
discourse (e.g., Agyeman & Angus, 2003; Kates, Parris & Leiserowitz, 2005; Redclift,
1993). In addition to acknowledging the over-use of natural resources on a global scale
(Roseland, Cureton, & Wornell, 1998), Our Common Future proposed a definition for
sustainable development that is widely used: “humanity has the ability to make
1
commonly referred to as the Brundtland Commission report
5

development sustainable- to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987).
Although this definition is commonly cited, it is also inherently vague2 , which has
led to divergent interpretations and approaches to achieving the goal of a more
sustainable global society (Bell & Morse, 1999; Kates et al., 2005; McCool & Moisey,
2001; and Roseland et al., 1998). Some authors have argued that the vagueness of the
definition may lead to unsustainable growth where economic or political interests
supersede ecological and social well-being (Parris & Kates, 2003; and Redclift, 1993).
There is also exceptional divergence of opinion on what the definition means for
developed versus developing countries (Redclift, 1993; and Nagpal, 1995), though some
authors argue that developed and developing countries have similar problems but the
degree and intensity of the issues differ significantly (Robinson, 2004, cited in Rist,
Chidambaranathan, Escobar, Weismann, & Zimmerman, 2007). The ambiguity of
sustainable development has also led to different ways of measuring sustainability
through indicators, which can vary depending on the user’s idea of what development
should occur and what should be sustained (Bell & Morse, 1999; and Parris & Kates,
2003).
Although the vagueness of the definition is an issue, it also allows flexibility for
application in myriad contexts (Kates, Clark, Corell, Hall, Jaeger, Lowe, McCarthy,
Schellnhuber, Bolin, Dickson, Faucheux, Gallopin, Grübler, Huntley, Jäger, Jodha,
Kasperson, Mabogunje, Matson, Mooney, Moore III., O'Riordan, & Svedlin, 2001),
which allows groups to adapt themselves according to their own initiatives and resources.
2
In the full report of Our Common Future the definition of sustainable development is actually much more
extensive; authors generally do not cite the entire picture this report presents, which might dispel some of
the arguments of its inherent vagueness and applicability (Kates et al., 2005).
6

Additionally, the Brundtland Commission definition can be thought of as a broad
philosophical approach rather than a recipe for sustainability (James & Lahti, 2004).
That being said, it is important to note that a distinction should be made between “weak
sustainability” and “strong sustainability”, where in the former the costs of obtaining
sustainability are often considered too high (essentially a cost-benefit analysis) and
economics supersede true efforts to attain the latter, which promotes ecological or social
sustainability without shying away from initial high costs (Bell & Morse, 1999). Weak
sustainability also assumes that resources depleted over time can be substituted by others,
which is countered by strong sustainability, which assumes that natural capital cannot
suffer a net loss (Agyeman, Bullard, & Evans, 2002).
There is a common theme in the literature that sustainable development
encompasses three broad, yet interdependent elements: ecological integrity, social equity,
and economic opportunity (e.g., Agyeman & Angus, 2003; James & Lahti, 2004;
Roseland et al., 1998). Each element is comprised of multiple factors that contribute to
sustainability (Table 2). Ecological integrity ensures that the environment is able to
regenerate, support biodiversity, and continue to perform ecological functions essential
for ecosystem health. Social equity includes themes such as gender and indigenous
rights, access to resources, and participation in decision making processes. Lastly, the
economic aspects of sustainability allow people to sustain livelihoods and meet the basic
needs (air, food, shelter, clothing, and water) of life for themselves and their families. As
such, economic aspects are really a means to an end, which is a more socially equitable
and environmentally sound world (Agyeman et al., 2002). The interconnectedness of
these three elements is stressed in the literature, especially the fact that environmental
7

health and degradation are often directly connected to economic and social disparities
(Agyeman et al., 2002; and Thrupp, 1993).
Although the literature stresses the three-pronged framework for sustainability,
there is divergence of opinion on how to achieve sustainability, especially the appropriate
level of governance to carry out sustainable development initiatives (Yanarella & Levine,
1992, cited in Bridger & Luloff, 2001). Many initiatives have been top-down, macro-
level efforts by national governments and international organizations. However, there is
currently a predominant push to make sustainability local (FAO, 2006; Gurung, 2006;
and Phillips, Miskowiak & Stoll, 2007). It is argued that macro-level efforts often negate
the rights of local communities, disallowing them the autonomy to govern themselves
towards sustainability (Armstrong & Stratford, 2004). Additionally, some studies have
shown that natural resources can be managed more effectively by the people who derive
direct livelihood from them, rather than by a centralized government agency or non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) (Agrawal & Gibson, 2001; Alcorn, 1993;
Kijtewachakul, Shivakoti, & Webb, 2004; and Thomas-Slayter, 1992).
One of the most cited sources of support for local-level sustainable development
came from what is a macro-level institution: the United Nations (UN). The promotion of
local-level sustainability has evolved over the latter half of the 20th century, especially
after the Brundtland Commission report (WCED, 1987) and the UN Conference on
Environment and Development in 1992 (Roseland et al., 1998). This conference,
commonly referred to as the “Rio Summit” (because it was held in Rio de Janiero,
Brazil), resulted in the development of an agenda for global sustainable development,
Agenda 21, which stresses the necessity of local involvement in sustainability. The
8

definition for Agenda 21 was established as “a participatory, multi-stakeholder process to
achieve the goals of Agenda 21 at the local level through the preparation and
implementation of a long-term, strategic plan that addresses priority local sustainable
development concerns” (ICLEI, 2002, page 5). The strategies laid out in this document
stress that local involvement, especially that of local authorities, is crucial for sustainable
development:
“Because so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by

Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and
cooperation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its
objectives. Local authorities construct, operate, and maintain economic,
social, and environmental infrastructure, oversee planning processes,
establish local environmental policies and regulations, and assist in
implementing national and subnational environmental policies. As the
level of governance closest to the people, they play a vital role in
educating, mobilizing and responding to the public to promote sustainable
development.” (Chapter 28, UNCED, 1992)
Although Agenda 21 promotes local-level sustainability, it is noteworthy that it also
emphasizes collaboration between international, national, regional, and local
governments, as well as the importance of non-governmental organizations in
implementing sustainable development (UNCED, 1992).
Sustainability is not an end state, but a process. The ultimate goal is an equitable
society that acts in ways that do not exceed the Earth’s capacity to support human and
non-human life. Working towards this goal is a multi-stakeholder process that involves
players at various levels of government and throughout disciplines. This thesis is
concerned with efforts at the local level.
Efforts towards sustainability at the community level
The International Council on Local Environment Initiatives (ICLEI) defines a
sustainable community as a community “that maintains the integrity of its natural
9

resources over the long term, promotes a prosperous economy, and hosts a vibrant,
equitable society” (ICLEI, 2002). Sustainable community development is an important
part of global sustainable development initiatives at the local level and has been
implemented and supported in a number of ways.
There are many cases of communities that have made attempts towards
sustainability and have valuable lessons to be learned from their experience. Some
communities have opted for the use of frameworks such as The Natural Step (James &
Lahti, 2004), or SEED (Taylor-Ide & Taylor, 2002). Other communities have joined
national and global networks, such as the Sustainable Communities Network (Concern,
2002) and the Global Ecovillage Movement (Trainer, 2000) that provide a venue for
discourse on sustainable community development.
Sustainable communities have been supported by larger institutions such as the
UN as a legitimate solution to global sustainability. The UN itself has initiated pilot
initiatives for sustainable communities in the Millennium Villages Project, a joint project
with the Earth Institute at Columbia University. The UN and the Earth Institute chose
twelve impoverished communities in sub-Saharan Africa to explore how external funding
and logistical and technical support can help pull small, rural communities out of the
poverty trap (Earth Institute, 2005). The project began in Sauri, a small village in
Kenya, in 2004 and will provide support and funds to this and the remaining eleven
villages for five years. The Millennium Villages Project has been criticized as being
unsustainable even in its nascent stages (Rich, 2007), but its success as a local-level
sustainable development initiative remains to be seen and lessons learned from the
10

project could have implications on how aid is administered to impoverished areas in the
future (Buse, Ludi & Vigneri, 2008).
Attempts at sustainability have spanned the globe and are present in both
developed and developing countries. Often, communities begin with one aspect of
sustainability, such as cultural preservation, solid waste management, Permaculture,
energy, or bio-gas. Expansion of efforts often follows success in one area. Examples of
communities that have initiated sustainability measures are listed in Table 1 below.
11

Table 1. Examples of Communities Making Efforts Towards Sustainability

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
Eco- Location Mission and Priorities Funding & Support Lessons Learned
established Inhabitants
municipality
1. Curitiba Brazil 1982 3 1.6 Million City wide planning and City and national Began with transportation; increased open
(Urban) development funding; impetus comes space; skills building and employment 5 ;
from local government 4 encourage local empowerment; address
poverty rather than hide it
2. Gaviotas Colombia 1979 200 Sustainable living; Various, University of Use of appropriate technology and
appropriate technology Bogotá, UN appropriate plants for habitat 6
3. Negros Philippines 1990-1995 2.1 million Comprehensive poverty Heavy in human and Involvement from multiple scales of
Occidental in the alleviation financial resources from government, NGOs, & grassroots
(province) province 7 outside- may prove organizations; occurred within context of
(Rural/ difficult to replicate political stability; support from higher
urban) levels of government 8
4. Grand Shandu China 1988 In 1988- Local level sustainable Local and national Planning; focus on diversifying economic
Eco-Village 3211 development using funding (Ecological activities; infrastructure; dealing with local
System (Rural) principles of economics Demonstrative development issues 9
and ecology Rebuilding for
Sustainable Settlements
national scheme)
3
The “date established” refers to the date when an already established community made a commitment to sustainability or when a new eco-village was created.
4
Taylor-Ide & Taylor, 2002.
5
Sustainable Communities Network, 1996.
6
Weisman, 1998.
7
Philippines National Statistics Office, 2002.
8
Cox, 1998.
9
Hu & Wang, 1998.
12

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
5. Millennium Sub- 2004 Reaching Poverty reduction and Joint project with UNDP Empowerment a key factor. Using practical
Villages (12) Saharan about experiments to guide and Earth Institute at solutions that fit into local culture. Lessons
Africa 400,000 development and aid Columbia University. are to be determined.
people in 12 for future work Contributing $300,000
villages and per year for 5 years 11
outlying
regions 10
6. CAMPFIRE Zimbabwe 1989 Approx. Local management of International and national External factors can limit success of local
51,000 wildlife resources financial assistance governance of natural resources; however, if
people communities continue to benefit from
reached wildlife conservation, they will continue
throughout practices. 13
the country 12
7. Findhorn Scotland 1985 320 Sustainable living Findhorn Foundation Education for visitors, links between
seeks financial assistance spiritual, ecological, social and economic
from donors domains; 14
8. Annapolis, USA 1993 About Establish goals based Grants, funding from Helps to have diverse group of people;
MD 36,000 upon the needs and private and public entities engage local government; seek advice from
desires of citizens experts. 15
10
Earth Institute, 2009.
11
Millennium Project, 2006.
12
Metcalf, 1993
13
Balint & Mashinya, 2008.
14
Findhorn Foundation, 2008.
15
Sustainable Communities Network, 1997.
13

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
9. Earthaven Asheville, 1994 60 “to create and to sustain Non-income sharing Permaculture; allowing residents to pursue
NC, USA beyond our lifetimes a community, members individual interests as long as they fit within
learning community lease or build houses; mission of village 16
village, by gaining the annual fees; annual
skills, cultivating the community service
attitudes and sharing requirements; grants;
with the public the donations; sale of
resources for a holistic, electricity generated on-
regenerative culture” site
10. Wongsanit Thailand 1985 About 40 “to develop and Various partnerships with Participatory process crucial for community
Ashram promote an alternative universities, fees for living. Changes and improvements to
lifestyle that is workshops 17 infrastructure to be sustainable. 18
grounded in Dharma,
cultural diversity, and
environmental
sustainability”
11. Austin, TX USA Late 1980s Over To be carbon neutral by Line items in city budget Need department committed to
656,000 2020 because this sustainability that can train other
encompasses most departments. One person does not make city
issues related to sustainable; it has to have top-down support
sustainability and bottom-up education 19
16
Earthaven Ecovillage, 2008.
17
Sulak-Sivaraksa, 2009.
18
Wongasanit Ashram, personal communication, January 27, 2009.
19
F. Blood, personal communication, January 27, 2009.
14

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
12. Ökodorf Poppau, 1997 115 “ to provide a model for Community members Offering diversity of living communities of
Sieben Linden Germany a future way of life, in pay; sell items in shop. which people can choose. 20
which work, leisure,
economy, ecology,
urban and rural culture
can find a balance”
13. Los Angeles CA, USA 1993 55 “demonstrate the Residents pay low rents; Model for transitioning to sustainability in
Eco-Village processes for creating a Bought building by urban setting; Education and outreach.
healthy neighborhood receiving loans from Engaging in policy for green buildings,
ecologically, socially, donors 22 etc. 23
and economically” 21
14. Kibbutz Arava 1983 130 (+ 20-40 Core values: ecology, Fundraising; acts as a Working like business; community above
Lotan Valley, volunteers) “I-thou”, right non-profit. all; action; outreach and education 24
Isreal livelihood, renewing
Judaism, equality,
economic cooperation,
home and community,
repairing the world.
20
Okodorf, 2008.
21
LAEV, 2009.
22
Arkin, 2005.
23
Assadourian, 2008.
24
Kibbutz Lotan, 2005.
15

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
15.Keimblatt Austria 2002 By 2020, A focus on spirituality, Grants, volunteer hours Long-term thinking and visioning, with
Okodorf 150-300 culture, economic well- by “key members” measurable objectives in short-term. Using
residents being, environment and donations, membership multiple resources for funding and
social equity fees and economic information. 25
activities when the village
has capacity.
16. Keruu Finland 1997 25 “In the end we hope to Self-sustaining through Dividing land uses for specific purposes,
Ecovillage be a human settlement agriculture and renewable voluntary work for residents, preserving
which is ecologically, energy. Hotel cultural heritage 26
economically, accommodations; courses
culturally and offered for sustainable
spiritually sustainable” living
17. Munksogard Roskilde, 2000 225 “to create a Some houses are Various types of housing; residents manage
Denmark development that privately-owned, others all aspects of village; associations deal with
integrates are rented and remainder various issues (e.g., waste management);
environmentally are owned cooperatively technical working groups (e.g., for snow
friendly technologies by residents. There are removal). 27
and practices in the various economic
construction of the activities: gift shop,
houses…and to vegetable sales, bicycle
establish a strong repair, etc.
community”
25
Keimblatt Okodorf, 2005.
26
Keruu Ecovillage, 2009.
27
Munksogard, 2009.
16

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
18. Solheimar Iceland 1930 100 “to create a self- Various fund raising Claims to be oldest ecovillage of its kind
sustainable community, activities including, worldwide. Sustainable business practices
or ecovillage, created forestry, gardens & gift in collaboration with companies. 28
by people whose focus shop. Companies work
is on cultivating the with community on their
individual and the land.
environment at the
same time”
19. Svanholm Denmark 1978 100 “basis…of common Residents put 80% Respect for each other’s individuality;
ideals concerning percent of their salaries having local economy but remaining
ecology, income- into common pool as well involved in “outside”; allowing members
sharing, communal as any other available flexibility to do what they want within
living and self- capital. Other resources reason 29
government” come from dairy and
forestry activities and
shop
20. The Village Cloughjor- 2004 About 130 Commitment to People buy houses in It is projected that people will move in
dan, homes ecological, economic which to live; some 2009. Interesting aspect is development of
Ireland and social sustainability employees, CSA, grants “Eco-charter”, with quantifiable objectives
from EU, government of for sustainability. 30
Ireland and other sources
31
21. Ecovillage Italy 1989 20 Restoration of medieval Guest house; various Communal decision-making.
Torri Superiore permanent village using ecological funders
residents principles
28
Solheimar, 2009.
29
Svanholm, 2008.
30
The Village, 2009.
31
Torri Superiore, 2009.
17

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
22.Auroville India 1968 Up to 50,000 To realize human Residents pay for houses Gained support of Government of India and
unity…and sustainable to be built and make UNESCO. 32
living donations; international
grants; money generated
from business on site
23. Crystal Australia 1987 200 Clean air, water and Residents buy houses, “learned how little you need to change your
Waters soil (thus food) ; various economic life in a Westernized country to make a very
Ecovillage Freedom of spiritual activities support positive impact on the environment” 33
belief ; To work community
towards guarantee of
meaningful activity for
all ; To create place for
healthy play and safe
recreation ; Active
social interaction
; Healthy shelter
24. Otamatea New 1997 20 Permaculture, Members pay for their “community hours” (in-kind contribution of
Ecovillage Zealand preservation of native own lots, beef cattle hours to community projects); land owners
ecosystems, to be production, in-kind sign agreements to live there; community
model of sustainability contributions decision-making; 34
32
Auroville, 2009.
33
Crystal Waters Ecovillage, 2009.
34
Otamatea Ecovillage, 2009.
18

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
25. Cleveland Ohio, USA 2004 444,313 35 Urban regeneration Collaborative project Affordable housing; emphasis on transit; 37
Ecovillage (2006 with ecological between EcoCity
estimate) design 36 Cleveland and Detroit
Shoreway Community
Development
Organization (DSCDO)
26. Ecovillage at NY, USA 1991 30 homes “Alternative model for Rent or buy homes, fees, CSA, communal living, Education of
Ithaca suburban living which loans, donations surrounding community, 38
provides a satisfying,
healthy, socially rich
lifestyle, while
minimizing ecological
impacts”
27. Ecovillage Loudon 2001 28 homes “to restore nature and Construct homes and buy LEED certified buildings; education and
County, expand human potential lots, work parties. outreach to visitors to promote ecovillage
VA, USA by creating a lifestyle principles; found that decision by consensus
that nurtures the human did not work, use approach called
spirit and offers hope “sociocracy” 39
for future generations”
35
United States Census Bureau, 2009.
36
EcoCity Cleveland, 2009.
37
Global Ecovillage Network, 2009
38
Ecovillage at Ithaca, 2009.
39
Ecovillage, 2009.
19

Eco-Village or
Date Number of
municipality
28. Dublin Ireland 2008 500,000 Engaging city officials City funds Use of The Natural Step Framework (James
in projects towards & Lahti, 2004) for sustainability;
sustainability development of action plans and vision,
beginning with flagship projects 40
29. Overtornea Sweden Mid-1980s 600 41 To create development Local citizens and Economic recession in 1980 caused
that would keep government involved in villagers to rethink their town; “widespread
inhabitants from decision-making; community participation” in study circles
moving, reduce where desire development was discussed
ecological impacts and acted upon; fossil fuel independency
step by step (e.g., began with municipal
buildings)
30. Kalix Sweden Late 1990s 18 villages, “strengthen economic All villages raised funds More power in numbers (e.g., all 18 villages
350 people and social self- to hire resident to head formed one group); creating place where
sufficiency in ways that 18-village association, people can earn livelihood instead of having
were also ecologically Ovre Bygd; community to migrate for work
sound” fund raisers, cooperative
businesses
40
The Natural Step, 2009.
41
James & Lahti, 2004.
20

Attributes of Local Sustainable Development Initiatives in Developing Countries
There is a wide base of literature regarding local-level sustainability efforts in
developing countries, especially in regards to community natural resource management,
integrated poverty and conservation initiatives, extractive reserves, ecotourism (Agrawal
& Redford, 2006) and sustainable communities. All of these approaches attempt to
merge ecological, economic, and social interests, though they are implemented in
different ways. The literature reveals that most projects in developing countries are
geared towards environmental restoration and poverty alleviation (e.g., Agrawal &
Gibson, 1999; Berkes & Seixas, 2004; or Western & Wright, 1994). This is a result of
the fact that people in these areas depend directly on natural resources as sources of
subsistence and livelihood and because environmental degradation impedes their ability
to meet their basic needs (MEA, 2005).
Deciding what constitutes as sustainability is an issue that has given rise to an
abundant amount of literature regarding its measurement (Bell & Morse, 1999; and
Pagdee, Kim & Daugherty, 2006). Indicators and measurement tools for sustainability at
the local level are highly variable depending on the user and context and exhibit many
inconsistencies (Bell & Morse, 1999; and Parris & Kates, 2003). For example, the ICLEI
report 42 to the UN Earth Summit in Johannesburg (ICLEI, 2002) developed criteria for a
community to be considered an Agenda 21 sustainable community. The criteria
included eight categories, of which communities must be committed to undertaking:
1. must include a participatory process with local citizens

2. must include a consensus on a vision for a sustainable future
3. must address economic, social, and ecological needs together
4. must establish a multi-stakeholder group to oversee process
5. must prepare an action plan
42
The number of Agenda 21 communities that met the criteria was 6,416 (ICLEI, 2002).
21

6. action plan must include concrete long-term targets

7. must establish indicators to monitor progress
8. must establish a monitoring and reporting framework (ICLEI, 2002)
While the ICLEI indicators were used to develop an initial report to the UN at the
Johannesburg Summit in 2002, they are also limited in what they can reveal about a
community’s place along the sustainability continuum.
Developing a list of ecological, economic and social indicators may help the
communities strengthen the overall project and may signal a more comprehensive picture
of what is happening (Bell & Morse, 1999). Data availability in the two communities
studied does not allow the development of numerical sustainability progress indicators.
The projects were not designed with relevant data gathering from the onset, thus not
allowing the establishment of baselines and definition of relevant indicators. To
overcome this limitation, this study uses indicators derived from literature on
sustainability initiatives as a checklist for sustainability. Using the state of the
communities at the beginning of the project as a reference, this study researches how the
projects have helped meet needs of community members and have shown commitment to
sustainability in their current states. This list of attributes may aid communities in
focusing efforts towards sustainability by providing a framework of enduring guidelines.
The proceeding sections of this chapter highlight the ecological, economic and
social attributes of local-level sustainable development initiatives that have been
important factors in the implementation and longevity of projects in developing countries.
The information in this section is derived from literature regarding sustainability
indicators, community natural resource management, ecotourism, and sustainable
communities and is summarized in Table 2 at the end of this section.
22

Ecological factors
The environment, with its myriad species and abiotic factors and interacting
functions, provides humans with what they need to survive. Environmental degradation
reduces people’s ability to live healthy and prosperous lives as well as impedes the
continuation of non-human species that share the planet with humans (MEA, 2005).
How communities manage and develop their surrounding natural resources is a key factor
in the success of sustainable development projects, especially for communities that
depend on those resources for direct livelihood and subsistence. There are several
aspects of natural resource management that are important elements to achieving
ecological goals in sustainable development projects at the local level.
Biodiversity conservation
Biodiversity is defined as “the variability among living organisms from all
sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the
ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species,
between species and of ecosystems” (UNEP, 1992). Biodiversity has allowed for the
development of humans through exploitation of various species and the niches they play
in ecosystems (MEA, 2005). For example, myriad species and the habitats in which they
are found are responsible for many medicines and a loss in biodiversity reduces the
amount of plant or animal derived medicines available for discovery. Additionally, the
intrinsic and aesthetic values of biodiversity to ecosystem function as the basis of life,
economy, and spirituality are important factors which must be considered.
Anthropogenic environmental degradation threatens the status of biodiversity, and the
potential for further development from it (MEA, 2005). Biodiversity also has inherent
23

value aside from the benefits humans have derived from it and losing species may have
remarkable linear and non-linear impacts on entire ecosystems that cannot be predicted.
Conservation of native biodiversity is a common aspect of local-level sustainable
development projects (Kellert, Mehta, Ebbin, & Lichtenfeld, 2000; Pagdee, et al., 2006;
Parris & Kates, 2003; and Western & Wright, 1994). The indigenous species of an area
are often important to native peoples for consumption, medicinal properties or other
cultural values. Biodiversity preservation may also have positive economic impacts for
communities. Preservation of fauna, for example, has been crucial for communities that
depend on ecotourism as a source of income generation. A study from Kenya in the early
1980s argues that ecotourism was more economically beneficial to locals than hunting
large game species and thus helped to preserve those species (Thresher, 1981). Studies
on great apes in Uganda have also contended that ecotourism can have a positive effect
on conservation of this species because its protection provides an economic resource for
local people (Litchfield, 2001).
Sustainable use of resources
Closely related to biodiversity conservation, the sustainable use of natural
resources is a common theme in local level sustainable development literature. Although
communities depend on surrounding resources, over-exploitation often results in
extinction, which transfers into loss of a species as well as the economic or social benefits
it once created. Some examples of the sustainable (or unsustainable) use of natural
resources in the literature are communities’ use of bush meat and non-timber forest
products (NTFPs) (Kellert et al., 2000; Murali, Murthy, & Ravindranath, 2006; Pagdee et
al., 2006; and Smith, Chhetri, & Regmi, 2003). In some cases where sustainable
24

harvesting has taken place, the threats to a species’ existence and its benefits to humans
have been abated. Community forest projects in Mexico, for example, have created
institutions to regulate extraction of timber and/or NTFPs, which demonstrates long-term
thinking used to preserve economically important species for the future (Castillo &
Toledo, 2000). Sustainable extraction regulations also help to lessen the chance of
exploitation by certain user groups over others (e.g., Smith et al., 2003).
Environmental awareness and stewardship
Environmental awareness and stewardship, or knowledge about ecological health
and the will to preserve it, is an important way to engage community members in the
management of natural resources and to create a connection to place (d’Entreves, 1992,
quoted in Davidson, 2003). Ultimately, creating environmental awareness and
stewardship may serve to reinforce the relationship between quality of life and
participation in maintaining environmental health (Young, 1997).
Restoration of degraded resources
The Earth’s ability to support human and non-human life is compromised by
environmental degradation, which is a result of both ultimate and proximate factors
(Diamond, 2005). Although ultimate factors of environmental degradation, such as
national policy, agriculture subsidies or globalization cannot be undermined, proximate
factors may be more readily addressed by local communities. Proximate factors are the
actual physical processes that lead to degradation, such as cutting a tree, building a road,
or constructing too many wells in a given area (Diamond, 2005, Pagdee et al., 2006;
Redclift, 1993; and Thrupp, 1993). In addressing proximate factors sustainable use is a
25

major consideration, as is improvement of the condition of the resource (e.g., allowing
positive succession) (Pagdee et al., 2006).
Preservation of ecosystem function and services
Protection or simulation of ecosystem functioning is an important aspect of
sustainability projects because it keeps ecosystems that people depend upon healthy
(MEA, 2005). Abiotic functions of ecosystems maintain biotic life and the diversity
found therein. Changes in ecosystem function may alter the make-up of native biological
communities. An example of this is the exclusion of fire from systems that have evolved
with natural fire maintenance (e.g., long leaf pine (Pinus palustris) and wiregrass
(Aristida stricta) ecosystems in the southeastern United States), which has resulted in less
biologically diverse ecosystems.
Ecosystems also provide various “services” that are economically and socially
beneficial to humans. Examples of ecosystems services are nutrient cycling, provision of
food and water, climate regulation, aesthetics and recreation (MEA, 2005). Preserving
these support systems by maintaining ecological function, preserving native biodiversity,
and reducing degradation are key aspects of sustainability that should be recognized and
implemented by communities (Parris & Kates, 2003; and Roseland et al., 1996).
Economic factors
Economic activities allow people to meet their basic needs and improve their
quality of life. In rural areas of developing countries economic activities are often
limited and can be at the whims of the international market. It is important for
communities to act within the existing economic climate and adjust to change while also
continuing to provide local economic services needed by community members. New
26

economic reality based on sustainability and living within nature’s means and limits is
being re-defined in the 21st century.
Poverty reduction
Many communities in developing countries are plagued with systematic poverty,
which impedes sustainability because it does not allow for long-term thinking or
planning, nor does it allow for much investment in the future. Poverty reduction is
viewed as one of the most important aspects of sustainability projects in the developing
world and is often the primary goal (Agrawal & Redford, 2006; Berkes & Seixas, 2004;
Parris & Kates, 2003; and Smith et al., 2003). Components of poverty reduction goals
are the sustained provision of basic needs such as food, water, air, shelter and clothing
(Nagpal, 1995 ; Parris & Kates, 2003; and Smith et al., 2003) and secure employment
opportunities or livelihood options to ensure basic needs provision (Pagdee et al., 2006;
Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003; and Smith et al., 2003). Although the causes of poverty
vary- especially in terms of degree- identifying and addressing the ecological, economic
and social factors that create poverty traps is an essential task for sustainability projects in
developing countries.
Economic diversity
Economic diversity is an important aspect of sustainability for a number of
reasons (Bridger & Luloff, 1999; and Davidson, 2003). A community that relies upon
only one activity is subject to economic disaster if that activity should fail or deteriorate.
Maintaining diversity in economic activities is a way to buffer fluctuations in markets
and reduce a community’s vulnerability to economic decline. It is also an incentive to
27

keep young people in a community rather than making them seek work elsewhere
(Davidson, 2003).
Access to markets
Having access to local, regional, national and even international markets is an
important aspect of economic sustainability. Local self-reliance, which means
emphasizing local markets, helps communities establish a buffer between their local
economies and the fluctuations in larger markets (Bridger & Luloff, 1999). Access to
markets is highly related to infrastructure and transportation, so it is even more important
for rural communities to create local economies that do not require shipping to regions far
away. However, using resources to move goods and services to larger markets is also
economically important and communities that have access to regional markets are at an
advantage because their products reach a wider demand base (Barbier, 2000).
Communities that have access to Fair Trade markets are at even more of an advantage
because more money goes directly to the producer through co-ops.
Social factors
The social factors involved in sustainability projects are perhaps the most
important considerations, yet they often pose the most challenging problems in keeping a
project alive and ultimately to a community’s success or failure in sustainability. In order
for a local community group to maintain efforts towards sustainability several social
factors must be considered including: education, information sharing, capacity building,
community ownership, support from multiple levels of government, participatory
decision-making processes, development of institutions, secure land tenure, development
28

of a community vision, action plan and evaluation techniques, and equitable distribution
of project benefits.
Education, interdisciplinary information-sharing and capacity building
Providing education to community members in both formal and informal settings
is key to sustainability (Kellert et al., 2000) because it helps to develop an understanding
of why the project is important and aids in giving the community ideas as to how it may
accomplish its various goals. Formal education is a critical aspect of any community and
is seen widely by people in rural communities in the developing world as a means of
reducing poverty (Nagpal, 1995). Informal education between outside and internal actors
is critical to sustainability projects because it involves engaging community members
(often adults) who will be actors in projects. Informal education can take place in the
form of participatory rural appraisals (Chambers, 1994), action education and other
forums for learning (Fagan, 1996). Learning that is applicable to local contexts is
especially pertinent to sustainable community development and can be facilitated in
informal settings (Fagan, 1996). Also, local indigenous knowledge provides a reservoir
of place-based knowledge pertinent to sustainability that is too often overlooked by rural
development projects practitioners of the past (Phillips, 2008b).
An aspect critical to education for sustainability is the ability of internal and
external actors to share information generated from various disciplines and sources.
Many sustainable development projects occurring at the local-level are not limited to the
internal resources (or interests) of a community or group (Mitchell, 2001) and a positive
interaction between external actors and a community can reinforce these efforts. Clear
communication between actors is an ingredient of any project involving multiple groups.
29

A study by Rist et al. (2007), for example, argues that management of natural resources is
strongly affected by ways in which external and internal actors relate to each other.
Information sharing between local groups, government, NGOs, research institutions can
help communities learn new research from multiple fields and merge it with local or
indigenous culture and knowledge (Burns, Audouin & Weaver, 2006; Castillo & Toledo,
2000; Kellert et al, 2000; Kijtewachakul et al., 2004; Redclift, 1993; Rist et al., 2007;
Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003; Taylor-Ide & Taylor, 2002; and Thrupp, 1993). Many
authors argue that an interdisciplinary approach to sustainable development is the best
way to ensure that projects are indeed meeting ecological, economic and social goals
(Berkes, 2004; Berkes & Seixas, 2004; Chan, Ranganathan, Boggs, Chan, Ehrlich, Haff,
Heller, Al-Khafaji, & Macmynowski, 2007; Fagan, 1996; and Kellert et al., 2000). There
is evidence of this in studies from the relatively new field of sustainability science, which
aims to create pathways of information sharing between disciplines and to communities
to reinforce sustainability projects (Burns et al., 2006; Kates et al., 2001; and Manual-
Navarrete, Slocombe & Mitchell, 2006). It is also especially important for local
authorities to be involved in sharing information with the community and provide access
to information from other sources (Agyeman, Morris & Bishop, 1996).
Capacity building is one of the key factors in maintenance of sustainable
development initiatives at the local level (Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Davidson, 2003;
Fagan, 1996; McCarthy, 2005; Phillips et al., 2007; Spangenberg, McGinley & Tschida,
2004; and Tucker, 2000). Developing capacity in the local community allows them to be
agents of change and provides them with skills to continue what has been initiated
(UNDP, 2008). Capacity building can also be empowering, giving community members
30

the confidence to sustain their work (Berkes & Seixas, 2004). The adoption of
alternative techniques learned through capacity building exercises may also aid in more
sustainable use of natural resources (Thrupp, 1993).
Community ownership
Community ownership of the project and its benefits is an important factor in
sustainability, especially when there is involvement by external actors (Bridger, 2001;
and Wiggins, Markfo & Anchirinah, 2004). A community’s commitment to
sustainability may be hampered if there is a perception that the process does not belong to
them (Wiggins et al., 2004). If community members have a stake in the project it makes
the idea of sustainability concrete rather than an abstract concept contrived by external
actors and driven by foreign ideology (Bridger, 2001). Ownership is also related to high
levels of mutual trust that benefits will be shared equitably among community members
(Pandey & Yadama, 1990).
Support from multiple levels of government
Although this thesis is focused on sustainable community development projects
occurring at the local level, it is important to recognize that local governments and groups
do not act independently of the larger governmental structures on national and
international levels (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999; and Berkes, 2004). This makes support
from higher levels of government a critical aspect of projects because they can act as a
brace to support long-term commitments (Rydin & Holman, 2004; Taylor and Taylor-
Ide, 2002; and Wint, 2000). On the other hand, lack of support from higher levels of
government may seriously undermine a project’s success (Armstrong & Stratford, 2004).
The first level of governance that is crucial is the local level, especially if projects are not
31

managed by local authorities (Armstrong & Stratford, 2004; and ICLEI, 2002), because it
serves as a conduit to and from higher levels. The local government must be able to
relay information and make connections to larger political structures in order to make
sure the community’s voice is heard at higher levels (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999). Of
course, it is important that local officials do so without individual interests in mind,
which undermines the community as a whole (Davidson, 2003).
Participatory decision-making process
Highly related to community ownership, projects that involve a participatory
decision-making process may be more successful in the long run because they may
garner more support from the community than projects that are initiated by the national
government or international NGOs (Armstrong & Stratford, 2004; Dorm-Adzobu,
Ampadu-Agyei & Veit, 1991; Horochowski & Moisey, 2001; Mitchell, 2001; and
Thrupp, 1993). A participatory decision-making process may mobilize citizens into
action (Agyeman & Angus, 2003; and Shutkin, 2000, quoted in Agyeman & Angus,
2003), especially if the process is transparent (Smith et al., 2003). One study found that
many people from developing countries viewed a democratic decision-making process as
a key to sustainability (Nagpal, 1995).
It is argued that involvement from local communities in decision-making
processes is crucial because their exclusion, particularly in relation to top-down natural
resource management, has resulted in conflict (Chan et al., 2006) or increased poverty
and environmental degradation (Hogg, 1987). Projects initiated from above have failed
largely in part because they introduced new and unknown management methods that
locals did not value or understand (Berkes, 2004; and Redclift, 1993). Local involvement
32

helps community members place value in the project because they have had a stake in
developing it. As cases in Africa have shown (Thresher, 1981; and Litchfield, 2001), if
the protection of natural resources is proven to have value for locals, then they may be
more willing to manage natural resources in a sustainable manner. If locals participate in
the project then they are also likely to articulate the problems affecting them, which may
not be clearly understood by outsiders (Fagan, 1996). Locals may need outside help to
get a project running, but this should not undermine their decision making processes
(King & Stewart 1996; and Walsh, Jamrozy & Burr 2001) and, instead, outside groups
can serve to empower local groups (Seymour, 1994).
Development of local institutions
The development of local institutions that govern behavior is viewed as one of the
most important aspects of sustainable development at the local level (Agrawal & Gibson,
1999; Berkes, 2004; Barton Bray, Merino-Perez, Negreros-Castillo, Segura-Warnholtz,
Torres-Rojo, Vester, 2003; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Kidane-Mariam, 2003; Leach,
Mearns, & Scoones, 1999; Murali et al., 2006; Pagdee et al., 2006; and Pandey &
Yadama, 1990; and Tucker, 2000). The creation of local institutions that are accepted by
the community can help in the decision-making process, reduce vagrancy, and provide a
transparent view of the process from both internal and external viewpoints (Barton Bray
et al., 2003; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Tucker, 2000; and UNCED, 1992). Many authors
have emphasized that the absence of strong local institutions is one of the most limiting
factors a project may face (e.g., Agrawal & Gibson, 1999; Berkes, 2004; Leach et al.,
1999, Pagdee et al., 2006; and Pandey & Yadama, 1990). A focus on institution
33

development helps to unite people from disparate groups that make up a community,
which may not necessarily be cohesive in and of itself (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999).
Institutions that are created through a participatory decision-making process are
only helpful if they are developed, accepted, and enforced by the community as a whole.
This is especially evident in community-based natural resource management projects
(Pagdee et al., 2006), but also in the conduct that governs social and political interactions
within groups (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999; and Berger, 2003).
A focus on institutions at higher levels of government is also important because
weak institutions at those levels may reduce a project’s sustainability even if there are
strong institutions at the local level (Berkes & Seixas, 2004). The impact external actors
can have on local-level sustainability efforts is complicated and in many cases, may make
or break any initiatives a local community attempts (ICLEI, 2002). In many cases, local
level institutions in many developing countries have been eroded in the colonial and post-
colonial eras because of a predominant push for centralized government (Kidane-
Mariam, 2003; Leach et al., 1999; and Wiggins et al., 2004), so the need for
reinforcement exists at all levels. Regional or national attempts towards sustainability
must take into account local institutions that govern behavior and adjust accordingly
(Berkes, 2004).
Secure land tenure
Secure land tenure in the form or legal or informal institutions that define
ownership and use rights is also a critical aspect of sustainability projects at the local
level (Barton Bray et al., 2003; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Kidane-Mariam, 2003; Tucker,
2000; and Romano, 2007). In Mexico, for example, the success of sustainable
34

community forest management projects is highly related to secure land tenure of local
communities (Barton Bray et al., 2003; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; and Tucker, 2000).
Studies from Africa have also shown that secure land tenure plays a large role in
sustainable management of natural resources such as soil (Barbier, 2000; Kabubo-
Mariara, Mwabu, & Kimuyu, 2006; Opondo, 2000; and Romano, 2007).
In post-colonial developing countries land tenure is an issue because areas
formerly inhabited or managed by local and indigenous groups has been changed
drastically, with land tenure being moved either into private hands or centrally managed
areas. This has made the question of redefining property rights a huge issue in these
countries (Kidane-Mariam, 2003; and Romano, 2007). Often, marginalized groups have
been relegated to less productive land (Thrupp, 1993) and local people resist involvement
with the government in fear that their ownership or access to land would be changed
(Mortimer & Tiffen, 1994). In order for communities to initiate sustainable development
projects on either private or common land, they must be ensured that the land will not be
taken away from them; otherwise, their commitment to long-term management is
severely compromised.
Community vision, action plan and evaluation techniques
As with many projects, there must be a vision for what the community wishes the
future to look like (Davidson, 2003; and Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003) and a road map
to get there (ICLEI, 2002; and Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003). Having a vision with an
action plan consisting of goals, objectives and benchmarks to work towards the vision is
a critical aspect of any venture because it allows for measurement of success. This is
especially important in sustainable development projects because it is argued that
35

economic interests may supersede social and environmental ones and an action plan may
help reduce overemphasis on economic goals (Bell & Morse, 1999; and Kates, 2005).
Literature related to ecotourism projects, for example, calls for significant planning,
which the absence of may serve to reduce overall success (Epler Wood, 2002; and
McCool & Moisey, 2001). Additionally, having a community vision and action plan
gives the community something concrete to work towards, with outlined objectives to get
there. Evaluation is also a key factor in meeting project goals and working towards a
vision and is often measured through the use of progress indicators (ICLEI, 2002; and
Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003).
Equitable distribution of benefits
A community’s commitment to sustainability may persist only if benefits are felt
throughout the community (Pagdee et al., 2006). Often, one group may secure more
economic gain from a project, leaving the poorest groups in the same financial situation
they found themselves prior to the inception of the project (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999;
Berger, 2003; Kellert et al., 2000; Mitchell, 2001; Murali et al., 2006, and Pagdee et al.,
2006). If this situation occurs, then the project may be met with diminished morale and
result in a lack of participation by marginalized groups (Horochowski & Moisey, 2001;
Kellert et al., 2000; and Wiggins et al., 2004). This is especially important to consider in
developing countries where the most marginalized groups are often the poorest.
On the other hand, equitable distribution of benefits to users may facilitate more
sustainable use of resources because all parties have an equal stake in protecting them
(Pagdee et al., 2006; Murali et al., 2006; Tucker, 2000). The development of institutions
to regulate behavior is an important factor in resource use (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999;
36

Berkes, 2004; Barton Bray et al., 2003; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Kidane-Mariam, 2003;
Leach et al., 1999; Murali et al., 2006; Pagdee et al., 2006; Pandey & Yadama, 1990; and
Tucker, 2000) and may be a precursor to equitable distribution of benefits because it may
provide a system of checks and balances to ensure that one group or individual does not
take advantage of the community’s efforts and that distribution of benefits is equitable
without marginalization of user groups.
37

Sustainability Attributes Checklist
Sustainability attributes
Literature regarding locally initiated sustainability projects reveals that success in
meeting goals is dependent on many factors (Kellert et al., 2000; and Pagdee et al., 2006).
For many cases in developing countries, program success is often evaluated based upon
poverty alleviation, social equity and protection of biodiversity (Agrawal & Redford,
2006; Berkes & Sexias, 2004; and Pagdee et al., 2006), but results are highly varied due
to situational factors of each case (Berkes & Sexias, 2004; and Kellert et al., 2000).
The global, national and regional economic context within which a community is
situated may significantly impact a project’s success. This is particularly true if the
project is depending on external sources of funding for seed money or other additional
financial support. Volatile markets, especially in the recent and continuing global
recession, are affecting the global economy and have trickled down into nearly every
sector and community. Social situations, including the heterogeneity of a community,
power structures, individual interests, gender relations, and instances of conflict also
affect a community’s commitment and ability to carry out sustainability projects.
The natural resources surrounding a community are also factors in the success of
sustainability projects. A community in Kenya, for example, that is able to develop an
ecotourism project centered around large felines may be more likely to succeed than
another community which does not have these animals in their immediate surroundings.
Water resources and the infrastructure to retain and purify water for irrigation, drinking,
and household use greatly impacts a community’s ability to abate poverty (ICLEI, 2002),
especially in dryland regions (characterized by arid, semi-arid and desert habitats). The
38

type of surrounding forest, for example, dictates opportunities for fuelwood, fodder, non-
timber forest products, which can be used both for subsistence and economic gain
(Pagdee et al., 2006). The proximity of natural resources that meet the needs of
community members is a huge factor in how the community is able to develop, though
some communities have been able to use technological advances to optimize resources in
seemingly barren areas (Weismann, 1998).
The differing contexts within which communities are found can make the
transferability of sustainable development successes and failures implemented in one
context difficult to achieve in other contexts (Agrawal & Redford, 2006). However, there
are certain aspects that are commonly found in the literature and a focus on these
attributes may be beneficial if adapted to the local context by local actors working with
outside actors. This chapter identified factors important to sustainability that are
important to consider in order to avoid over-emphasis one or a few elements (e.g.,
economic gains over social equity or ecological health). The attributes generated in this
literature review may serve as a guide for communities for developing indicators for
sustainability if they so choose. The elements are listed in Table 2 below.
39

Table 2. Ecological, economic and social attributes important to sustainable community development
Ecological Economic Social (Sociopolitical)
Education 47
A. Access to information and
sharing of information
Poverty reduction 44
between internal and
A. Secure livelihood 45
Biodiversity external actors 48
B. Provision of basic
conservation 43 B. Interdisciplinary approach
needs 46
inclusive of scientific,
indigenous, traditional and
cultural (etc.) knowledge 49
C. Capacity building 50
Sustainable use of
Economic diversity 52 Community ownership 53
resources 51
Political support from local,
Environmental awareness 55
Access to markets regional and national
and stewardship 54
governments 56
Restoration of degraded Inclusive democratic decision-
resources 57 making process 58
Preservation of ecosystem
Institution development 60
function and services 59
43
Barton Bray et al., 2003; Berkes & Seixas, 2003; Kellert et al., 2000 ; Pagdee et al., 2007; Smith et a l.,
2003 ; and Western & Wright, 1994
44
Berkes & Seixas, 2004; Parris & Kates, 2003; and Smith et al., 2003
45
Pagdee et al., 2006; Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003; and Smith et al., 2003.
46
Nagpal, 1995 ; Parris & Kates, 2003;and Smith et al., 2003.
47
Agyeman et al., 1996; Fagan, 1996 ; Kellert et al., 2000 ; and Nagpal, 1995.
48
Agyeman et al., 1996 ; Burns et al., 2006 ; Castillo & Toledo, 2000 ; Fagan, 1996; Kates et al., 2001 ;
Kellert et al., 2000 ; Manual-Navarrete et al., 2006 ; Redclift, 1993 ; Rist et al., 2007 ; and Thrupp, 1993.
49
Alcorn, 1993; Berkes, 2004; Berkes & Seixas, 2004; Burns et al., 2006; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Chan et
al., 2007; Fagan, 1996; Horochowski & Moisey, 2001; Kellert et al., 2000; Kijtewachakul et al., 2004;
Manual-Navarrete et al., 2006; Nagpal, 1995; Redclift, 1993; Rist et al., 2007; Rocky Mountain Institute,
2003; and Taylor-Ide & Taylor, 2002.
50
Berkes & Seixas, 2004 ; Castillo & Toledo, 2000; Davidson, 2003; Fagan, 1996; McCarthy, 2005;
Thrupp, 1993 ; Tucker, 2000, and UNDP, 2008.
51
Barton Bray et al., 2003; Bridger & Luloff, 1999; James & Lahti, 2004 ; Kellert et al., 2000; Smith et al.,
2003; and Murali et al., 2006.
52
Bridger & Luloff, 1999; and Davidson, 2003.
53
Bridger, 2001; Pandey, 1990; and Wiggins, 2004.
54
Agyeman & Angus, 2003; Davidson, 2001; and Nagpal, 1995.
55
Barbier, 2000; and Bridger & Luloff, 1999.
56
Agrawal & Gibson, 1999; Armstrong & Stratford, 2004; Berkes, 2004; Berkes & Seixas, 2004;
Davidson, 2003; Rydin & Holman, 2004; Taylor-Ide & Taylor, 2002; Wint, 2000.
57
Smith et al., 2003.
58
Agyeman & Angus, 2003; Armstrong & Stratford, 2004; Berkes, 2004; Dorm-Adzobu et al., 1991;
Fagan, 1996; Horochowski & Moisey, 2001; Mitchell, 2001; Nagpal, 1995; Seymour, 1994; Smith et al.,
2003; Thrupp, 1995.
59
MEA, 2005; Parris & Kates, 2003; and Roseland, 1998.
60
Agrawal and Gibson, 1999; Berkes & Seixas, 2004; Dorm-Adzobu et al., 1991; Junkin, 2007; Kellert et
al., 2000; Kidane-Mariam, 2003; Leach et al., 1999; Romano, 2007; and Smith et al., 2003.
40

Ecological Economic Social (Sociopolitical)

Secure land tenure 61
Action Plan with an accepted
community vision 62
Evaluation techniques 63
Equitable distribution of
benefits 64
61
Barbier, 2000; Barton-Bray, et al., 2003;Castillo, & Toledo, 2000; Kabubo-Mariara et al., 2006; Kidane-
Mariam, 2003; Mortimer & Tiffen, 1994; Opondo, 2000; Romano, 2007; Thrupp, 1995; Tucker, 2000; and
Romano, 2007.
62
Davidson, 2003; ICLEI, 2002a; Junkin, 2007; Pandey & Yadama, 1990; and Rocky Mountain Institute,
2003.
63
ICLEI, 2002a; and Rocky Mountain Institute, 2003.
64
Agrawal & Gibson, 1999; Berger, 2003; Horochowski & Moisey, 2001; Kellert et al. 2000; Mitchell,
2001; Murali et al., 2006, Pagdee et al., 2007 ; and Wiggins et al., 2004;
41

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Research Goals and Objectives
The goal of this study is to evaluate two sustainable community initiatives to
determine how they have met the needs of community members (Objectives 2-8) and
have contributed to the development of a sustainable community (Objective 9). The
objectives of this goal are lumped into the following categories: Literature Review,
Project History and Assessment of Actions (See Chapter One, Objectives).
General Methodological Approach
In order to meet the objectives of this study the researcher used methods based
upon case study research, qualitative analysis and rapid resource assessment. This
research is descriptive in nature. These methods are described in the following sections
of this chapter.
Case studies
Case studies are a form of research used primarily in the social sciences and are
selected when the study proposes “how” or “why” questions about the topic at hand, the
researcher has little control over events, and the study is investigating contemporary
phenomenon in the context of events in the real world (Eisenhardt, 1989; Stake, 2006;
and Yin, 2003). Case studies are generally used to test theory, generate theory or to
describe phenomena (Eisenhardt, 1989). There are intrinsic case studies, which compile
information that informs the individual case, and instrumental (or “extrinsic”, as it is
referred to in this study) case studies, which inform a larger and more general
phenomenon (Stake, 1988; and Stake, 2006). The questions posed in this descriptive
42

study meet the criteria for case study research. This study investigates how local-level
sustainable development initiatives have been implemented by the communities of
Sanjadi-ka-badia and Nyumbani Village, how they are (or are not) meeting the immediate
and long-term needs of community members, how the initiatives have contributed to the
development of a sustainable community. The researcher does not have control over the
events in the study (i.e., initiatives taken by the communities are not controllable by the
primary researcher). Finally, this study investigates the approaches taken by the two
communities and assesses how these approaches are contemporarily affecting humans
and the surrounding environment, with implications for future management of human and
natural systems. As such, it is both an intrinsic and extrinsic study.
In order to develop case studies of each community the researcher used several
sources of evidence. Case study research, like other forms of research, requires a number
of sources in order to triangulate data, which adds to the internal and external validity of
a study (Yin, 2003). Unpublished documents were collected before and during the
researcher’s time in each community. These documents were used in to describe actions
taken towards sustainability prior to the researcher’s time in the respective community, to
provide background information and support information collected with other research
methods. The second source of evidence used by the researcher was a structured
interview conducted with community members, community leaders, and staff of the
NGOs (FES and COGRI) working with the respective community. The third source of
evidence used was direct observational data, which was collected during time spent in the
villages from May-August, 2008. Additionally, the researcher conducted one or more
43

Rapid Resource Assessment (RRA) exercises in each village. The interview transcripts,
RRA reports and observation data are found in Appendices of this thesis.
Rapid resource assessment
The RRA exercise was developed by GEM Director Victor Phillips (Phillips,
2008a) and has been used in different applications internationally in GEM applied
research, capacity building and outreach efforts to empower local communities to move
towards sustainability (e.g., Spangenberg et al., 2004; and Phillips et al., 2007). The
RRA process is described in Appendix Three, Notes on Rapid Resource Management
Methodology (Phillips, 2008a). In this study the RRA serves as a way to assess what are
the current assets or resources of the community and how much each of those resources
needs to be further enhanced in order to move towards sustainability and meet needs of
community members (Objective Eight) and serve as an additional method in evaluating
what needs were met either by the FES or COGRI project (Objective Five). This process
is also useful as a tool to guide community action through the community’s own internal
analysis of needs and resources. The RRA results in a visual depiction of relative
strengths and weaknesses in a “spider web” illustration of local capacity as determined by
local citizens (e.g., Appendix Three). The complete RRA findings are found in the
results Appendices (Appendix One, Results from Sanjadi-ka-badia and Appendix Two,
Results from Nyumbani Village) and within the case studies for each community.
Methodology in Sanjadi-ka-badia
Interviews
The researcher conducted interviews with three types of respondents: community
members, community leaders and FES staff (see Interviews from Sanjadi-ka-badia
44

Village section in Appendix One). This took place during five weeks of field research in
Sanjadi-ka-badia (SKB) in May and June of 2008. The researcher conducted these
interviews with the help of a FES staff translator(s). All of the interview questions were
translated into the local dialect of Rajasthani used in rural parts of Bhilwara district.
Prior to conducting the interview, the researcher made sure that the translator understood
the questions and how to conduct the interviews in order to maintain consistency
throughout the process. In cases where the interviewee spoke English, the researcher
interviewed the interviewee directly.
Each interviewee signed a consent form that described the research and gave the
researcher permission to use information gathered in the interview in the overall study.
At the beginning of the interview the translator explained why the researcher was
conducting the study and why they were being asked to participate. After receiving
verbal consent, the interview was conducted. The translator and researcher decided to
have the interviewees sign, or give thumbprints for those who could not write, the form
after the interview was completed, so the interviewee knew more about the study and was
comfortable signing the consent form (this was a recommendation by FES staff).
Interviews with community members
The researcher used techniques of convenience, snowball and purposeful
sampling. Convenience sampling is interviewing people because they are available at the
time (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003). Snowball sampling is a technique in which an
interviewee recommends another person who is either available at the time or was
involved in the subject at hand (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003; and Patton, 2002).
Purposeful sampling is selecting interviewees because they have a specific set of
45

characteristics (Patton, 2002). To receive a representative sample of the community,
interviewees were selected based upon their caste, age (18 and above), gender, and
whether they were present in the village at the time of the FES project, whether they were
a panchayat member (for a description of the panchayat system, see Chapter Four) and if
they were one of the FES staff members that worked directly with the project at SKB.
There are three castes in the community: Gujjar, Balai, and Lohar 65 . There is
only one Lohar family in the community and, at the time of a census in 2001, the
community was about two-thirds Gujjar. Sanjadi-ka-badia is a community of 63
households. Five men and five women from Gujjar and Balai castes and one family
member from the Lohar caste were interviewed, for a total of 23 respondents in 22
interviews, or approximately 35 66 percent of the community households. Community
members were asked questions regarding their pre-project, current, and future needs,
perception of the FES project, and vision for the village’s future (transcriptions of all
interviews can be found in Appendix One, Interviews from Sanjadi-ka-badia village).
Interviews with community leaders and FES staff
Community leader interviewees were selected using purposeful sampling
techniques because of their present or former status as either panchayat members or
community leaders. FES staff members were chosen using purposeful techniques based
upon their involvement in the project. The researcher asked questions related to the
project initiated in the community (transcriptions can be found in Appendix One,
Interviews from Sanjadi-ka-badia Village). Two FES employees, one former community
leader and three panchayat members were interviewed.
65
Explanation of Castes is found within the Sanjadi-ka-badia case study.
66
One of these interviews, code SCI3, consisted of two interviewees from the same family. As such, the
percentage of community members (35) was calculated using 22 interviews.
46

Direct-observational data
Observational data were recorded by the researcher during visits to the
community, which totaled eight individual visits of no less than three hours per visit.
During this time the researcher visited homes and toured around the village, including the
site of a new water well currently under construction at the closest river and the Common
Grazing Lands (CGL) plots within the Chitamba panchayat that were a part of FES work
in the region. Conversations with FES staff recorded in a journal were also used as
observation data. These data were helpful in providing context for understanding the
local conditions as a glimpse into community culture and landscape, which contributed to
reflective insights of the researcher presented in the SKB case study. The data also
clarified information about FES and the work it conducts in India. These transcribed
observational data are found in Appendix One, Observations of Sanjadi-ka-badia.
Documents
Documents were gathered from the FES regional and team offices located in
Bhilwara town. These documents (most of which are unpublished) included:
1.) Map of the Chitamba panchayat conducted during a participatory rural appraisal
(PRA) 67 ;
2.) PRA needs assessment conducted in 1999 with Sanjadi-ka-badia village members;
3.) Excel spreadsheet of community baseline data collected by another NGO;
4.) Maps of the area created by FES staff;
5.) Basic village information compiled by FES staff;
6.) Ecological monitoring reports of areas within and outside the Sanjadi-ka-badia CGL
plot;
7.) Report authored by the FES regional cell leader (Joshie, Kalam, Chaturvedi, Rastogi,
2008);
8.) FES annual report (FES, 2007);
9.) Ecological Profile of Bhilwara completed by FES (FES, 2008).
67
The PRA method was described by Robert Chambers (Chambers, 1992; and Chambers, 1994) and is
widely used in developing countries as an initial assessment tool (e.g., Temu & Due, 2000; and Zanetell, &
Knuth, 2002).
47

The RRA for Sanjadi-ka-badia was attempted by the researcher and three
translators on 20 June, 2008. The process was explained to the translators prior to the
RRA with SKB villagers and questions were translated from English to Hindi. With the
advice of the FES staff, the researcher decided to conduct the RRA in two sessions
divided by gender. The reason for this was that the FES staff did not feel that the women
would actively participate if the men were present. The women had a difficult time
understanding the process and ended up leaving because they said they had work to do.
The second RRA with the men was also incomplete. The process was initiated up to step
three (Sparring) because there was a breach in understanding and people were beginning
to become disengaged by the process. The date of this inadequate RRA fell at the end of
the researcher’s time in India, so FES agreed to conduct a more thorough RRA after the
monsoons ended and people were more available to do the RRA. FES conducted the
RRA with community members in one group of 18 participants on 29 August, 2008.
This information is found in Appendix One, Rapid Resource Assessment Results.
Methodology in Nyumbani Village
Interviews
The researcher conducted interviews with three types of respondents:
grandparents living in Nyumbani Village (NV), members of outlying communities
working for NV, community leaders in the surrounding districts, NV staff, and two
outside consultants (see interview questionnaire in Appendix Two, Interviews from
Nyumbani Village). This took place during five weeks of field research at NV during
July and August of 2008. The researcher conducted these interviews with the help of a
48

NV staff translator. All of the interview questions were translated into Kikamba, the
local language. Prior to conducting the interview, the researcher made sure that the
translator understood the questions and how to conduct the interviews in order to
maintain consistency throughout the process. In cases where the interviewee spoke
English, the researcher interviewed the interviewee directly.
Prior to the interview, the translator explained the consent form, which was
translated into Kikamba, and received verbal consent to conduct the interview. After the
interview the participant signed or thumb-printed the form, which indicated their consent
to be included in the study.
Community member interviews
The community member interviews were conducted with grandparents living in
NV and members of the outside communities working with NV, using the same or very
similar sets of questions for each. Convenience, snow-ball and purposeful sampling
techniques were used to select people for the interviews. Grandparents were selected
using convenience and purposeful sampling and ultimately two grandfathers and eight
grandmothers were interviewed (comprising 34 percent of grandparents living in NV at
the time). Interviewees who were outside community members were selected using
snowballing and purposeful techniques. These interviewees were recommended by NV
staff and had been working with NV as more than casual day laborers (so they were
familiar with the village and projects implemented there). Eight outside community
members were interviewed in seven interviews (13 percent of 59 workers). Both the
grandparents and the outside community members were asked questions about the NV
49

project, how it is or is not meeting needs, what issues exist, etc. (see Appendix Two,
Interviews from Nyumbani Village).
Interviews with community leaders and Nyumbani Village staff
Interviews were conducted during July and early August, 2008 with community
leaders of the district in which NV is located and the district located nearby the village
(Kwa Vonza and Kwa Matonga, respectively). Four community leaders were
interviewed in two interviews. Interviews with ten NV staff were conducted to represent
the different departments (e.g., home care, sustainability, polytechnic school, primary
school, clinic) of the village. Two interviews with outside consultants were conducted.
(see all interview results in Appendix Two, Interviews from Nyumbani Village).
Direct-observational data
Observations of NV were made by the researcher during five weeks spent in the
village. During this time, the researcher stayed in the guest house, spent time working in
the homes of the families living in the village and worked with the staff on various
projects. Insights gained from these daily observations helped in preparing the NV case
study. Conversations with staff, workers and NV volunteers that were documented in a
journal were also included as observational data. These data can be found in Appendix
Two, Observations of Nyumbani Village.
Documents
Documents were collected by the researcher during and before the stay at NV and
in COGRI headquarters in Nairobi. These unpublished documents include:
1.) Quarterly reports;

2.) COGRI strategic plan;
3.) Reports from the home care, school and sustainability departments.
4.) Sustainability Strategic Plan developed in 2003 by Woodlands Trust.
50

5.) Power Point Presentation given to donors by COGRI staff.
Three RRAs were conducted with three groups at NV: COGRI staff assigned to
NV, grandparents, and the Organic Outgrowers Group (a group of outside villagers
working in NV). The RRA with staff was conducted by the researcher in two sessions on
28 and 30 July. The grandparent RRA was conducted on 24 July with the assistance of
two translators who were coached on the process prior to the activity. The Organic
Outgrowers Group RRA was conducted in two sessions on 18 and 24 July with the help
of two translators who were also coached on the process prior to the sessions. All of the
RRAs can be found in Appendix Two, Rapid Resource Assessment Results.
Analysis of Qualitative Data
This research is a qualitative study aimed at describing and analyzing a
contemporary phenomenon: sustainable communities. Qualitative studies are hypothesis-
generating, which “involves analyzing and interpreting texts and interviews in order to
discover meaningful patterns descriptive of a particular phenomenon” (Auerbach &
Silverstein, 2003). This research generates hypotheses about each case study (intrinsic
hypotheses) and how they inform sustainable community development as a whole
(extrinsic hypotheses) (described in Chapter Six: Discussion).
The researcher uses an open-coding technique to analyze qualitative information
gathered in the study. Open coding is a process used to systematically categorize, build
relationships, and explain phenomena through systematic coding of raw qualitative data
(Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1998; and Taylor, & Bogdan, 1998).
The open-coding process involved a series of steps: formation of propositions,
51

categorization of propositions and development of themes. The process of developing
propositions, categories and themes is discussed in the following sections.
Formation of propositions
In this study the researcher divided the interviews into three interviewee
groupings: community members, community leaders, and staff members of the NGOs
working with each community. All interviews were analyzed for propositions separately
by grouping because the set of questions differed. After choosing the richest interview
(the interview that provided the most information for Objectives 2-8), the researcher went
through each objective to find direct, quoted answers specific to that objective. These
answers became “propositions”, or the initial form of the data analysis taken directly
from interview quotes. The wording of the propositions was not changed by the
researcher. The first answer to the objective became “Proposition 1” and new
propositions (proposition 2 and so on) were added as new responses were mentioned.
After all of the answers for Objective Two were recorded in the first interview, the
researcher went on to the next objective, numbering propositions consecutively from the
previous objective. After finishing all objectives for the first interview, the researcher
went on to the next interview, adding new propositions when necessary and marking
when respondents mentioned an already established proposition. Propositions that were
identical, similar to, or served to inform other propositions were put together in graphs
with the number of times a proposition was reinforced and in which interviews (See
Appendices One and Two for graphs). This process was conducted for all interviews.
52

Development of categories and themes from the interviews
After the initial proposition phase, the researcher combined propositions into
categories in order to understand the dynamics of the raw data and how responses relate
to each other. The researcher then sorted the data in different ways in order to identify
emerging clusters of responses and build themes reinforced by the generated categories.
Conclusions were generated for each objective using the developed themes or categories
and compared to other sources of data, such as direct observations, documents, RRAs or
data from other objectives (e.g., data from Objective Eight informed conclusions drawn
in Objective Five). Other sources of information are cited in the conclusions for each
objective and un-cited information comes from the analyzed interview data. All of this
information (i.e., the propositions, categories and conclusions for each objective) are
found in the community’s respective Appendix in the section titled, “Results Categorized
by Objective”.
How the case studies were written
Information in the case studies came directly from interviews, documents, RRAs
and/or direct observations. All of the information is not directly cited in the case study
chapters to reduce complexity for the reader, but is cited in the conclusion sections of the
sections titled “Results Categorized by Objective” in Appendices One and Two. Direct
and summarized quotes were cited, giving the Appendix and interview code.
53

CHAPTER FOUR: SANJADI-KA-BADIA CASE STUDY
Case Study Overview
The case of Sanjadi-ka-badia (SKB), or “agricultural place where people live” as
it translates in Rajasthani, is one where, prior to the project initiated by Foundation for
Ecological Security (FES), community members experienced difficulty meeting basic
daily needs because of reduced capacity for the primary subsistence and livelihood
activities of animal husbandry and agriculture. The collaborative project between FES
and SKB primarily served primarily to restore fodder production, which reinforced the
economic activity of animal husbandry and reduced migration in search of fodder during
the dry season. Ecological restoration and development of institutions to regulate
behavior were the primary methods used to restore fodder availability. Institutions also
served to empower women and lower castes, whose involvement created a sense of unity
and reflects a move towards inclusive decision-making for collective good.
Additionally, institutions created incentives for universal education, which will
undoubtedly affect the community in the future. The fact that these institutions remain
intact four full years after the project’s completion signals that there is mid-term retention
of institutions to guide behavior towards collective good.
However, there are many other issues the community still faces that were simply
not within the scope of the FES project, such as lack of employment, lack of
infrastructure, lack of education, lack of health care services and limited access to outside
information. When asked about their current situation, one interviewee said, “they are
managing but it is very difficult” (Appendix One, SCI11). While the FES project served
to meet some of the needs of SKB, it certainly could not and did not meet all of the needs
54

the community had prior to the project and that currently still exist currently. As one
community member noted, “FES is helping them solve problems to a certain degree”
(Appendix One, SLI2).
In terms of sustainability, the FES project made significant steps by increasing
viability of a major livelihood source, animal husbandry, which assisted in basic needs
provision, the first step towards sustainability. Economic status of SKB remains tenuous
because of limited employment opportunities, low access to markets and lack of
infrastructure to support economic activity. Ecological considerations were also
addressed by the FES project, though restoration was limited to the common grazing
lands plot. The process and work implemented in the plot was, however, comprehensive
and may serve as a model for the community to conduct restoration and sustainable use
practices on other sites. The most impressive aspects of sustainability that the FES
project addressed were social inequity and a lack of institutions to regulate and guide
collective behavior. The development of institutions served as an umbrella for fostering
many of the other attributes such as education (especially for girls), inclusive decision-
making processes, secure land tenure, political support from local government and
community ownership. The development of these institutions was a catalytic event that
helped the community step beyond their comfort level to ensure a more equitable society.
FES also helped to bring more information and new ideas to the community, which is
fairly geographically isolated, and did so in ways that aligned with local culture. Overall,
the FES project contributed to social development because it helped to bring about a
more cohesive social unit that could make decisions for its collective well-being through
institutions that remain after FES finished the five-year project.
55

Site Description
SKB is located in Bhilwara District of Rajasthan State in northwestern India
(Figure 1).
Figure 1. Rajasthan, India (National Portal of India, 2008)
The community is approximately 70 kilometers northwest from the district head,
Bhilwara Town (Figure 2). It is one of five communities falling under the jurisdiction of
the Chitamba panchayat 68 , located in Chitamba Village, which is located approximately
five kilometers from SKB. The population of SKB at the time of the most recent census
(2001) was 393 people in 73 households. There are three castes in the village: Gujjar,
Lohar and Balai. All of these are considered backward castes 69 . Balais are considered
as a Scheduled Caste 70 , whereas Lohar and Gujjar are considered as Other Backward
Castes. All of these castes receive reservations for political seats in local, regional and
national positions and for some government jobs. The community encompasses an area
of about 183 hectares 71 .
68
The panchayat system is explained with more detail in the next section.
69
There are four tiers of castes in India. The first two are considered as forward, or upper castes, and the
latter two considered as backward, or lower castes.
70
Scheduled Castes and Tribes are Dalit, or Untouchables, the lowest castes within the fourth tier of the 2nd
backward caste.
71
1 hectare = 2.47 acres
56

Chitamba panchayat
and Sanjadi-ka-badia
Bhilwara
Town
Map created by Chiranjit Guha, FES
Figure 2. Location of Sanjadi-ka-badia village, Bhilwara District, Rajasthan, India.
Infrastructure and social services are lacking in the immediate area. A primary
school is the only education facility in the community. There is a middle school in
Chitamba Village and a secondary education facility about 10-15 kilometers from the
village. There are no formal medical facilities in the community but a Mother and Child
Welfare Center is located about 10-15 kilometers away. During the dry season (about
mid-March-July) water is primarily provided by communal hand pumps; during the wet
season (August-December) water is available in taps, hand pumps and wells. There is a
paved road connecting the village to Chitamba and to Bhilwara Town. A railway station
is approximately 12 kilometers from the community. Banking facilities are located in
Chitamba. There are no developed economic activities in the community (e.g.,
57

community store or industry). The majority of the villagers gain subsistence through
agriculture and animal husbandry and livelihood through the sale of crops and milk or
through daily wage labor. Most women are involved currently in the National Rural
Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) program, a national government program that
pays villagers to conduct development work (such as road building) in their own
communities and is administered by the local panchayat.
There is no forest within the community’s jurisdictional boundaries, but some
trees and shrubs can be found sporadically, including Acacia nilotica, A. leucophloea,
Prosopis cineraria, P. juliflora, Azadirachta indica, Balanites aegyptiaca, Capparis
decidua, C. horrida, Rhus msorensis, Zizyphus numularia, and Crotolaria burhhia.
Common grazing lands (CGL) are about 102 hectares. The community has access to
these common lands, which are managed by the Chitamba panchayat for grazing
livestock such as goats, sheep, cattle and buffalo (Figure 3). Most of the private land
outside of the CGL is used for agriculture and commonly grown crops are maize,
groundnuts, sesame, wheat, mustard, barley and pulses. The climate of SKB and the
Bhilwara District is semi-arid. Agricultural systems and other man-made systems are the
predominant type of the landscape mosaic (FES, 2008). The district’s propensity for
drought is high, although generally the southern region receives more precipitation than
the northern part, unfortunately which is where SKB is found (FES, 2008).
58

Figure 3. Sheep and goats graze in a Common Grazing Land plot in Sanjadi-ka-badia, India.
Photo/Lindsey Wood.
Panchayati Raj System of Local Governance
The panchayati raj institution (PRI) system of local governance in India is an
important factor of local-level sustainable development initiatives in the country and is a
key element of the project in SKB. This type of political system was common prior to
colonization of the subcontinent by the English, who effectively dismantled such
arrangements and gave power to a centralized government (Kaushik, 2005). The PRI is
a system of rural local governance with three ascending tiers: Gram panchayats, Mandal
or Panchayati Samitis, and Zilla parishads (Kaushik, 2005). Gram panchayats (hereafter
referred to as panchayat), being the lowest level of the Indian political structure, are local
bodies of five people who are elected to oversee the affairs of the communities within the
59

jurisdiction 72 of the panchayat and act as liaisons to higher levels of government. The
panchayats elect a leader, referred to as a sarpanch, with the collective group called a
panch. The panchayat is the level of government associated with the FES project in
SKB.
India’s development in the post-colonial era has ultimately reverted back to the
PRI system. After independence from Great Britain, decentralization became a key part
of the country’s internal development policy. Although the country attempted to reinstate
PRI directly after independence in 1947, it was not legally codified in national legislation
until the 1990’s. It started to gain momentum as a social movement in the 1980’s, which
was largely in response to a mostly ineffective top-down development scheme that rarely
met its goals, especially in rural areas of the country (Choudhury, 2004; and Kaushik,
2005). The PRI system, though largely stamped out, was still in practice in some rural
areas, and provided an existing framework for the process of renewed decentralization
(Kaushik, 2005). The 73rd Amendment reintroduced the historical PRI system, bringing
it into law, and was adopted by all states in the country by 1994. The primary goals of
the amendment are social justice and economic development with reinforcement of local
government to facilitate both (Kaushik, 2005). The strength and relative success of
panchayats varies throughout the country (Joshie, Kalam, Chaturvedi, & Rastogi, 2008).
In SKB, the Gram panchayat was a key element in the sustainability project. The
initiative was primarily focused on the CGL, so the community needed the support and
permission of the panchayat to reach its goals. In particular, the credibility, effective
leadership and trustworthiness of the sarpanch had a lot to do with SKB’s ability to
implement the project (S. Joshie, personal communication, June 4, 2008).

72
The panchayat’s jurisdiction depends on proximity between villages or hamlets.
60

Foundation for Ecological Security Project in Sanjadi-ka-badia
Project details
In SKB the sustainability project was initiated by a NGO, Foundation for
Ecological Security (FES), in collaboration with the community members and local
panchayat. FES was legally constituted in 2001, though it worked as a part of a
government agency (The National Dairy Development Board) for several years prior to
becoming a NGO. FES works throughout India and primarily focuses on two thematic
areas: forests and tribal livelihoods, and commons 73 and rural livelihoods (FES, 2007).
The mission of FES is to “strengthen, revive, or restore, where necessary, the process of
ecological succession and the conservation of land, forest, and water resources in the
country” (FES, 2007, page 2). A summary of FES’s scope of work comes from its 2007
Annual Report: “the central character of the efforts lies in the intertwining principles of
nature conservation and local self governance, aimed at accelerating ecological
restoration, as well as improving the living conditions of the poor” (FES, 2007, page 3).
As this case study shows, the work FES completed in SKB is evidence of its ability to
meet goals of ecological health and poverty reduction.
FES initiated contact with SKB and the Chitamba panchayat in 1998 to determine
if it was feasible to do work on the CGL managed by the local panchayat (Appendix
One, SLI1). FES chose to do work in the Chitamba panchayat and SKB because of the
presence of CGL to implement restoration work, interest by the communities and
panchayat, and the severity of environmental degradation and poverty in the region. In
SKB, the CGL is a vital part of the community, especially for families with little or no
73
Commons are tracts of land owned by the people of India and have different distinctions (e.g., common
grazing lands, forest lands, revenue wastelands)
61

private land for grazing livestock. The CGL in SKB is used for grazing goats, sheep,
cattle and buffalo and some fuelwood extraction. Official work with the community
began in 1999 with a five-year work plan from 1999-2003.
Prior to the initiation of the FES sustainable livelihoods and ecological restoration
project, citizens of SKB had a very difficult time meeting their daily basic needs. The
primary causes of this situation were the setting in a dryland climate and anthropogenic
degradation of natural resources used for livelihoods and subsistence. Other factors were
underlying this issue, such as a lack of accepted institutions to reduce overgrazing on the
CGL: “(there) were no institutions to guide behavior on the land under the panchayat”
(Appendix One, SLI1). The degradation of vegetation on the CGL and surrounding
private lands served to increase water scarcity in an area already prone to drought, which
further impacted agriculture, water availability for household use and fodder production.
Migration to other regions in search of fodder during the dry season was also a major
issue for many, especially those in the lowest caste (Balai), who own less land. The poor
economic state of the area affected people further because they did not have an outlet to
turn to as their capacity to earn a living through animal husbandry and agriculture was
diminished: “before there was not any form of employment and they would often have to
do wage labor in other areas” (Appendix One, SCI3). Additionally, a lack in social
services (e.g., higher levels of school and medical services), social equity (lack on
involvement in decision-making from women and lower castes, high rates of child
marriages, and low school enrollment for girls) and infrastructure (i.e., roads, electricity
and structures for water management and distribution) resulted in an overall situation of
62

low development. For a visual depiction of the relationship between the underlying
factors that resulted in SKB’s difficulty in meeting basic needs, see Figure 4.
Figure 4. Factors contributing to low development in Sanjadi-ka-badia, India prior to a

project by Foundation For Ecological Security.
In 1999 FES conducted a needs analysis with SKB 74 community members and
prioritized the following as important needs or issues to be addressed: water (quantity
and infrastructure); low agricultural outputs; poor animal husbandry techniques; lack of
education opportunities; fodder scarcity; lack of medical facilities; lack of employment
opportunities; droughts; and the need for more information on government schemes. It
was not within the scope of FES’ work to address all of these issues (e.g., medical
facilities or education), so it focused the project on work it was qualified to do. Given the
74
FES was working not only with SKB, but all of the hamlets that fall under the jurisdiction of the
Chitamba panchayat. However, staff worked with each of the hamlets individually to meet the varying
needs of all five communities while also reinforcing relationships within the panchayat.
63

expertise of FES in ecological restoration and institution development, the project was
focused primarily on issues related to the community’s ability to meet livelihoods, natural
resource restoration, employment, fodder and water. In interviews with the community
members, respondents most commonly mentioned fodder and water as major issues and,
as one community member commented, “everything was linked to fodder and water”
(Appendix One, SCI4).
In order to address the prioritized needs (livelihoods and employment, natural
resource development, fodder production and water retention) of the SKB community,
FES initiated programs related to natural resource restoration and development of
institutions to regulate behavior on the CLG plot and within the community. All of the
actions taken were decided upon in community meetings and required significant
planning and commitment by the community to do the work. It was noted by respondents
that community participation was high throughout the 5-year project. The work can be
categorized into the following: engaging the community and planning, natural resource
restoration and institution development.
Engaging the community and planning
Beginning work with SKB took significant planning and patience on behalf of
FES. The work completed by another NGO, Mangra Mewar Vikas Sanstha 75 , prior to
FES’s involvement was a crucial aspect in FES’s work with the village because it began
the process of building trust between the community and an outside organization (Joshie
et al., 2008). One interviewee provided a synopsis of this process:
“Some resistance was met at the beginning of the project because people who
owned private lands near the common grazing lands thought they would be able
to move into those lands and lay a claim to them for their own purposes. People
75
This NGO was working on developing patches of land for fodder production.
64

also thought the NGO (Mangra Mewar Vikas Sanstha) may try to sell the land.
There were a lot of rumors about what was going on. They had a meeting to
clarify what they wanted to do. This led to an increased interest in the project
from about 10 people to more than 40.” (Appendix One, SLI4)
Another interviewee flushed out more of the process: “initially the community thought
that FES was trying to take their land, so FES took them on a field trip to Ajmer to see
the work they’d done there and talk to villagers; after this they were motivated to have
FES help them.” (Appendix One, SLI5).
The process of building trust took about a year after the initial contact in 1998,
and SKB and FES began formal work in 1999. The first year (1999) was spent deciding
what work was needed to meet the villagers’ needs (e.g., conducting the 1999 Needs
Analysis and Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRA){Chambers, 1992; Chambers 1994} to
assess and map resources); having community meetings; meeting with leaders of the
Chitamba panchayat; developing committees, including a women’s management
committee that acted like a self-help group; coming up with a conservation agenda and a
five-year work plan; and building knowledge and capacity of the community members,
especially for management of the CGL.
Natural resource restoration
In order to restore the CGL, FES engaged the community members in a number
of capacity building and physical work activities. Fodder production, soil conservation
and groundwater recharge were primary goals for physical work on the CGL (Joshie, et
al., 2008). FES paid villagers to perform physical labor to improve their CGL, so the
community members were able to earn income while preserving the commons. FES
brought in saplings for plantation development, which were planted and maintained by
the community. Check dams, ditches and contours were constructed to conserve water
65

and soil. A living fence, consisting of thorny babul (Acacia spp.) shrubs, was constructed
around the CGL plot to clearly demarcate its area and provide an easier way to guard it
against encroachment from other communities as well as to deter misuse by SKB
community members. Capacity building workshops to manage natural resources were
also conducted, as well as development of knowledge and understanding of ecological
processes, such as rain cycles. In order to make the information culturally appropriate,
FES conducted “puppet shows (and) cultural programs that showed their connection with
the land and the necessity of managing natural resources well” (Appendix One, SLI1).
Institution development
The FES project also focused on the development and strengthening of local
institutions, especially in relation to sustainable governance of natural resource
management. FES did this by helping the villagers specify rules and regulations, creating
a democratic forum for decision-making, encouraging transparent and accountable fiscal
management, and supporting participation of women and lower castes (Joshie et al.,
2008). The Chitamba panchayat and informal village institutions called Charagah Vikas
Samitis (CVS) were the primary conduits for these activities. The process served to
legitimize the panchayat’s authority within the area and establish trust between villagers
and their elected officials (Joshi et al., 2008).
The CVS groups formed in each hamlet aided the Chitamba panchayat in
managing CGL lands while also giving villagers the ability to make collective decisions
about the land that provides them with their livelihood (Joshie et al., 2008). It was
decided that although the panchayat is responsible for only 450 households, the smaller
CVS institutions could manage the physical work and oversight more effectively. The
66

CVS groups became an integral part of the FES project because they had the legal
authority and support of the panchayat to manage the CGL, but also transitioned the
community into being responsible for management of public natural resources.
Similarly, other CVS were formed to manage additional issues and a federation of CVS
was created to report to the panchayat. The federation proved a useful forum to discuss
village issues and bring them to the panchayat if they could not be resolved within the
community.
Developing institutions to protect the CGL was a crucial element because they
wanted to maintain the physical work completed in its restoration. SKB adopted
rotational grazing schedules that coincided with natural cycles, primarily the wet
monsoon season, to reduce or eliminate overgrazing on the CGL plot and to allow
regeneration of grasses, shrubs and trees (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Restored Common Grazing Lands plot in Sanjadi-ka-badia, India. Photo/Lindsey

Wood.
67

Each year the schedule is reviewed based upon the state of the plot and may be altered if
the community decides it needs to have less grazing or if more grazing may be permitted.
Each family pays a fee depending on the size of the livestock (e.g., grazing buffalo and
cattle is more costly than sheep or goats) and the size of the herd, which was decided by
the community. The money earned goes into the “ora system”, which is another
institution created to protect the CGL. In the ora system, one family from the community
guards the plot for one week, ensuring no encroachment, and is paid for their time. After
a week another family takes over, so that responsibility is assigned to each family in the
community.
Improving the status of women and lower castes was also targeted in the
development of institutions, primarily by making sure both had a place in decision-
making. For example, women and lower castes were previously not allowed to sit on the
Hatai, the sacred community space for decision-making, but SKB went against cultural
tradition and allowed them to sit on the Hatai. Incentives for education of both sexes
were also created to encourage education of youth. Girls’ enrollment in school was very
low, so the village decided to impose fines on families that did not send their children to
school. The fine for not sending girls is about 1200 rupees and the fine for not sending
boys is lower (they are required to buy a bag of grain to feed the pigeons, which are
highly regarded by the community).
Impacts of the FES project on Sanjadi-ka-badia
Overall, the interviews revealed that most respondents were satisfied with the FES
project, and that it did in fact help them meet previously unmet needs and resolve some
issues. For example, in 17 out of 22 interviews with community members, respondents
68

mentioned that the project was either beneficial to them or successful (Appendix One,
page 39). As far as meeting the project’s intended goals, data indicate that water
retention, fodder production, livelihoods and employment and natural resource
restoration were improved to a certain degree. The following sections describe how the
FES project met or did not meet those goals.
Water retention
The need to increase water retention for household and agricultural use was
addressed by the FES project, and responses indicated that many of the interviewees felt
that the project did serve this need. Restoration of the CGL helped reduce local
desertification and improve rainwater penetration within its boundaries. Respondents
noted that groundwater recharge, overall water availability, and supply for irrigation
increased: “ditches and contours helped bring water for irrigation and livestock”
(Appendix One, SCI18).
However, the respondents’ positive attitudes towards the project’s water retention
goals did not encapsulate the entire situation. The interview and RRA results (Figure 7)
show that water is an issue that still needs to be addressed. People mentioned that there
was more water in wells, which signals that the project helped restore groundwater levels,
but a study to compare previous levels relative to rainfall was not conducted, so this
information may be mostly anecdotal and could be related to other factors. Water
retention will remain an issue, especially if overgrazing, removal of vegetation and soil
loss continue on private lands, or if the CGL should become degraded once again. The
community is currently building a well at the nearby river, but infrastructure for
transporting and saving water largely does not exist. Unfortunately, the dependence on
69

the highly variable monsoons makes the village subject to climatic vagaries that only
serve to confound the water scarcity issues they face. That being true, it can be argued
that water issues were addressed to a degree by the CGL restoration and could continue
to be improved if land restoration on private lands is implemented.
Fodder production
Nearly all of the respondents mentioned that fodder had increased as a result of
the FES project. This resulted in less migration in search of fodder and the ability to have
more livestock: “they see less migration so they know that it has been successful”
(Appendix One, SCI3). People also noted better milk production from their livestock. It
is clear from photographs that the CGL is producing fodder (Figure 5 above), whereas
surrounding private lands lack vegetation (Figure 6 below).
Figure 6. Private lands surrounding Common Grazing Lands plot in Sanjadi-ka-badia, India.
Photo/Lindsey Wood.
A biodiversity inventory completed by FES also confirmed the presence of more
fodder-producing species after the project’s completion. This study found that tree
70

biomass (11.7 t/ha) was significantly higher in the plot than on surrounding private lands
(1.02 t/ha). Shrub biomass was also higher in the CGL plot (5.10 t/ha) than on the
surrounding private lands (3.66 t/ha). The use of the ora system, rotational grazing
methods, and the living-fence boundary are no doubt the reason for the continued
presence of fodder for livestock. One community member, for example, commented
“there is no longer encroachment on the CGL because of the boundaries” (Appendix
One, SCI13).
Livelihoods and employment
Respondents noted that livelihoods and employment were improved by the FES
project: “the project also gave them employment which helped bring money into their
homes” (Appendix One, SCI8). During the time of the FES project, villagers were able
to secure employment and earn money for the work they completed on the CGL. This
resulted in an increase in household income and ability to pay off some debts. The ability
to use the plot for fodder also reduced the need to buy fodder elsewhere and resulted in
less migration, which was a strain on income. Agricultural outputs also increased, which
had an effect on this income-generating and subsistence activity.
Although community members were paid by FES during the project, they are still
currently without viable employment opportunities. Many women are involved in the
National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA program), but this governmental
program could end pending federal legislation and only guarantees 100 days of work per
year. This was evident in the interviews, where, in 11 out of 28 interviews, respondents
mentioned that employment is still needed. Additionally, participants in the RRA
71

completed on 29 August 2008 (Figure 7) decided that a stable source of income was a
priority for the village.
Natural resource restoration
The need to improve conditions of surrounding natural resources was addressed
by the FES project, most notably on the CGL plot. In one interview it was stated that:
“(You) couldn’t see plants before, now they are all around” (Appendix One, SLI3).
Rotational grazing methods have increased the amount of greenery and placed less
anthropogenic stress on that area. FES staff mentioned that the project helped reverse
retrograde succession and restore nutrient flows and the food chain. It was also noted
that there are now more wildlife using the plot.
However, natural resource restoration is limited to the CGL and large areas of
degraded land remain outside its borders (e.g., Figure 6 above). Studies conducted by
FES on the CGL showed that higher biomass, higher soil moisture and more biodiversity
are possible if the community members initiate restoration. Hopefully, the new
knowledge and skills gained by the community will be used to restore private lands to
increase their productivity for human use and ecological health. Interviews with FES and
panchayat members indicate that they believe SKB villagers did make significant
connections between livelihood and environmental health: “people had the realization
that managing the environment is helpful to them and are starting to apply the same
concepts on their private lands” (Appendix One, SLI2). Another panchayat member
explained how, through active participation, community members were able to
understand how natural resource management can be implemented to their benefit:
“During construction of the ditches (and) bunds, people had a hard time
with the techniques, especially that FES wanted them to measure the size
72

of the ditches…this is because before they had been employed by the

government on projects but had no monitoring and no ownership. They
had to show them that the size of the ditches did matter and that the act of
measuring the size was directly affecting them” (Appendix One, SLI2)
Additional FES project achievements
The development of a relationship between FES and the community was noted as
a significant achievement by community members, panchayat leaders and FES staff
because mistrust of an outside organization was the greatest challenge they faced in the
beginning and yet they were able to overcome it with time. Many community members
felt that the FES project helped to develop a sense of unity that was absent previously.
A very substantial benefit mentioned in the interviews was the improvement of
women’s status and increased women’s involvement in decision-making. Women’s
empowerment was evident not only in the fact that girls were increasingly being sent to
school, but also that women felt as though they were given importance and could work as
a unified group. One interviewee commented: “women were given importance…now
when there is a meeting, women participate” (Appendix One, SLI2). The improved
status of women that occurred is impressive because “it is the only village in the FES
project area where women were allowed to sit” (Appendix One, SLI4) on the Hatai.
Current needs and issues in Sanjadi-ka-badia
An investigation of SKB’s current needs is helpful in determining whether the
FES project met its goals and contributed to meeting the basic needs of community
members. These data confirm what was discussed in the previous section and highlight
some other facets of the community’s experience towards development. Many of the
community’s current needs are related to the need for economic opportunities; a lack in
social services, particularly in terms of education; health services; infrastructure for
73

water, transportation, and electricity; and the need for more connection to the outside for
information and development assistance. The RRA (Figure 7) provides a visual
description of the community’s current assets and which ones need to be developed to
move towards sustainability. The economic status of the community remains an issue
because employment opportunities are scarce. The federal government’s NREGA
program is an exception of this, but anecdotal information indicated that payment of
wages in this program are sometimes delayed and, because it is a program funded by the
government, there is no long-term guarantee that it will continue. In the RRA and
interviews respondents mentioned that economic development is a high priority.
74

Figure 7. Rapid Resource Assessment results from Sanjadi-ka-badia, India, 29 August 2008.
Water continues to be an issue in spite of the FES project (i.e., in 19 out of 28
interviews it was mentioned as a current issue). As one respondent noted, “the future is
about water” (Appendix One, SCI1). Another interviewee said: “(our) major needs are
related to water because most of (our) problems are related to water scarcity” (Appendix
One, SCI9). A lack of water infrastructure is also a significant setback. Natural
environmental factors related to water scarcity are a compounding factor. Managing land
75

for water retention is critical on private lands, as well as improving water retention,
through contoured swales and ditches on the CGL.
SKB’s location and lack of development also limits access to new information
about topics such as agriculture, government assistance programs, or hygiene. Therefore,
gaining new access to information was considered a main priority for the community.
Discussion of Sustainability Attributes
Objective 9 of this study is to determine to what extent the actions taken have
contributed to the development of a sustainable community. Attributes of sustainability
were created in Chapter Two and are used to discuss SKB’s efforts towards
sustainability.
Ecological attributes
Even though biodiversity conservation was not a primary goal of the FES project,
the CGL restoration work contributed to biodiversity conservation in several ways. For
example, after the FES project, more wildlife species and an increase in vegetation
diversity were recorded within the plot (Appendix One, SLI1).
Determining whether the project has increased biodiversity conservation is
difficult to discern with the available information. Without pre- and post- biodiversity
surveys, it cannot be concluded that the project made significant impact on biodiversity
conservation. However, the plantation programs to restore vegetation are tangible results
that are preserving those species, whereas if the project had not been conducted, the plot
would probably not be able to support them.
76

Sustainable use of natural resources
The institutions created in the FES project helped to ensure more sustainable use
of natural resources, at least for vegetation within the CGL plot. This is primarily
because the amount of grazing is limited and done on a rotational basis. Community
members are taking inventory of the plot and gauging whether it is being overgrazed, so
there has been a development in capacity to manage vegetation resources in a more
sustainable manner. The project made a significant contribution in developing awareness
that using resources sustainably in the CGL is to their advantage in the long run.
Whether this will extend to other natural resources, such as water and private land
resource management, is yet to be seen.
The FES project enhanced understanding of the relationship between ecosystem
health and livelihoods, which represents a key step in environmental awareness and
stewardship. The management of the CGL that continues even three years after the
project’s completion manifests that SKB community members are committed to
ecological health, at least within the plot. As one community member said, “after FES
came, the village still looks after the plants that were planted in the plantation program”
(Appendix One, SCI17). The capacity building that took place during the project helped
to increase knowledge of ecological systems and develop the skills to manage them. If
restoration of private lands happens in the future, there is an even stronger argument that
the FES project helped to increase environmental awareness and stewardship.
77

The restoration work completed on the CGL plot helped to reverse severe
environmental degradation. This included revegetation of trees, shrubs and grasses and
soil and water conservation mechanisms. After the project it was noted that there was a
significant increase in vegetation (as seen in Figure 5), a reversal of retrograde succession
and restoration of some ecological functions such as nutrient flows.
The restoration of the CGL plot helped to preserve ecosystem function and
services within that area. Revegetation of the plot slowed the process of desertification,
which will allow for more penetration of rainwater into the soil to replenish groundwater.
Constructed ditches and contours also aided in soil and water conservation.
Economic attributes
Poverty reduction
In terms of reducing poverty, the FES project helped to a degree. During the
project SKB community members were able to earn an income, which helped them meet
basic needs and pay off some debts. The renewed availability of fodder may have
stimulated local economic activity of animal husbandry, so with more production
community members may be able to earn more income. The fact that they do not have to
migrate for fodder any longer is a significant improvement that affects household income.
Increased availability of water in wells also helps agriculture, which may aid in reducing
poverty.
Without statistics to show poverty levels before and after the project it is difficult
to determine whether it significantly impacted poverty. However, the fact that
78

respondents mentioned basic needs as the primary issues before the project and, when
asked about needs existing after the project, were more focused on social services may
indicate that the community has made a positive step towards improving the economic
status of its members.
Secure livelihood
A lack of secure livelihood options remains a challenge for SKB community
members. The women are currently involved in the NREGA project, which may or may
not continue in the future and is only good for 100 days of work per financial period
(Ministry of Rural Development, 2009). Most families are involved in agriculture, which
is dependent on the variable monsoons (water) and animal husbandry (fodder).
Restoration of degraded resources is crucial for agriculture and animal husbandry, as the
FES project demonstrated. There are no formal economic activities in the community,
which means that people may still have to migrate for wage labor. All of these factors
signal that livelihood provision remains a tenuous issue for SKB.
Provision of basic needs
The FES project did help increase community members’ ability to meet basic
needs, at least in the perception of community members. For example, community
members mentioned basic needs less when asked about their current needs than they did
when asked about them prior to the project. Water remains the most critical issue
because it affects food security and livelihood on a daily basis. As with poverty
reduction and secure livelihoods, the status of the community’s ability to meet basic
needs is dependent on these and other factors.
79

Economic diversity
There was no evidence gathered that showed the FES project increased diversity
in economic activities. It did strengthen existing activities of animal husbandry and
agriculture.
Access to markets
There was no evidence gathered to show the FES project affected access to markets.
Social attributes
Education
Non-formal education about natural resource management was a key component
in the FES project. This helped to increase awareness about the environment and
knowledge of ecological processes. For example, in several interviews, community
members explained the rain cycle and how vegetation plays a role in it (Appendix One,
SCI12; SCI14). FES was able to provide this knowledge through plays and puppet
shows, which fit into the culture and made the information accessible and appropriate for
the setting and audience.
Although the project did not target formal education, the increase in girls’ school
attendance as a result of institutions created during the project is very significant. The
community’s self-imposed fines for not sending girls or boys to school are the reason for
this. FES’s presence also helped to expand the villagers’ perceptions of what women can
achieve. In one interview, it was mentioned that women who came from FES to the
community were a big influence because the villagers were able to see that women could
benefit from education:
“Education of girls (was a) big problem because people didn’t see the
benefit of educating girls. But, when women from FES or other areas
80

would come, he would say, look at these women, they are here because
they are educated. People began to see that was a good thing and started
sending girls to school” (Appendix One, SLI4).
In the interviews, improvements in education of community members and
development of a secondary school were mentioned numerous times as important needs
for the community. As one interviewee commented, “(they) need education for the
future” (Appendix One, SCI1) and it is evident that community members see education as
a necessary component for the community’s development because it was one of the most
cited current issues. Attributing a direct connection between the project and the
perception that education is important is not possible with the data collected, but it is
notable that there exists such a strong emphasis on education from a majority of
interviewees.
Unfortunately, there is currently only a primary school in the village. Some
families will not send girls to Chitamba for middle school, much less to the secondary
school which is even further away. Until the government or another entity helps to
provide either transportation or a new facility, many residents will not receive a
comprehensive education.
Access to information
The mere presence of FES in the community increased access to information
about agriculture, animal husbandry, accounting, ecology and the need for institutions to
regulate behavior. The project also strengthened the community’s relationship with the
Chitamba panchayat, which provides information about government programs. In the
RRA, participants regarded access to new information as a key (and current) issue for the
community. A continuation of the relationship between SKB, the panchayat, FES and
81

other entities will help to provide the community with new information about how they
can further develop.
Interdisciplinary attributes
The FES project merged science with indigenous knowledge to make information
appropriate for the audience. The ability of FES staff, some of them from the immediate
region, to develop and share information in forms that were readily understandable was
probably a key factor in the positive relationship between the NGO and the community.
Although FES is most proficient in ecological restoration and institution development,
they were able to use community resources, such as teachers (Appendix One, SLI4) and
panchayat members, to aid in accounting or governance.
Capacity building
Capacity building for natural resource management was a significant goal of the
FES project. Work on the CGL was completed almost entirely by the community. They
learned the importance of measuring ditches for soil and water conservation (Appendix
One, SLI2) and applied the knowledge. They began to understand the importance of
grazing schedules and how to tell if a section was being overgrazed and adjust the
schedules accordingly. Community members also developed skills to participate in
decision-making that affects them individually and as a whole.
Community ownership
Several sources of information indicate that community ownership of the FES
project exists. The process of work was driven by needs articulated by the community,
that is, local citizen stakeholders participated actively and felt strong ownership from the
very beginning. In all of the interviews with community leaders and FES staff it was
82

mentioned that the community was very involved throughout the duration of the project,
and there was no indication that participation waned near the end of the five years. The
inclusion of women and lower castes is probably a significant factor in levels of
participation and overall community ownership. This served to increase the amount of
participation and create a more holistic program of work that benefited the majority of the
community, including the marginal groups. Community ownership is also shown in the
community’s defense of the project when it was criticized. For example, when accused
of corruption, the community took it upon themselves to prove their innocence, and it
ended up they did more work than were paid to do (Joshie et al, 2008; and Appendix
One, SLI4). Additionally, it is clear that FES empowered the community to develop
according to its own culture and worked within the accepted local governing bodies.
Political support from government
The local panchayat was involved in all phases of the FES project and continues
to work with FES in the region. The support given to the CVS groups formed to manage
the CGL plot by the panchayat indicates that it was able to efficiently devolve natural
resource management in a way that benefited SKB greatly. The project did not try to
change existing laws and acted within the framework of the political system, which
probably enhanced the panchayat’s willingness to work with FES. Support from the
sarpaunch, a widely respected figure and leader, is another important factor that indicates
a positive relationship with local political leaders and government.
Inclusive democratic decision-making process
Decisions in the community are made on the sacred Hatai, which was off-limits to
women and lower castes prior to the project. FES encouraged them to step beyond their
83

comfort levels by allowing women and lower castes to sit, which resulted in a more
inclusive and more equitable decision-making process. As a result, “it is the only village
in the FES project area where women are allowed to sit” (Appendix One, SLI4). It is
also noteworthy that one of the most effective leaders in the village throughout the
project was a Dalit woman.
The development of institutions to affect positive behavioral change was one of
the primary ways FES worked to meet its goals. For example, new locally developed
agreements served to reduce overgrazing on the CGL, to incur fines to parents who do
not send their children to school, and to encourage a decision-making process that is
inclusive of marginalized groups such as women and lower castes. Because these
institutional steps were created by the community, it may be more likely for the residents
to follow them in the long run. The project also helped to reinforce the panchayat by
involving the community directly in its affairs (e.g., managing the CGL) through the CVS
groups. These informal institutional groups are still being used to manage the CGL and
for other purposes such as women’s issues.
Secure land tenure
Secure land tenure is a clearly defined set of land ownership and/or access to user
rights on a particular piece of land. In terms of ownership, the CGL is owned by the
people of India and managed by the Chitamba panchayat. Unless laws change to
restructure commons throughout the country, this will remain true. User rights on the
CGL are not as clearly defined, but SKB and the other hamlets in the Chitamba
panchayat have developed policies and institutions that regulate user rights for the benefit
84

of the whole community (Joshie et al., 2008). The boundary and ora system have
reduced encroachment from other communities so that the institutions created by SKB
are not nullified by outsiders taking advantage of their work. Unfortunately, there may
be pressure from other communities if they too do not restore their commons. SKB and
FES have been trying to work with other communities to ensure that this does not
happen. SKB is a role model for CGL restoration and the benefits of managing land
collectively may be transferred to other areas.
Action plan with an accepted community vision
The community does not have a comprehensive, written action plan. There are
plans for two projects involving water infrastructure: a well that was under construction
in summer 2008 (Figure 8) and the Nabhad Project, a watershed-scale project that was
written by FES and is funded by the government.
Figure 8. Well under construction near Sanjadi-ka-badia, India. Photo/Lindsey Wood.
85

When asked about a vision for the future, community leaders and FES staff
commented that the vision was a dairy (Appendix One, SLI2 & SLI6) or the well at the
river (Appendix One, SLI2; SLI3; SLI6 & SLI4). One respondent said they did not have
a shared vision (Appendix One, SLI1). When community members were asked what
they would like to see in the future the most common responses were more education
(higher levels in the school and/or more people educated) and infrastructure for water and
roads (Appendix One, page 50). The RRA results are in line with the responses in the
interviews (Figure 7) because they show water as a priority. Overall, community
members are concerned with water and education even if they have not developed a
formal plan or vision to deal with these concerns.
Evaluation techniques
Most of the evaluation techniques for the FES project were informal. The
primary way the project was evaluated was by FES staff or local citizens through regular
community meetings. For the ecological component of the project, FES measured
success by the presence of foliage and other types of natural resource management
monitoring such as soil moisture and biomass measurement. Participation throughout the
five-year period also served as an indicator of meeting goals, particularly related to
participation in decision-making by women and lower-castes and labor contributions,
especially when the villagers were found working in the plot even when they were not
paid by FES. The transparency of the payment system helped confirm that there was not
corruption. Other indicators that showed success were a reduction in the amount of
money spent on funeral feasts, higher enrollment of girls in school, lower rates of child
marriages and less migration for fodder.
86

Evaluation of the FES project was challenging because specific objectives and
results were not available for the researcher to review, and baseline information on water,
fodder, biodiversity and other environmental, social and economic parameters before the
project was minimal (primarily demographic and economic status of the community
members), and a post-project survey was not completed. In spite of visible changes
(e.g., more trees in the post-treatment plot) and qualitative information (e.g., interview
responses such as “fodder is now available”), definitive evaluation of the FES project
remains a challenge without measurable quantitative figures that represent a change in the
community’s state.
Information to conclude that there was equitable distribution of benefits was not
gathered. However, there are several gobbets of information that indicate equitable
distribution of project benefits. It was not mentioned in any of the interviews that one
group benefited more than the other, which is significant to show an overall feeling of
approval in how benefits were distributed. The inclusion of women and lower castes is
an indicator that benefits were being received throughout the community. The
transparency of the payment system was mentioned by one interviewee as an evaluation
tool (Appendix One, SLI1) to determine if corruption was present, which it appears it was
not. The institutions developed for the CGL for grazing ensure that community members
pay per head and size of the animal, so there is an equitable charge for each user.
87

CHAPTER FIVE: NYUMBANI VILLAGE CASE STUDY
Case Study Overview
Nyumbani Village (NV), or “home” as it translates from Kiswahili, is a visionary
humanitarian relief effort to bridge the gap left by the “lost generation” of HIV/AIDS
victims. By reconstituting social family structure, education, and health care of related or
unrelated grandparents and children, and engaging neighbors in collaborative
microenterprise income generation, NV strives for sustainability. The most notable
achievement of NV is the provision of basic needs of the villagers and education for the
children, which were previously mere dreams before they came to NV. The sense of
hope that has been created is quite remarkable. For example, when speaking of the
orphans, one NV staff member commented, “you can tell a difference between the ones
that have been here for a short time and those who’ve been here for longer, they are
usually happier” (Appendix Two, NVS10). Although there are challenges associated
with village life, NV has given the villagers hope, which is the beginning of restoring the
ability to look towards the future. This case study explores where the NV project is on its
pathway to meeting its community’s needs sustainably. The village has provided the
neighboring communities with opportunities to reduce poverty and improve knowledge
of and access to sustainable livelihood options, as well as skills that can be transferred to
their own farms, families and regions. Also, the village has established a place for local
orphans who were left without care and were unable to receive support from their
neighbors due to the overall poverty of the region. As with the NV villagers, there is a
new sense of hope in the surrounding community.
88

NV has made significant early steps in ecological, economic and social realms,
which may eventually serve as a model for others trying to merge community life with
sustainability principles. Founded in 2005, NV is still adapting to a steep learning curve
and pioneering how to merge sustainability with its other goals related to humanitarian
relief.
Site Description
Located in south-central Kenya, NV is about 120 kilometers east of Nairobi in the
Kitui District (Figure 9) in the Kwa Vonza municipality.
Figure 9. Location of Nyumbani Village in Kitui District, Kenya.
The primary ethnic group of the NV area is the Kamba tribe, a subtribe of the Bantu
ethnicity. Traditional subsistence and livelihood activities in the area are farming (maize,
millet, sorghum, sweet potatoes, cassava, pigeon peas and sugar cane as subsistence crops
89

and coffee, cotton, sisal and tobacco as cash crops) and animal husbandry (cattle, goats
and sheep) (Kabwegyere & Mbula, 1979). Currently, most people are engaged in daily
wage labor and the sale of subsistence crops, cash crops, charcoal and/or fuelwood.
Infrastructure and social services are lacking in the immediate area, though NV is now
offering some limited services and has contributed to on-site infrastructure development.
All of Kitui District is considered as semi-arid or arid drylands. Average annual
rainfall can range from 450 to 760 millimeters (Kigomo, 1992). There are typically two
rainy seasons (October-November and March-May) that provide reprieve from the harsh
dry seasons. The dry periods can be particularly harsh, especially when a severe drought
occurs, usually around every five years, which significantly complicates the primary
economic and subsistence activities of agriculture and animal husbandry (Opere, Awuor,
Kooke, & Omoto, 2004). Increased human populations and resulting environmental
degradation have placed a strain on food production as well as ecological function and
resources (Kigomo, 1992).
Nyumbani Village Project
Nyumbani Village is being operated by a Nairobi-based Catholic organization,
Children of God Relief Institute (COGRI). The mission of COGRI is “to provide quality
comprehensive care and support to HIV infected and affected children, families and
communities in a sustainable manner” (COGRI Strategic Plan). Currently, NV is
managed by COGRI staff, though it is hoped that one day the village may be run by a
council of elders from the Kamba tribe. Staff at the time of field research (summer 2008)
included an off-site village manager, sustainability manager, home care manager,
teachers at the primary school and polytechnic school, farm manager, social worker,
90

counselor, clinic nurses and practitioners, and administrative assistants. Major funding
for the project comes from a grant administered by the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID).
The main goal of NV is “to be a self-sustaining community to serve orphans and
elders who have been left behind by the ‘lost generation’ of the AIDS pandemic”
(Nyumbani, 2008). The major tenets of the village are to meet the basic needs of all
villagers and provide an education for the orphans. Two sub-goals of the village are to
operate the village using principles of social, ecological and economic sustainability and
to help the surrounding communities develop sources of sustainable livelihoods.
COGRI chose to create NV in the Kwa Vonza municipality because it is one of
the areas most afflicted with extremely low levels of development and a high rate of
HIV/AIDS. COGRI staff works with the surrounding municipalities, churches and other
NGOs to identify grandparents and children who are eligible to live in the village. In
order to be eligible to live in the village, the villager must be Kamba, destitute and a
member of the ‘lost generation’ 76 . The first villagers arrived in the village in November
2006.
Currently the village has 30 grandparents and over 300 orphans. The ultimate
vision is to house 1,000 orphans and 100 grandparents. The “families” consist of one
grandparent and no more than 10 children who may or may not be blood related (Figure
10). Living in a house with no running water, a composting toilet, bunk beds, dining
table and a few chairs, the families share responsibilities for cooking, gathering water
(supplied in nearby spigots) and fuelwood (gathered on-site), taking care of the home and
76
“lost generation” refers to the children and parents of AIDS victims, who have often been left out of the
Global struggle to address and end the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
91

raising the young children. Cooking is done outside with the use of fuel-efficient open
stoves (jikos) or make-shift bricks that support pots over an open fire.
Figure 10. Children proudly display their dinner at Nyumbani Village, Kenya.
Photo/Lindsey Wood.
Details of Nyumbani Village project
Formal education for the children
A primary school was built on the village property to provide an education for the
orphans living in the village. The school is funded in large part by the Hotcourse
92

Foundation 77 and currently is not public, but is recognized by the government. When
they are ready, children are sent to secondary schools in surrounding areas.
Polytechnic school
The polytechnic school serves as a vocational alternative to secondary school
where the children can build skills in garment making, fashion design, carpentry and
construction. Opened in 2008, the school is also open to children from the surrounding
communities, so they too have a chance to build skills for the future. Products created by
the students will be sold in local and regional markets to generate income for the village’s
activities. Items created in the polytechnic school woodworking and textile shop classes
will also provide the villagers with items they need, such as furniture or clothing. The
polytechnic school is planning for future material needs by planting trees to be harvested
for timber and processed on-site in value added products, such as furniture.
Capacity building
Capacity building of the villagers and the neighboring community has been an
integral part of the village’s activities up to this point. A goal for the children is to
develop skills for the future, especially in dryland farming techniques, so they will be
able to provide for themselves when they leave the village. The grandparents have
participated in workshops about sustainable living (e.g., using eco-toilets, organic
farming, composting, or greywater harvesting,) and health (hygiene, disease transmission,
and HIV/AIDS).
Most of the capacity building, however, has been related to the surrounding
community. Members of the neighboring community are engaged in wage labor in
77
The HotCourses Foundation was founded in 2004 by a British Member of Parliament and strives to
provide education for NV children as well as children in the Kibera slum of Nairobi (Hotcourses
Foundation, 2009).
93

different aspects of village life, so these people are able to build skills in specific areas
such as organic farming in drylands (including permaculture, intercropping, composting,
biopesticides, drip irrigation, and mulching), waste management, water conservation
(e.g., construction of sand dams and shallow wells), silviculture, apiculture, renewable
energy production, brick-making, building construction and livestock management.
Outside community members had preexisting knowledge about animal husbandry and
farming in drylands, but NV has been able to offer new techniques that are based upon
principles of sustainability. Many of these skills have been transferred to work in their
own homes and villages, which helps to extend this knowledge to people who are not
directly involved with NV.
Farming
Farming is a major part of life in NV and throughout the Kitui District. NV has
implemented various farming schemes to meet the needs of villagers and provide income
to support the village, all of which are implemented using organic and Permaculture
methods such as composting, biopesticide application (e.g., use of Azadirachta indica),
intercropping, agroforestry and garden polyculture, water harvesting and drip irrigation.
The main farm (Figure 11) produces kale, spinach, carrots, maize, cow peas, moringa,
beets, okra and cilantro for consumption by the villagers and for sale outside the village
in local farmers’ markets and high-end urban shops in Nairobi to generate income. The
grandparents, for example, pick up baskets of fresh vegetables grown in the main farms
on Tuesday and Friday, much like a basket scheme or community-supported-agriculture
style farm. These baskets include vegetables and greens that are highly nutritious, adding
to the traditionally starch-heavy diet of the Akamba. The main farm is comprised of 12.5
94

acres of drip-fed agriculture and 33 acres of rain-fed agricultural plots. The drip-fed
sections are supplied with water pumped with solar panels from shallow wells and with
water from a bore hole pumped using a diesel generator.
Figure 11. Main Farm Two at Nyumbani Village, Kenya. Photo/Hilary Meyer.
The second farming scheme used in the village is the perimeter shamba 78 (PS)
system, and is comprised of all of the land on the perimeter of the 1,000 acres, divided
into 240 lots that measure 15 by 70 meters. This system was devised by COGRI staff and
an outside consultant with The Woodlands Trust to provide a permeable boundary for the
village that would protect it from encroachment but also keep it open to the outside
villages. All of the village families and some members of the outside community have
access to this land for farming and they have the option of selling the crops back to NV or
consuming them at home. Approximately 160 of the 342 outside residents who are
allowed access are using their leased plots and 11 of the grandparents are using the PS
78
Shamba means farm in Kiswahili.
95

actively. Most of the PS are far from the shallow wells constructed at the river or the
bore holes, so users rely on seasonal rains to grow crops or use oxen-driven carts to carry
water to the plots.
The third farming approach at NV is the home garden system, which is used for
each village family at their homes. The idea behind this strategy was for the families to
start producing most of their own food so they do not have to rely upon the main farm,
which would allow crops produced there to be sold for village funds. The home gardens
began in summer of 2008 and are maintained by the grandparents and children. These
gardens are approximately 25 meters by 20 meters and are used to cultivate kale, spinach
and maize. A greywater system is being devised to water the gardens and villagers have
been encouraged to compost organic waste to add nutrients to their gardens.
Livestock unit
Infrastructure to house cattle, chickens and goats was constructed and has been in
use since the first villagers arrived. The cattle and goats provide some milk for the
villagers and it is hoped that they will eventually generate income. Families with HIV
positive children receive eggs from the village chickens. The village would also like to
sell eggs and chickens to markets in Nairobi or elsewhere as an income-generating
activity. The village owns two oxen that are used to haul water and other materials
throughout the village. Fodder for the ungulates comes from the restored riparian areas.
Agroprocessing unit
The agroprocessing unit (AU) is directly related to the village’s farming and
animal husbandry strategies. The AU was constructed to process crops and, in some
cases, to create value-added products to sell. The main objectives of the AU are to
96

develop local markets for the outside community and generate income for the village.
Currently, staff members from COGRI and Global Environmental Management
Education Center (GEM) are working in the AU to create a local market between the
outside community and the village for honey. The outside villagers supply the honey,
which the village purchases, packages, and sells in high-end niche markets in Nairobi
(Figure 12).
Figure 12. Honey supplied by villagers from communities surrounding Nyumbani

Village, Kenya being sold in an organic shop in Nairobi. Photo/Joanna Bietka.
Processing of biofuels from castor (Ricinus communis) and possibly jatropha (Jatropha
spp.) grown on site or purchased from the outside villagers will also occur in the AU
when proper equipment is acquired and supply is sufficient.
Waste management
Management of waste created by the village is a major aspect of village life that
requires constant attention for health and hygiene. Each home and most of the buildings
have composting toilets that separate solid and liquid human waste, which are collected
97

and composted for use in the various agroforestry projects. Five outside villagers are
employed to work in this unit, aptly named the humanure unit. Composting of organic
waste is encouraged and is used in the farming and agroforestry projects. Most other
trash is burned in shallow pits.
Agroforestry and tree plantations
Fuelwood is a major source of energy for the village, primarily for cooking on
open stoves. Leucaena leucocephala, a commonly used, fast-growing legume has dual
benefits of fixing nitrogen and providing a quick source of fuelwood. Approximately
five acres have been planted in L. leucocephala at NV. Coppicing techniques for L.
leucocephala are very effective because shoots grow quickly and will produce for about
five years before new trees must be planted and the cycle starts over again. The villagers
consume about 40 kilograms of fuelwood per week and children are responsible for
collection.
A more long-term project is the establishment of a Melia volkinsii woodlot, which
was cultivated in summer of 2008 and covers 47 acres. This fast-growing indigenous
species is known to be highly valued for timber and termite resistance (Kigomo, 1992).
M. volkinsii is a “very promising prospect for income generation, especially if they want
to break free from donors and to give them more self-reliance” (Appendix Two, NVS9).
It will take some time for the woodlot to produce trees that can be harvested, but it may
serve as a significant source of income once that time comes.
Other plantation development and tree planting have occurred on the village
property. Species with special value, such as neem (Azadirachta indica), Croton
megalocarpus, and Eucalyptus spp. have been planted to provide various services for the
98

village. Native species (primarily Acacia spp.) have been planted for restoration of
degraded areas, serving to help maintain hydrological and nutrient cycles that were
previously disrupted from anthropogenic environmental degradation. Plantation
development was initially focused on riparian areas (8 acres) but there are now efforts to
afforest much of the 1,000 acres, which was deforested almost completely before it
became NV. The village is also working with outside villagers to establish seed sources
for tree species because procurement of seeds and seedlings is difficult and costly. In this
scheme, outside villagers are given seeds and then they may sell the seedlings back to the
village when it attains a height of one foot or plant them on their own property for seed
production, fodder or fuelwood. This would hopefully provide a new livelihood option
for outside villagers.
Water conservation and infrastructure
Water is a crucial component of this dryland community, where the primary
economic activities rely directly upon water catchment and infrastructure to supply it to
various sites. The first actions by the NV Sustainability Department in 2004 were
restoring vegetation to the riparian zone to increase groundwater penetration of rainfall
and constructing sand dams in the river bed to increase water recharge and to decrease
loss of sediment downstream. The concrete structures allow the river to flow but slow
the velocity and block sediment from moving downstream. The sediments are retained
on the upstream side of the dam and can be harvested for the farm, as well as provide a
water sink for recharge and improved availability of water during the dry season.
Shallow wells were created around the sand dams to irrigate the main farm and
plantations. A bore hole was excavated to provide potable drinking water to the villagers.
99

Diesel and solar generators provide energy to pump water uphill from the river to other
parts of the village. Many of these activities were completed with the outside community
providing labor and local sources of materials were used when possible.
Clinic
A village medical clinic was built to care for the villagers, in particular the special
needs of the few HIV positive children, and to provide some limited healthcare services
for the nearby communities. The villagers do not pay for visits and may receive
counseling and workshops on health. Outside villagers have access to free consultations
and a cost-share program for any additional treatments or medicines the clinic has
available. The clinic has two beds and currently serves an average of 250 patients per
month.
Energy production
A reliable, readily available and affordable source of energy is an important need
at NV. The village is striving to become self-sufficient in using only renewable energy
sources (solar and biomass) available on site. Some of the water pumps are solar-
generated and they add panels as funds allow. The development of biofuels is a major
activity, with castor and jatropha as the primary species targeted for oil production. This
activity would ideally provide for the village’s energy needs as well as provide a local
market for outside community members who supply the seeds for pressing in the AU.
Impacts of Nyumbani Village on the villagers and outside community
Assessment of Nyumbani Village project goals
The primary goals of the NV project are meeting the basic needs of the villagers,
providing the children with an education, and helping the outside community sustain
100

livelihoods (generating income and conducting activities in an eco-village type setting are
really a means to an end rather than a need to be addressed). The following sections
describe the achievements and challenges of meeting these goals.
1. Meeting the needs of the villagers
In interviews with the grandparents all of respondents indicated that NV was
meeting their basic needs (Appendix Two, page 62). The village has given them access
to water, food, shelter, clothing, health services, psychological support and fuelwood. As
one grandparent stated, “before (she) didn’t have hope that they would have a good future
but now (she) does” (Appendix Two, NVI1). The grandparents have also been able to
earn extra income by selling baskets and wood carvings to volunteers and other visitors
who come to NV.
Although the grandparents were very positive about their situations in the village,
other data indicate that some of their needs are being partially met. Several grandparents
mentioned that clothing and shoes are often lacking, especially for girls. Another issue is
a shortage in food, which was mentioned by more than half grandparents. The reason for
this is two-fold. First, the vegetables produced in the main farm, perimeter shambas and
home gardens are currently not producing enough food to feed all of the villagers. As a
result, significant portions of food, such rice, potatoes, flour, maize, tomatoes and some
pulses, are purchased by the village and rationed to the villagers. The global food crisis,
which is represented by high costs and less supply, has made provisioning of these extra
food items difficult.
In spite of trying to engage the villagers in farming in the home gardens and
perimeter shambas, COGRI staff mentioned that the grandparents and children are not as
101

involved in food production as they would like for them to be. A disconnect between the
villagers and staff regarding expectations seems to exist and the grandparents do not
understand that NV cannot provide for all of their food needs. For example, one staff
member commented: “(the grandparents and children) are given food from the main
farm so they don’t see the need (to grown their own food). It is contradictory because the
staff is telling (the grandparents and children that) they need to produce their own food
but then they receive a food basket twice a week (from the main farm). (The staff) need(s)
more knowledge of what to give (the grandparents and children) and what they should
produce on their own” (Appendix Two, NVS4). Another staff member noted, “In the
beginning (the COGRI staff) did not outline exactly what they wanted (the grandparents
and children) to do and now it is difficult to change” (Appendix Two, NVS10). There is
reliance on COGRI to provide for them because that is the precedent they began with,
which is counter to the sustainability of the village. This dependence is exemplified in
the following statement from a grandparent: “they [grandparents] used to get 4 kilograms
of rice and now they get 2 kilograms and it isn’t enough” (Appendix Two, NVI1). This
will become an even greater challenge as COGRI continues to add villagers and one staff
member worried that: “the sustainability program has not even been able to feed the
families they have so far…what will happen when there are more children?” (Appendix
Two, NVS11).
Food production is directly tied to water, which will continue to be an issue for
the village’s overall ability to meet the villagers’ needs. Unfortunately, the region is at an
extreme disadvantage because of the climate and somewhat reliable five-year droughts
102

and sporadic yearly droughts. In a RRA (Figure 13) grandparents agreed that water was
the most important factor because it impacts agriculture.
Figure 13. Rapid Resource Assessment results with resident grandparents at Nyumbani Village,
Kenya, 24 July 2008.
In spite of these details, it does seem that the grandparents have indicated that
overall their basic needs are being met at the village. There is certainly a need for more
food, but factors somewhat beyond their control are limiting food production. Overall,
the fact that their lives have greatly improved as a result of NV was exhibited time and
again in the interviews: “(she) is not struggling like before, (the) kids are getting an
education and looking towards the future” (Appendix Two, NVI1); “(she) can now meet
the needs that she was trying so hard before to meet but could not…they now have food,
clothing and can now bathe with soap” (Appendix Two, NVI4).
103

2. Providing the children with an education
The children are all receiving a formal education, whether it is in the primary
school, polytechnic school or a secondary school located elsewhere. However, there is
concern that the children are too involved with school and are not gaining necessary life
skills for the harsh realities they will certainly face when they leave the village. As one
grandparent mentioned, ‘the children are not getting exposed to what they will face when
they leave the village…here they are just given water and firewood, but outside they will
have to travel long distances in search of both; the same with farming” (NVI5). This is
reinforced by comments made in interviews with the community leaders and NV staff:
“there is no work to help the kids build lives after they leave the village…they need to
contribute to the development of the children…they need exposure” (NVS9). Although
NV can provide the children with a formal education, the life skills needed to live in a
region with a semi-arid climate, little available land and few job opportunities are viewed
to be lacking in their education.
3. Helping the outside community sustain livelihoods
The NV project is helping the outside community sustain livelihoods in various
ways and the interviews indicate that the outside community has benefitted greatly from
NV’s presence. The project has provided them with direct employment, which has
allowed them to provide for their children and pay school fees to receive an education.
Currently, NV is employing 59 people in various aspects of the village’s activities. As
one interviewee commented, “people are happy because it is easier to raise their
families” (Appendix Two, NVO7). The project has also helped them develop capacity
and acquire “skills to help themselves” (Appendix Two, NVO1) in many areas, such as
104

organic farming, brick-making, and construction of wells, check dams, and houses. The
potential for creating local markets could also prove very beneficial in the long-term.
The microenterprise activities, such as apiculture, mushroom growing, seedling
provision, and biofuels, developed by GEM and the Woodlands Trust are helping to
create a market where the outsiders provide necessary goods for the village, which it can
then add value to and sell for a profit to both the village and the outsiders.
NV presents a great opportunity for the outside villages to earn livelihoods and
provide for their families. One COGRI staff member mentioned that NV is providing an
opportunity that no one else can: “they are dependent on the knowledge that NV can
bring to them” (Appendix Two, NVS12). Truly, NV is offering new opportunities for
the people who are employed there, which is a step in helping them bring themselves out
of poverty. Yet, the outside villagers still have many needs and face issues associated
with the overall lack of development in the area. In an RRA (Figure 14) for example, the
outside community members agreed that livelihood options are in need of significant
development to reach their full potential.
The process of learning how best to work with the surrounding community has
been a difficult one for NV. Initially, they were paying the villagers a daily wage, but
this proved to be too expensive and work results were often slow to be realized. The
outside villagers, on the other hand, mentioned that wages were low and that work was
not always a guarantee even if they travel from far away to offer their labor. Currently,
NV is trying to devise a system where the surrounding community members are paid for
a product (e.g., honey), so that incentives to produce are present and the village is not
strained by the high costs of labor.
105

Figure 14. Rapid Resource Assessment results with outside community members who live near
Nyumbani Village, Kenya 18 and 24 July, 2008.
Current needs and issues at Nyumbani Village
Nyumbani Village villagers
The grandparents did not mention that their basic needs were not being met or that
the children were not receiving an education, so there is strong evidence that they feel
NV is meeting these identified needs and project goals. However, frequent mention of
food shortage and need for more farms (highlighted in both the interviews and the RRA)
show that food security is lacking. The RRA results (Figure 13) depict the need to
106

increase water resources, which highlights that fact that water is a limiting factor for food
production.
The grandparents also see the need for more money-making opportunities.
Although baskets and wood carvings have brought some income, they do not provide a
steady source because they only make money if sold. The earned income from these
activities helps the grandparents buy things they need or pay for transportation to their
home villages, but is not sufficient for them to buy extra items the children may need.
The village supplies most items for the children, such as clothing, but this is lacking and
puts a further strain on the household income brought in by the grandparents: “(she) has
to make kiondo 79 money go further” (Appendix Two, NVI4).
Outside villagers working with Nyumbani Village
The needs of the outside villagers reflect an overall low level of development in
the region, which affects livelihoods and other aspects of social and domestic life. In a
RRA, outside villagers focused primarily on improving economic opportunities (Figure
14). All of the primary income generating activities (apiculture, sand, farming, milk
production, chickens, brick-making, rocks, basket-weaving and wood carving) are limited
because they rely upon local ecosystem services, which are extremely reduced because of
environmental degradation and a harsh climate. Knowledge and education are also
limiting factors for development of economic activities. Food production is especially
difficult because they “have to depend on rains” (Appendix Two, NVO3).
Those who have been fortunate to work with NV have been trained in various
skills, but they are only a small portion of the population living outside the village: “the
majority of people in the community still do not have work in spite of NV being here”
79
Basket
107

(Appendix Two, NVO7). Isolation from regional markets impacts the economic state as
well because the nearest villages, KwaVonza and KwaMatonga, are many kilometers
away for most people and do not provide a significant market anyway. Many people
cannot pay for school fees because they simply do not have the money. The poverty then
becomes cyclical because children are not able to break free from the situation in which
their parents exist. Interviews and the RRA (Figure 14) also indicate a lack of
infrastructure and social services as priorities. Education in particular is viewed as a
major step in moving towards sustainability.
Needs identified by Children of God Relief Institute Staff
Most of the issues NV is now dealing with are related to institutional factors and
“growing pains” associated with conducting a new type of project in a new setting with
people who are living in abject poverty. Institutional issues can be readily seen in the
RRA that was conducted with COGRI staff below (Figure 15).
Figure 15. Rapid Resource Assessment results with staff members from Children of God Relief
Institute who work at Nyumbani Village, Kenya, 28 and 30 July, 2008.
108

Communication was viewed as the most crucial step in moving towards
sustainability, yet staff articulated that this was the most lacking. Meeting NV’s goals is
compromised by a lack of communication between the staff, the villagers and the outside
villagers: “there are many gaps between the staff and the villagers and things are often
left uncompleted” (Appendix Two, NVS2). The unmet expectation of the villagers to
produce more of their own food is also viewed as a result of poor communication: “they
need to create more understanding of NV’s goals” (Appendix Two, NVS11). The
misunderstanding of what sustainability means has also created confusion along those
same lines:
“the grandparents don’t understand the concept of sustainability and think that it
means that they will have to do everything and they came here because they were
told that they would have their basic needs met and the children’s education
provided. They are scared that they will have to sustain the village themselves.
The outside villagers think that if the village is sustainable then they won’t be able
to work there anymore.” (Appendix Two, NVS2)
A lack of communication between COGRI field staff and the Nairobi office was
also articulated in the RRA and interviews. Some staff mentioned that decision-making
is all top-down and that these decisions are often made without knowledge of what is
happening on the ground in the village: “people and staff are not involved at all in the
decision-making process of the village- it’s all top down management” (Appendix Two,
NVS1). This has led to confusion of NV’s goals: “there are…confusing policies that are
developed elsewhere and not completely understood even though they are to be
implemented” (Appendix Two, NVS2). Adding new orphans, for example, is an issue
because currently the village is not able to fully support the ones who are there: “(have
not) been able to feed the families they have so far, so what will happen when there are
109

more children” (Appendix Two, NVS11). These examples show disconnect between
what is going on in the village and decisions that are made in Nairobi.
Reaching the goal of sustainability has been an ongoing challenge for the village.
Maintaining organic status is difficult. For example, when the chickens caught a disease
that could not be treated organically, they had to receive permission to use anti-biotics or
face losing all of the birds. The up-front operating costs have been high. Energy costs
are particularly draining because they have not yet set up the biofuels processing center
and have limited access to solar energy technologies. Having to pay for diesel
significantly offsets any money coming into the village: “they can grow food in the
dryland but they need to do it without diesel because they will never make money if they
have to pay for petrol” (Appendix Two, NVS9). Making sure that the budget is not in
deficit is a significant challenge that has placed COGRI under pressure: “they need to cut
costs, and be business focused and do evaluations based on results” (Appendix Two,
NVS9). Some of the departments (Sustainability and the Polytechnic School) have not
been meeting their budgets (Appendix Two, NVS8; NVS1), which is a major issue.
However, these departments are essential to the longevity of the village because they are
the only viable options for earning revenue needed for self-sufficiency.
Discussion of Sustainability Attributes
This section describes each of the attributes of sustainability identified in Chapter
Two. NV has made significant steps in each of the three sustainability attributes
(ecological, economic, and social attributes), but there are some areas where attention
could be focused.
110

Ecological attributes
Conservation of biodiversity is evident in places NV, especially in the restored
riparian zone, which “now has many natives and some exotics” (Appendix Two, NVS7).
However, without biological surveys, it is difficult to assess an increase in biodiversity on
the entire 1,000 acres. That being true, the fact that much of the land is no longer subject
to overgrazing and deforestation as it was before signals that biodiversity loss may be less
of an issue that before NV settled there and one respondent noted, “some species that
were thought to be extirpated have come back”. (Appendix Two, NVS10). It is also
important to recognize that some introduced exotic species (e.g., L. leucocephala and A.
indica) are known to be invasive and must be monitored carefully so as to not displace
native vegetation.
Sustainable use of natural resources
NV is operating under the auspices of organic farming and Permaculture, which
attempt to use natural resources in a way that does not impede their use in the future.
These techniques are especially beneficial in the conservation of soil, which is a vital part
of NV community life. Using fuelwood species, such as L. leucocephala, that are easily
coppiced and have other helpful qualities is another example of NV’s approach towards
sustainable use of natural resources. The production of renewable energy sources (i.e.,
when they are able to fully utilize them) will also exhibit a break from non-renewable and
polluting resources for energy and this was viewed as a major priority in the staff RRA
(Figure 15). Water conservation and catchment techniques are also helping to restore
water resources for use in the future.
111

NV is trying to create a sense of environmental awareness and stewardship both
among the villagers and in the neighboring community. COGRI staff mentioned that the
outside community, for example, “(is) getting exposure; before it was very closed and
now it is opening up to a degree and they are receiving training that changes their
perspectives” (Appendix Two, NVS11). Although knowledge exchange about
environmental services has occurred, there is still little evidence that it has directly
influenced environmental stewardship in the short-term. The outside villagers mentioned
that they are using farming techniques learned from NV, which is very significant, but a
more long-term assessment would help to make this argument in the future.
Restoration has occurred on the 1,000 acre site as a result of direct human
intervention and cessation of anthropogenic sources of environmental degradation. The
riparian area is the most obvious example of successful restoration on the site, which has
resulted in improved water quantity during the dry season. Protection of the land has
also aided in restoring the site, which was previously “heavily overgrazed and degraded
from people felling trees for charcoal” (Appendix Two, NVO2).
The most notable preservation of ecosystem function and services at NV is the
improvement of hydrological and nutrient regimes. The increased vegetation in the
riparian area and throughout the 1,000 acres has reduced local desertification and aided in
groundwater recharge. Nutrient cycling has also been preserved through Permaculture
and organic farming practices as well as vegetation restoration. Long-term studies
112

comparing past, current and future data for soil and hydrological processes would provide
a more reliable argument towards preservation of these functions.
Economic attributes
Poverty reduction
Poverty reduction is certainly a primary aim of the NV project and one in which it
has been making headway. The orphans and grandparents have been able to escape their
previous situations of poverty just by being at NV and, overall, their basic needs are
currently being met. The outside community has also been able to earn income and
skills to help them get out of poverty, though they face a more tenuous situation because
of the depth of poverty and factors that create it in the entire region. The economic
opportunities created or being created at NV may also serve to reduce poverty to a degree
in the area. Comparative studies of household income would help to clarify how much
the project is serving to reduce poverty and may indicate the impact of its presence,
especially for the outside communities.
Secure livelihood
The grandparents are able to earn some income from basket and woodcarving
sales, but this is not a guarantee because it depends on volunteers to purchase them and
other markets the COGRI staff members can arrange. Most grandparents still have land
in the areas where they came from, and it has been proposed that they could plant castor
to sell to the village: “the 29 grandparents own a lot of land where they could plant
castor or develop in other ways” (Appendix Two, NVS1). Grandparents expressed the
need to “earn more income and not have to rely on the office as much as they do now”
113

(Appendix Two, NVI4). Developing a more secure form of livelihood may be a good
project for them to pursue in the future.
The outside community has been able to work for NV, but this is on a daily basis
and not a completely secure form of livelihood. For example, one interviewee noted,
“sometimes they come to work and there isn’t any work available for them” (Appendix
Two, NVO7). NV is also currently evaluating how to deal with the outside laborers
because the expense to pay them has, in some cases, been higher than the returns: “they
need to solve the labor problem…they have a deficit every year” (Appendix Two, NVS9).
Developing an opportunity for the outside community to provide raw products to the
agroprocessing center (e.g., honey, castor seeds) may be a significant conduit to secure
livelihood because it would benefit both the village and the producers by creating local
markets.
Provision of basic needs
Overall the basic needs of the villagers are being met, though with some concern
about food production, which is difficult given the semi-arid climate and global food
shortages. Devoting more land to agriculture on the 1,000 acres, increasing water
catchment (i.e., via groundwater, rainwater and greywater systems) and creating
incentives for the villagers to farm may be a viable option to help stave off food
shortages.
The employment opportunities provided to the outside community by NV have
helped them meet basic needs for themselves and their families. This primarily includes
buying food and being able pay school fees. The village has also helped them build
capacity to cultivate crops for consumption and sale in ways that are more appropriate to
114

the dryland habitat. In short, the village can help the outside villagers help themselves to
meet their basic needs.
Economic diversity
The village is attempting several income-producing agroforestry and polyculture
programs, such as honey, M. volkinsii and value-added vegetable products. The livestock
unit, polytechnic school and essential oils factory are also aimed at generating funds for
the village. Developing local markets and a market in urban areas has been the focus of
the GEM Sustainable Agroforestry Program, which works with the outside community as
producers and various restaurants and retail stores in Nairobi as consumers (Figure 16).
The village requires more development of each activity, but it clearly has worked towards
developing a number of diverse economic activities.
Access to markets
As mentioned previously, the GEM Sustainable Agroforestry Program has been
working to develop local and regional markets for goods produced in the village and on
surrounding lands. Transport may be an issue, especially if certain items require special
transport vehicles, and it would be in the village’s interest to avoid products that need it.
Social attributes
Education
As mentioned in previous sections, the children are able to receive a formal
education at NV. Non-formal education in life skills and sustainability principles appears
to be lacking and there is concern that the children will need to prepare themselves in
such areas and cannot currently do so because they spend too much time in school: “they
115

just want to get them an education…they are not gaining any skills otherwise” (Appendix
Two, NVS9).
Figure 16. John Sheffy of Global Environmental Management Education Center

demonstrates how to grow mushrooms to a group of community members who live on
the outskirts of Nyumbani Village, Kenya. Photo/Lindsey Wood.
The outside villagers are receiving non-formal education in agroforestry, organic
farming, Permaculture, waste management, construction and water management.
Adolescents are also able to attend the polytechnic school, which provides vocational
training in woodworking and textiles. Money earned from employment in the village has
allowed some outside villagers to pay school fees for their children.
116

Access to information
NV is connected to a number of universities and other external agencies that can
provide it with various types of information. The intern program with Kenyan
universities and the Kenyan Institute of Organic Farming, for example, helps channel the
flow of information into and out of the village. However, some employees feel that
access to information about farming is lacking: “they don’t have books (or) reliable
internet to gain information on management techniques” (Appendix Two, NVS10).
Access to medical information is also an issue: “medicine is a field that is always
changing and they are very isolated; they don’t always have access to new information
and techniques” (Appendix Two, NVS3). The village does have internet, but access is
limited to a few computers and is only available when the generator is turned on during a
few hours each work day.
Interdisciplinary attributes
COGRI staff members claimed to have worked with the outside community to
identify “indigenous knowledge” about farming in the area and have worked with the
grandparents in identification of useful crops (Appendix Two, NVS10). The connections
made with universities and other agencies have brought in scientific and practical
knowledge about crop management, biofuels and other aspects of village life. The
village is trying to merge ecological and humanitarian interests, so an interdisciplinary
approach is a necessary tool to meet their goals and objectives. However, it is difficult to
assess to what degree activities have been interdisciplinary because the staff, both in
interviews and in the RRA, were concerned that decisions are being made from top rather
than through an interdisciplinary approach.
117

Capacity building
Capacity building has been a significant focus of the village activities up to this
point. Primarily, COGRI staff members have worked with the outside community to
provide employment opportunities that help them gain skills in particular areas such as
organic farming, waste management, animal husbandry, well construction, building
construction, sand-dam construction and tree management. The staff members have also
tried to build capacity with the villagers to help manage the village using sustainable
practices.
Community ownership
Community ownership of the NV project is difficult to assess because it is still in
its early stages of development. There is a feeling that the villagers are starting to exhibit
a “sense of belonging” and ownership over the project (Appendix Two, NVS2). The
outside villagers also expressed commitment towards the village: “ownership in caring
for the children is growing” (Appendix Two, NVS11).
Management of the village has, to date, been primarily the task of COGRI staff
members, with limited involvement in decision-making from the villagers or outside
community. There is concern that they have lost touch with the outside community: “NV
is really losing the connections with the outside community…they need to go back to the
chiefs” (Appendix Two, NVS1). An initial vision was for the village to be managed by a
council of elders from the surrounding areas, but so far this has not been implemented.
It is questionable to what degree community ownership exists because NV is teetering
between being an institution and a community.
118

Political support from government
Understanding the relationship between NV and the surrounding municipal
governments is challenging because the relationship has changed as new staff have come
to work at NV. Therefore, people interviewed in 2008 may not have known or
understood the complexities that existed. However, interviews with the outside
community leaders indicate that they support the village, but would like to be more
involved. A Kwa Vonza municipal government official, for example, noted their support
of the village, but that it is not included in “shaping its future” (Appendix Two, NVL1).
The Kwa Matonga municipal government, which is located directly east of the village
and is closer in distance than Kwa Vonza, also mentioned their relationship with NV:
“they would like to be more involved…they don’t have communication” (Appendix Two,
NVL2). Additionally, the staff prioritized local governance as a key step towards
sustainability in the RRA (Figure 15).
Inclusive democratic decision-making process
Inclusive decision-making processes are not always present in the village’s
activities. The grandparents were involved in deciding economic activities (baskets and
wood carvings) they wanted to pursue, as well as developing the idea for the home
gardens. However, their involvement in decision-making is limited, especially related to
the direction of the village’s future. The outside community is “not involved in decision-
making” (Appendix Two, NVS12). Overall, there is a sense that “people and staff are
not involved at all in the decision-making process of the village- it is all top-down
management” (Appendix Two, NVS1).
119

There are few indicators that institution development has occurred at NV. It has
not been a focus of the project and it is clear that expectations of both the villagers and
the outside community are confused and not clearly defined. Creating rules and
regulations that are accepted by the community to regulate behavior is a missing
component of NV activities.
Secure land tenure
The village owns and manages 1,000 acres. Use rights of the property are still
being developed. The perimeter shamba system, for example, is an attempt to allow
leasing rights to outside villagers to grow crops and create a secure but permeable
boundary around the village.
Action plan with an accepted community vision
Each department in the village (e.g., homecare, sustainability, clinic, primary
school and polytechnic school) develops its own objectives. While COGRI may or may
not have a comprehensive action plan for the village, from interviews with the COGRI
staff it is apparent that all staff are not aware of one (Appendix Two, page 95). The staff
appear to have very different opinions about planning and objective setting. This
communication gap may be an important area to address in the future.
Evaluation techniques
The interview results show that use of evaluation techniques in the village is
inconsistent. Some respondents said that they do not have evaluation tools. The
inconsistency seems to lie in evaluation of the village as a whole versus intra-
departmental evaluations, which are present. However, each department seems to use
120

different techniques, for example, the clinic evaluates based upon whether they are
meeting their budget, whereas the home care department comes up with measureable
objectives. Respondents mentioned that evaluation is often on a project basis. For
example, the sustainability department communicated with outside consultants for
evaluation ecological restoration in the riparian areas.
Data gathered do not indicate sufficient information to qualitatively assess
equitable distribution of benefits.
121

CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION
Discussion of Needs Analysis
This thesis has described the experiences of two small, rural communities that are
making efforts to improve the lives of inhabitants and invest in sustainable actions that
will help secure a better future for future generations. Both communities were faced with
poverty, the case of NV being more extreme than that of SKB (because SKB community
members have easier access to commons and because the NV villagers’ situations prior to
coming to NV were extremely dire). Addressing poverty and meeting basic needs is
often the first step in development and sustainability projects in developing countries
(Agrawal & Redford, 2006; Berkes & Seixas, 2004; Parris & Kates, 2003; and Smith et
al., 2003) because it can hopefully change a situation of short-term thinking to one where
the future is considered and actions reflect more long-term approaches. The following
sections describe how SKB and NV have made steps towards meeting the basic needs of
community members to plant the seeds for long-term sustainability.
Sanjadi-ka-badia
SKB community members meet their basic needs in these ways: subsistence and
income from agriculture and animal husbandry, as well as supplemental income from
wage labor to pay for children’s education and to buy additional food or other necessities.
Prior to the FES project, animal husbandry and agriculture were at the mercy of a
degraded natural resource base, a result of interconnected natural and anthropogenic
factors. The CGL plot, an essential livelihood source for many, was overused and under-
regulated. As people began searching for other ways to feed their families, they were
122

met with an economy that could not provide a steady source of employment. In sum, the
degradation of ecosystem services and limited economic opportunities resulted in a
community whose members were unable to meet their daily basic needs.
FES works to help the rural poor develop livelihoods by restoring the ecological
functions and services that support rural life. In SKB, FES worked with the community
to improve the CGL’s capacity to produce fodder for livestock by implementing physical
methods of revegetation, soil and water conservation and institutional mechanisms to
deter encroachment and improve productivity. In the words of one community member,
“everything was linked to fodder and water” (Appendix One, SCI4). FES succeeded in
restoring fodder production on the CGL, which also reduced local desertification within
the plot. This reduced migration for fodder during the dry season and allowed some lee-
way for community members to apply time and resources to other activities, such as
developing a water well and improving agricultural production.
FES helped SKB help itself to meet its basic needs. By focusing on one element
of the village’s livelihood, it was able to open the door to progression towards other
goals. SKB, however, is still faced with a challenging and tenuous environment that
makes meeting basic needs an on-going challenge and priority. This is due to natural
environmental conditions associated with living in a semi-arid dryland and the overall
condition of low human development in the area. The improved state that FES and SKB
have created will continue if the community maintains the CGL and extends similar
activities to other areas used by community members. The continued confidence of the
panchayat is a critical element that could potentially change in the future if and when
new members are elected. Another element to consider is the influence of regional,
123

national and global processes that impede the ability to secure livelihood. Because the
latter is inevitable, it is crucial for SKB to work towards local self-sufficiency to provide
food, water, clothing and shelter as it has learned to do as a result of the FES capacity-
building project. Now, hope and know-how exist in SKB to hopefully achieve this end.
Nyumbani Village
NV is addressing the needs of Akamba people in Kitui District in several ways. It
is working towards providing basic needs for members of the lost generation and a formal
education for the orphans. The reconstituted family structure attempts to provide a
nurturing environment and social fabric in which healing and hope may grow. The
children’s education will help their chances of obtaining a job or going on to higher
education and therefore increasing their chances at a secure livelihood. NV is also
helping the outlying communities work towards sustainable livelihoods by providing
employment for nearly 60 people and building capacity in much needed areas, such as
dryland farming and water conservation. These are notable steps in improving the lives
and meeting basic daily needs of Akamba people.
NV is offering these people a rare chance to secure better lives, but the situation
in Kitui, and elsewhere in Kenya and throughout Sub-Saharan Africa, remains difficult.
For example, inadequate sanitary waste treatment contributes to disease. Extremely
harsh environmental factors severely threaten food and water security, with rapid rates of
population growth compounding this factor greatly. The economic development of Kitui
is still marginal and the local economy cannot currently offer jobs to all that need them,
even if they are qualified or have a formal degree. These are factors that affect all
Kenyans and will continue to affect the orphans, grandparents and outside villagers in
124

spite of the fact that NV is an island of hope transforming despair into hope for some
Akamba.
Discussion of Community-level Sustainability
In addition to discussing how projects in NV and SKB have contributed to basic
needs provision, this study also investigates a move towards sustainability. Deciding
what constitutes and indicates sustainability is a difficult task. In Chapter Two of this
thesis, the researcher compiled a list of attributes (Table 2) that have been deemed
important by other researchers and practitioners in their investigations of rural
community projects in developing countries. Developing a list of quantifiable ecological,
economic and social indicators may help communities strengthen their efforts and may
signal a more comprehensive approach to development (Bell & Morse, 1999). Although
this research study was not designed to generate quantifiable indicators for each
community, a primary goal was to alert the communities to factors that may be important
for sustainability and to create a framework for developing their own indicators based on
each attribute. Additionally, sustainability is not an end state or a concrete “place”, it is a
continuum, or a fluctuating process in which communities undertake. The following
sections highlight ways in which each community has contributed to lessons learned in
sustainability and recommendations they may want to consider when deciding future
action.
It is also important to mention the fact that community sustainability does not
exist in a vacuum. Regional, national and global forces shape even the most rural
communities in developing countries. Rice production in Bangladesh affects supply to
Nyumbani Village. Monetary policies created by the World Bank change economic
125

situations for SKB community members. The recent and continuing global food and
economic crises affect everyone in myriad explicit and implicit ways. So, what is a small
community in a rural dryland habitat to do? It is important here to mention the concept
of resilience, which is explained as a community’s ability to buffer external forces that
limit the foundations of sustainability (e.g., Berkes, 2002; and Olsson, Folke & Berkes,
2004). Resilience also implies that a community can maintain sustainability in the long-
term. The forces against sustainability may seem insurmountable, but community
sustainability allows people to take small, simple sustainable steps (Phillips, 2006) when
and where they can (e.g., by securing local food production and reducing local
environmental degradation).
Sanjadi-ka-badia
Sustainability is not a term that exists in Hindi language, much less so in the local
Rajasthani dialect spoken by SKB inhabitants. The focus of the FES project was
seemingly focused only on sustainable livelihoods. However, the case study reveals that
all aspects of sustainability-ecological, economic and social- were addressed by the FES
project. The case of SKB shows that it does not matter what term is used to indicate
sustainability as long as elements of the three-pronged framework exist.
Achievements in sustainability in Sanjadi-ka-badia
SKB exhibits many facets of the ecological, economic and social attributes
reported in Chapter Two. The most significant achievements appear in the social realm
and, from these, SKB has many lessons to share. These elements are perhaps the most
crucial because although the environment and our human economies support human
development, it is the relationships humans create, or social capital, that dictate whether
126

steps towards sustainability will be taken. Other researchers have found similar results
when discussing the importance of social capital in collective action projects. For
example, Rydin & Pennington (2000) argue that social capital can aid in sustainable
management of natural resources if it allows the individual to receive direct benefits of
collective action. To a similar effect, Agrawal & Gibson (2001) argue that a focus on
identifying common interests may be an effective way to engage groups in collective
natural resource management. SKB developed a sense of unity through the FES project
that allowed them to implement work that would serve to address collective interests and
restore communal property.
SKB highlights the importance of the development of community-generated
institutions that guide behavior towards collective good. These institutions have helped
stave off the ‘tragedy of the commons’ that existed in the SKB CGL in 1999 when the
FES project began. They have also allowed a space for inclusive decision-making, which
has empowered women and lower castes. Not surprisingly, these institutions continue
four years after the official project was completed because the community understands
the importance and benefits that are associated with accepted institutions, which indicates
retention of this aspect of sustainability, at least in the mid-term.
Perhaps the most valuable lesson to be learned from SKB is the process of
community ownership that FES was able to foster. Sustainability cannot occur if there is
not an accepted path for a community to take. Through the development of a strong
sense of commitment to improve the CGL, FES facilitated empowerment to show SKB
that it can help itself. In turn, this helped the community see the connection between
their health, their livelihood and the health of the natural world. FES acted within
127

existing political and cultural parameters, but encouraged the community to stretch
beyond its comfort level to create a more inclusive society. FES provided financial and
technical support in a way that promoted community participation in actions that were
tangible and meaningful to the community members. As a result, SKB inhabitants have
retained the knowledge and skills learned in the five-year project and are using them to
help implement projects (such as the water well) of their own choosing. They now know
that, although outside NGOs and government can help them, they have the power to
move ahead towards a brighter, more sustainable future. The ultimate lesson, then, is for
external development actors to be aware that even poorly developed communities have
the ability to self-start and that the process must be their own. Developing local pride,
‘can-do’ attitudes, and ownership of planning and action are behavioral changes that are
helping SKB citizens move a little further along the sustainability continuum.
Recommendations for Sanjadi-ka-badia
Through the FES project, SKB has embarked on a collective journey to secure a
more sustainable future. The following are considerations for SKB that may help it move
even further along the continuum of sustainability:
1. Retain the accepted community institutions developed in the FES project and adapt
them as the community deems fit. The researcher visited the CGL plot four years after
the FES project finished and it was still providing fodder for many SKB residents. This
has occurred because of the institutions they created to protect the CGL from
encroachment and environmental degradation. These institutions are clearly an effective
way for the village to operate because they are accepted and relevant. The retention of
this process may be an important step for future action.
128

2. Retain the enhancement of community life using the step-by-step process. Taking
small, efficient steps towards community goals is a way for SKB to address other issues
without becoming overwhelmed with too many tasks at once. As one community
member mentioned, they can “do small but good things (and) do them well” (Appendix
One, SCI1). Taking small, meaningful steps has also been an experience of some of
other communities highlighted in the Literature Review (e.g., Austin, Texas; Curitiba,
Brazil; Grand Shandu, China; Cleveland, Ohio; Overtornea, Sweden have all taken a
step-by-step approach that has been helpful for them in spite of their differing social,
economic and ecological contexts) that has produced positive results.
3. Restore ecological health of private lands. The other major recommendation for SKB
is to make serious efforts to restore degraded private lands. Currently, the CGL is a small
island of restored environmental health and services, but it cannot provide all that the
community needs. The CGL was restored with very little project costs (e.g., ditches dug
with trenches, rocks moved to create sand dams, and vegetation planting), which means
that similar activities could occur on private lands. The community could develop an
institution for local work parties, such as the highly effective mwethya system common in
the Machakos District of Kenya (Barbier, 2000; Mortimer & Tiffen, 1994; and Thomas-
Slayter, 1992). The mwethya concept is one where community members get together on
someone’s land to do work and the owner provides food for the group. In Machakos, a
highly celebrated example of soil conservation via terracing, the mwethya has been an
effective way to accomplish work on private lands, create a sense of social cohesion, and
restore degraded ecosystem services (Barbier, 2000; Mortimer & Tiffen, 1994; and
Thomas-Slayter, 1992). Because strong communal ties and an understanding for the need
129

for natural resource management already exist in SKB as a result of the FES project,
developing work parties may be a cost-effective way for the community to continue on its
journey towards sustainability.
4. Quantify the amount of livestock per hectare that is permissible on the CGL in a semi-
arid habitat to reduce future possibilities of overgrazing. Although SKB has made
significant steps in developing institutions for grazing on the CGL, the improved
availablity of fodder may encourage people to buy more livestock, which would place
further pressure on the plot. FES has worked with the community to explain the need to
have fewer, more productive livestock, but it is unclear whether the community fully
grasps this concept of ”carrying capacity” and the impact that more livestock may have
on the plot’s productivity.
Nyumbani Village
NV is a project that is attempting to merge many aspects of sustainability all in
one package. They are experiencing some growing pains in their attempt to do so, but the
efforts made so far are quite honorable and hold immense promise to bring a local
community closer to sustainability in the future.
Achievements in sustainability at Nyumbani Village
Perhaps NV’s greatest achievement is that it may someday prove to be an
international model for sustainable living under specific circumstances. Although NV is
geared towards alleviating the problems associated with HIV/AIDS, it also exemplifies
taking courageous steps towards sustainability from which other communities may learn.
In many ways, NV is a meeting of the minds. It is merging social and health services
with business and ecologically-sound practices as a social and ecological experiment
130

testing out new methods. It has evolved with interdisciplinary input from people in
various fields and cultures. It will be a primary example of applying new techniques for
dryland farming- an essential contribution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Essentially, it is the
researcher’s belief that NV is an island of hope in a harsh desert; one that holds great
promise as a social, environmental and economic experiment to bloom and grow.
Recommendations
The following are recommendations for NV that have emerged as a result of this
research (not ranked in order of importance).
1. Keep lines of communication open. There was significant evidence to show that
communication, or lack thereof, is a limiting factor at NV. This apparent gap
exists between all interested parties (COGRI staff, villagers, outside villagers,
outside political leaders). Perhaps the absence of a residential manager at NV
(none was present at the time of the field research in 2008) contributed to the
break-downs in communication that were evident in data from interviews, RRAs
and the researcher’s own observations. Opening communication will help to
solve some of the problems associated with expectations of the grandparents and
orphans in terms of their roles in village life; integration of the Sustainability,
Home Care and Education programs; and interactions with the outside community
for clear understanding of what is expected of them and what NV can offer them.
Communication is a key aspect of participatory decision-making, which at the
time of the field research in Summer 2008, was viewed by COGRI staff,
surrounding community members and leaders, and the grandparents, as lacking.
When viewed in terms of participatory decision-making, opening the lines of
131

communication may positively influence community ownership of the NV
project, which is a key aspect in development projects that wish to extend beyond
the time direct donor funding is received.
2. Scale back or slow down and focus. It seems as though NV is trying to do too
many things at once and it is challenged to perform activities without or below
capacity. For example, providing water and food is the number one priority, but
so many aspects of these activities are being clouded because too few staff are
charged with overseeing too many activities. In contrast, SKB was focused on its
highest priority resource (fodder) was able to use that experience to extend into
other areas. Although other communities have varying economic, social and
ecological contexts from that of NV, many of them (e.g., Austin, Texas; Curitiba,
Brazil; Grand Shandu, China; Cleveland, Ohio; Overtornea, Sweden) discussed in
this report started with one aspect they wanted to pursue, which was achieved
successfully and manifests the importance of focusing on small, manageable
projects that foster a deep understanding and capacity to extend new-found
knowledge to other areas (e.g., Phillips, 2006).
3. Manage like a business venture. For the ultimate success of NV, it needs to make
money to provide for the orphans, grandparents and staff, as well as jobs for the
outlying community partners. It cannot afford to lose money, as COGRI staff are
very well aware. In order for the village to persist beyond the external funding it
has so far received, it must limit the development of a “culture of dependency”,
both between COGRI and external funders, and between the NV villagers and the
NV staff/COGRI.
132

o With the villagers. Engaging and empowering the villagers in taking
ownership through their daily lives in the NV experiment is vital. This
may be accomplished by having them grow more of their own food in the
perimeter shambas (which would then require more water infrastructure in
those areas so they are not dependent on rain-fed agriculture); raising their
own goats (with grazing regulations- this is key) or chickens; planting and
caring for trees; managing domestic household wastes; responsible use of
on-site water and energy; and participating in microenterprise ventures.
Producing food storage units for crops that can be preserved is also a way
to save in times of abundance and reduce the need to buy in times of less
production. This is also true of fodder storage for livestock. Contributions
by the villagers for food and other provisions may ultimately lead to
limiting the need for external funding to support their basic needs and
village life.
o With the outside community. NV is not a rich neighbor, especially in the
early formative years in which it is dependent on external grants and
donations. It seems as though the outside community is beginning to
understand this, and by cooperatively working together both communities
can benefit. Currently, however, NV cannot afford the labor costs of
employing the outside community in the way it has up to this point. NV
needs to provide (in the words of one interviewee) “opportunities for self-
employment” (Appendix Two, NVS9) where community members are
paid for work on a commission basis, not on an hourly or daily basis. This
133

has been attempted with both crops and tree seedlings and is being
attempted in the agroprocessing unit with castor and honey. Unfortunately,
the outside villagers need more help to get started than just the capacity
NV has been providing. A micro-financing option for community loans
may be a viable solution to this problem. If NV could provide some start-
up money (i.e., through some form of low-interest loan), then outside
villagers could possibly buy the equipment they need to produce items that
NV can then purchase.
o As an institution. Figuring out ways to spend less money by merging
activities of the various departments when possible may be a significant
way to save money. Also, interview and observational data show that NV
is pressured to add new villagers but that it cannot support them
financially yet. Scaling back to reinforce existing resources and develop
them to accommodate more villagers may be a necessary step to ensure
financial stability.
4. Develop leadership skills to empower the inside and outside community. NV
offers a significant opportunity for new skills that could be transferred to other
families in the region. If newly trained outside villagers could conduct workshops
on their new-found technical knowledge, it would serve as a way to extend
sustainable livelihoods to those not in direct contact with NV. They could use
their own farms as demonstration sites to show the benefits of their work.
5. More water conservation strategies. Water often mentioned as the most limiting
factor at NV given its dryland habitat. Water is essential for farming, silviculture
134

and other village activities. Capacity to conserve and transport water is needed
(and is also contingent on developing renewable energy sources to pump it from
groundwater sources) as well as reducing loss of vegetation cover.
6. Life skills for children. This was also a major concern for some of the
grandparents and COGRI staff members. NV offers children a wonderful
opportunity in formal education, but some people feel that they are not developing
sufficient life skills, such as growing food, gathering firewood and water,
constructing homes, tending livestock, managing money, and learning a trade for
an income. A sustainability education program can be developed to address these
important skill sets via hands-on practical experience that also allows them to
contribute to daily life at the village. Major components of such a program may
include basic skills such as organic farming using permaculture techniques
(composting, intercropping, spot farming, et cetera), water conservation
strategies, building energy efficient stoves, tree management for ecosystem health
and fuelwood and leading up to skills in other areas, such as money management,
entrepreneurial skills, and land management.
An interesting educational experience for NV children would be to extend
their new-found sustainability knowledge gained in a sustainability education
program to outside children by putting on workshops and teaching Akamba who
will face similar problems. Research regarding health promotion strategies, for
example, shows that peer-based education can be very effective (Turner &
Shepard, 1999). Investigations of youth programs in the United States have also
elicited arguments that youth can generate meaningful learning experiences when
135

initiated by older role models (Dubas & Snyder, 1993). Such a program would
also give NV children a meaningful community service project that encourages
connection to place (Sobel, 2005). Additionally, sustainability education is a
growing international movement (Cloud, 2005; McKeown, 2002; and UNESCO,
2009) and NV could become a model for implementing wide-scale sustainability
education.
7. Strategic planning for the village. NV needs to connect the three main programs
(sustainability, home care and education) and make meaningful connections with
other initiatives (polytechnic school and clinic). A lack of coordination of these
primary three programs at NV causes a disconnect between and among staff.
Although a comprehensive strategic plan with measurable objectives may exist,
there is strong evidence that NV working in the field are not aware of it and do
not use it.
8. Quantify energy needs. The need to develop reliable renewable energy
infrastructure was a significant component of data from the staff RRA,
observations and the interviews. Energy is a key to sustainability and NV has
been very successful in quantifying fuelwood needs and planting accordingly with
species (e.g., L. luecocephala) that can meet the demand, but this needs to extend
to other energy needs as well. Relying upon diesel is not economically viable for
pumping water and running the generator, so developing solar and biofuel options
are key elements to not only financial success, but also sustainability.
136

Extrinsic hypotheses and implications for other communities
Regardless of their presence in a developing or developed country, communities
do not exist in a vacuum unaffected by external forces. The notion of resilience to major
shock and change is an important consideration in sustainable community projects. This
research, especially the case of SKB, manifests that small steps towards sustainability
that increase resilience are a key element. In SKB, the community developed accepted
institutions that have stood the test of time in the mid-term, which has alleviated
difficulties in animal husbandry and helped the community move towards other aspects
of development, such as education, health and water conservation and infrastructure.
Another important consideration this research shows is the importance of
community ownership in development projects where an external actor is a key
component, or driver of the project, which is another indicator of resiliency. There is a
contrast between NV and SKB in terms of the level of community ownership the project
created. In SKB, FES acted more as a facilitator to the community’s growth, which
helped to develop strong community commitment to the project. COGRI initially sought
to create community ownership in the original vision of the village and a revitalization of
community ownership may be a key aspect for the community to become resilient once
external funding sources and other forms of technological and logistical support wane.
Suggestions for future research
o The development, implementation and evaluation of a sustainability education
program for NV orphans and perhaps for NV grandparents and outside villagers.
137

o The development of measurable, quantifiable objectives for sustainability
attributes that include a set of indicators for each attribute (e.g., sustainable use of
natural resources → water quality→ various water quality indicators (BOD, fecal
coliforms, etc.) that can then be applied in a local setting and monitored over
time.
o The importance of community ownership in the longevity of development
projects that have been implemented by an external actor.
Study Limitations
o Identifying where a given community exists on a sustainability continuum without
a set of criteria poses a difficult task. This study was not designed to measure
sustainability quantitatively, but did offer qualitative observations about each
community’s level of sustainability.
o Translation was an issue, especially in India. The translator did not speak the
local language and the translator surely “summed up” what was said. Getting
direct quotations was improbable given the task at hand, so the interview
transcriptions reflect this. There may have also been a lack of candid answers
from respondents who were being interviewed because the translator was a staff
member of FES or COGRI. They may not have wanted to express negative
attitudes and opinions about the respective project or organization.
o Understanding a culture different from one’s own is always a demanding and
complex task and the researcher may have missed important aspects of the
communities that can only be informed by knowing and understanding cultural
138

o In the NV case study, interview data was collected with staff who worked at the
village in summer, 2008. NV has experienced a high rate of staff turnover before
and after that time. Some of the opinions and views expressed in these interviews
may not reflect the big picture of NV’s process to meet its goals because these
staff were not aware of what has happened.
o In the NV case study, the number of outside community members was low- only
13 percent of workers at NV- so more interviews may have captured a more
representative sample.
o Case study research is generally performed over a longer period of time than what
was available for this project (Punch, 1998).
139

REFERENCES
Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. (Eds.). (2001). Communities and the environment:
Ethnicity, gender, and the state in community-based conservation. New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Agrawal, A. & Gibson, C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: The role of

community in natural resource conservation. World Development, 27(4), 629-649.
Agrawal, A. & Redford, K. (2006). Poverty, development, and biodiversity

conservation: Shooting in the dark? Working Paper 26. Wildlife Conservation
Society.
Agyeman, J., Morris, J., & Bishop, J. (1996). Local government’s educational role in
LA21. In J. Huckle & S. Sterling (Eds.), Education for Sustainability (pp181-
194). London: Earthscan Publications, Ltd.
Agyeman, J., & Angus, B. (2003). The role of civic environmentalism in the pursuit of
sustainable communities. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management,
46(3), 345-363.
Agyeman, J., Bullard, R., & Evans B. (2002). Exploring the nexus: Bringing together
sustainability, environmental justice and equity. Space and Polity, 6(1), 77-90.
Alcorn, J. (1993). Indigenous peoples and conservation. Conservation Biology, 7(2),

424-426.
Arkin, L. (2005). Making Money Sustainable: Work in Progress at the Los Angeles
Eco-Village. New Village Press. Retrieved January 28, 2009 from:
http://www.newvillage.net/newvillage.html .
Armstrong, D. & Stratford, E. (2004). Partnerships for local sustainability and local
governance in a Tasmanian settlement. Local Environment, 9(6), 541-560.
Assadourian, E. (2008). Engaging Communities for a Sustainable World. In World

Watch Institute: 2008 State of the World: Innovations for a Sustainable Economy
(pp.151-165) Washington, D.C., WWI.
Auerbach, C., & Silverstien, L. (2003). Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding

and Analysis. New York City: New York University Press.
Auroville. (2009). Auroville. Retrieved February 11, 2009 from:

http://www.auroville.org/index.htm .
140

Balint, P. & Mashinya, J. (2008). CAMPFIRE during Zimbabwe’s national crisis:

Local impacts and broader implications for community-based wildlife
management. Society and Natural Resources 21, 783-796.
Barbier, E. (2000). The economic linkages between rural poverty and land degradation:
some evidence from Africa. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 82, 355-
370.
Barton Bray, D., Merino-Perez, L., Negreros-Castillo, P., Segura-Warnholtz, G.,

Torres-Rojo, J., Vester, H. (2003). Mexico’s community-managed forests as a
global model for sustainable landscapes. Conservation Biology, 17(3), 672-677.
Bell, S., & Morse, S. (1999). Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable.
London: Earthscan.
Berger, G. (2003). Reflections on governance: power relations and policy making in

regional sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Policy Planning, 5
(3), 219-234.
Berkes, F. (2002). Cross-scale institutional linkages: Perspectives from the bottom-up.

In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. Weber (Eds.),
Drama of the Commons (pp. 293-321). Washington, D.C., National Academy
Press.
Berkes, F. (2004). Rethinking community based conservation. Conservation Biology,

18(3), 621-630.
Berkes, F. & Seixas, C. (2004). Lessons from community self-organization and cross-
scale linkages in four equator initiative projects. Joint Project with the
International Development Research Center and the UNDP. Winnipeg: Centre for
Community-Based Resource Management, Natural Resources Institute,
University of Manitoba.
Bridger, J. & Luloff, A. (1999). Toward an interactional approach to sustainable

community development. Journal of Rural Studies 15(4), 377-388.
Bridger, J., & Luloff, A. (2001). Building the sustainable community: Is social capital
the answer? Sociological Inquiry, 71(4), 458-472.
Burns, M., Audouin, M., & Weaver, A. (2006). Advancing sustainability science in
South Africa. South African Journal of Science, 102, 379-384.
Buse, K., Ludi, E., & Vigneri. M. (2008). Millennium Villages Project: OSI/ODI
Review of Political Sustainability- Inception Report. Overseas Development
Institute.
141

Castillo, A., & Toledo, V. (2000). Applying ecology in the third world: The Case of
Mexico. Bioscience, 50(1), 66-76.
Chambers, R. (1992). Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed, and Participatory. Brighton,

U.K., Institute of Development Studies Discussion Paper 311.
Chambers, R. (1994). The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal. World
Development, 22(7), 953-969.
Chan, K., Pringle R., Ranganathan, J., Boggs, C., Chan, Y., Ehrlich, P., Haff, P., Heller,
N., Al-Khafaji, K., & Macmynowski, D.(2007). When Agendas Collide: Human
Welfare and Biological Conservation. Conservation Biology, 21(1), 59-68.
Choudhury, C. (2004). Practicing Local Governance, Working Paper Number 14.

Foundation for Ecological Security. Retrieved December 12, 2007 from:
http://fes.org.in/index.php .
Cloud, J. (2005). Education for sustainability: What is its core content? NAAEE
Communicator, 35(4), 1-10.
Concern. (2002). November 8). Sustainable Communities Network. Retrieved January

24, 2008 from http://www.sustainable.org/index.html.
Cox, D. (1998). Community rebuilding in the Philippines: A Poverty alleviation

program in Negros Occidental, 1990-1995. In: M. Hoff (Ed.), Sustainable
Community Development: Studies in Economic, Environmental and Cultural
Revitalization (pp. 45-62). Boca Raton, Florida: Lewis Publishers.
Crystal Waters Ecovillage. (2009). Crystal Waters Ecovillage. Retrieved February 12,
2009 from: http://crystalwaters.org.au/?page_id=41 .
Davidson, J. (2003). Citizenship and sustainability in dependent island communities:

The case of the Huon Valley region in southern Tasmania. Local Environment,
8(5), 527-540.
d’Envtreves, M. (1992). Hannah Arendt and the idea of citizenship. In C. Mouffe (Ed)
Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community (pp. 145-
168). London: Verso.
Diamond, J. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York:
Penguin.
Dorm-Adzobu, C., Ampadu-Agyei, O., & Veit, P. (1991). Community institutions in

resource management: Agroforestry by Mobisquads in Ghana. From the Ground
Up, Case Study Number 3. Nairobi: Acts Press; and Washington D.C: Center for
International Development and Environment.
142

Dubas, J. & Snider, B. (1993). The role of community-based youth groups in enhancing
learning and achievement through nonformal education. In R. Lerner (Ed.) Early
Adolescence (pp. 159-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Earth Institute. (2005). Millennium Villages Project annual report: Millennium

Research Villages, The first year: July 2004 to June 2005. New York: The Earth
Institute at Columbia University.
Earth Institute. (2009). Millennium Villages. Earth Institute at Columbia University.

Retrieved March 30, 2009 from:
http://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/1799 .
Earthaven Ecovillage. (2008). Earthaven Ecovillage. Retrieved January 22, 2009 from:
http://www.earthaven.org/index.php .
EcoCity Cleveland. (2009). Cleveland Ecovillage. EcoCity Cleveland. Retrieved

February 16, 2009 from:
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/ecovillage/intro_ecovillage.ht
ml .
Ecovillage. (2009). Ecovillage of Loudon County, Virginia. Ecovillages. Retrieved

February 18, 2009 from: http://ecovillages.com/index.php .
Ecovillage at Ithaca. (2009). Ecovillage at Ithaca. Retrieved February 17 2009 from:

http://www.ecovillage.ithaca.ny.us/default.html .
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of

Management Review 14(4), 532-550.
Epler Wood, M. (2002). Ecotourism: Principles, practices, and policies for

sustainability. Paris: United Nations Environment Programme.
Fagan, G. (1996). Community-based learning. In J. Huckle and S. Sterling (Eds.),

Education for Sustainability (pp.136-148). London: Earthscan Publications, Ltd.
FAO. (Food and Agriculture Organization). (2006). The new generation of watershed
management programmes and projects. Forestry Paper 150. Rome.
FES (Foundation for Ecological Security). (2008). Ecological Profile of Bhilwara

Region. Foundation for Ecological Security. Anand: FES.
FES (Foundation for Ecological Security). (2007). Annual Report 2006/2007.

Foundation for Ecological Security. Anand: FES.
143

Findhorn Foundation. (2008). The Findhorn Ecovillage. Findhorn Foundation.

Retrieved December 16, 2008 from:
http://www.findhorn.org/whatwedo/ecovillage/ecovillage.php .
Global Ecovillage Network. (2009). Global Ecovillage Network. Retrieved February

17, 2009 from: http://gen.ecovillage.org/ .
Global Environmental Management Education Center. (2009). What is GEM? Global

Environmental Management Education Center. Retrieved March 30, 2009 from:
http://www.uwsp.edu/CNR/gem/ .
Gurung, T. (2006). Sustainable community development in Nepal: Voices from the

bottom-up. PhD Dissertation. Amherst: University of Massachusetts- Amherst.
Hogg, R. (1987). Development in Kenya: drought, desertification and food scarcity.

African Affairs, 86(342), 47-58.
Horochowski, K., & Moisey, R. (2001). Sustainable tourism: the Effect of local
participation in Honduran ecotourism development. In S. McCool & R. Moisey,
(Eds.), Tourism, recreation and sustainability: Linking culture and the
environment, (pp. 163-175). Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.
Hotcourses Foundation. (2009). Hotcourses Foundation. Retrieved March 23, 2009

from:
http://www.hotcoursesfoundation.org/pls/fdn/kb_pub.pg_home?x=16180339 .
Hu, D., & Wang, R. (1998). Exploring eco-construction for local sustainability: An
eco-village case study in China. Ecological Engineering 11, 167-176.
ICLEI (International Council for Local Environment Initiatives). (2002). Second Local
Agenda 21 Survey. New York: United Nations.
James, S. and Lahti, T. (2004). The natural step for communities: How cities and towns
can change to sustainable practices. Gabriola Island, British Columbia: New
Society Publishers.
Joshie, S., Kalam, S., Chaturvedi, R., Rastogi, A. (2008). Decentralization of natural
resource governance: A case study from an Indian village. Paper presented at the
11th Biennial International Association for the Study of Common Property in Bali,
Indonesia.
Junkin, R. (2007). Overcoming the barriers to financial services for small-scale

forestry: the case of the community forest enterprises of Petén, Guatemala.
Unasylva, 58.
144

Kabubo-Mariara, J., Mwabu, G., & Kimuyu, P. (2006). Farm productivity and poverty
in Kenya: the effect of soil conservation. Journal of Food, Agriculture, and
Environment 4(2), 291-297.
Kabwegyere, T. & Mbula, J. (1979). A case of the Akamba of Eastern Kenya. Changing
African Family Project Series Monograph Number Five. Canberra: The
Australian National University.
Kates, R., Clark W., Corell R., Hall J., Jaeger C., Lowe I., McCarthy J., Schellnhuber
H., Bolin B., Dickson, N., Faucheux S., Gallopin G., Grübler A., Huntley, B.,
Jäger, J., Jodha, N., Kasperson R., Mabogunje, A., Matson, P., Mooney H., Moore
III, B., O'Riordan, T., & Svedlin, U. (2001). Sustainability science. Science, 292,
641-642.
Kates, R., Parris, T., & Leiserowitz, A. (2005). What is sustainable development?
Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment, 47(3), 9-21.
Kaushik, P. (2005). Panchyati Raj movement in India: Retrospective and present status.
In B. Debroy and P. Kaushik (Eds.), Energising rural development through
Panchayats (pp. 77-149). New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
Keimblatt Okodorf. (2005). Keimblatt Okodorf. Retrieved February 2, 2009 from:

http://www.oekodorf.or.at/www.eng/index.html .
Kellert, S., Mehta, J., Ebbin, S., & Lichtenfeld, L. (2000). Community natural resource
management: Promise, rhetoric, and reality. Society and Natural Resources, 13,
705-715.
Keuruu Ecovillage. (2009). Keuruu Ecovillage. Retrieved February 3, 2009 from:

http://www.ekokyla.tk/ .
Kibbutz Lutan. (2005). Kibbutz Lutan. Retrieved January 29, 2009 from:
http://www.kibbutzlotan.com/index.html .
Kidane-Mariam, T. (2003). Environmental and habitat management: The Case of

Ethiopia and Ghana. Environmental Management, 31(3), 313-327.
Kigomo, B. (1992). Restoration of woody vegetations for better livelihoods: The

Ukambani and Maasai land in Kenya. African Journal of Ecology, 30, 1-9.
Kijtewachakul, N., Shivakoti, G., & Webb, E. (2004). Forest health, collective
behaviors, and management. Environmental Management, 33(5), 620-636.
King, D. & Stewart, W. (1996). Ecotourism and commodification: Protecting people

and places. Biodiversity and Conservation 5, 239-305.
145

Los Angeles Eco-Village (LAEV). (2009). Los Angeles Eco-Village. Retrieved January
28, 2009 from: http://laecovillage.org/ .
Leach, M., Mearns, R., & Scoones, I. (1999). Environmental entitlements: Dynamics
and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World
Development, 27(2), 225-247.
Leedy, P. & Ormrod, J. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design. Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Litchfield, C. (2001). Responsible tourism with great apes in Uganda. In S. McCool &
R. Moisey, (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and sustainability: Linking culture and the
environment, (pp. 105-132). Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.
Manual-Navarrete, D., Slocombe, S., & Mitchell, B. (2006). Science for placed-based
socioecological management: Lessons from the Maya forest (Chiapas and Petén).
Ecology and Society, 11(1): Article 8 (online). Retrieved 31 January 2008 from:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art8.
McCarthy, J. (2005). Devolution in the woods: Community forestry as hybrid

neoliberalism. Environment and Planning, 37 (6), 995-1014.
McCool, S. & Moisey, R., (Eds.). (2001). Tourism, recreation and sustainability:
Linking culture and the environment. Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.
McKeown, R. (2002). Education for sustainable development toolkit (Version 2).

Knoxville, TN: Energy, Environment and Resources Center at The University of
Tennessee.
Metcalf, S. (1993). CAMPFIRE: Zimbabwe’s communal areas management

programmer for indigenous resources. Paper prepared for the Liz Claiborne & Art
Ortenberg Foundation workshop on Community-based Conservation. Retrieved in
PDF format March 30, 2009 from:
http://www.resourceafrica.org/documents/1993/1993_campfire_bg.pdf .
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-

being: Synthesis. New York: Island Press.
Millennium Project. (2006). Millennium Villages. Millennium Project. Retrieved

December 15, 2008 from: http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/mv/index.htm .
Ministry of Rural Development. (2009). National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.

Government of India. Retrieved February 20, 2009 from: http://nrega.nic.in/ .
Mitchell, R. (2001). Community perspectives in sustainable tourism: Lessons from

Peru. In S. McCool & R. Moisey, (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and sustainability:
Linking culture and the environment, (pp. 137-162). Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.
146

Mortimore, M. & Tiffen, M. (1994). Population growth and a sustainable environment.

Environment 36(8), 10-32.
Munksogard. (2009). Munksogard. Retrieved February 4, 2009 from:

http://www.munkesoegaard.dk/index_en.html .
Murali, K., Murthy, I., & Ravindranath, N. (2006). Sustainable community forest
management systems: A study on community forest management and joint forest
management institutions from India. International Review for Environmental
Strategies, 6(1), 23-40.
Nagpal, J. (1995). Voices from the developing world: Progress towards sustainable
development. Environment, 37(8), 11-35.
National Portal of India. (2008). Government of India. Retrieved January 29, 2008
from: http://india.gov.in/default.php.
The Natural Step. (2003). The Natural Step. Retrieved January 28, 2008 from
http://www.naturalstep.org/com/nyStart/.
The Natural Step. (2009). Sustainable Dublin. Retrieved February 23, 2009 from:
http://www.naturalstep.org/en/sustainable-dublin .
Nyumbani. (2008). Nyumbani Village. Children of God Relief Institute. Retrieved

February 13, 2009 from: http://www.nyumbani.org/village_need.htm .
Okodorf. (2008). Ökodorf Sieben Linden. Retrieved January 27, 2009 from:
http://www.siebenlinden.de/english0000.html .
Olsson, P., Folke, C., & Berkes, F. (2004). Adaptive comanagement for building
resilience in social-ecological systems. Environmental Management, 34(1), 75-90.
Opere, A., Awuor, V., Kooke, S., & Omoto, W. (2004). Rainfall characteristics in semi-
arid Kitui District of Kenya. In Stephenson, Shemang, & Chaoka (Eds.) Water
Resources of Arid Areas (pp. 35-46). London: Taylor and Francis Group.
Opondo, M. (2000). The socio-economic and ecological impacts of agro-industrial food

chain on the rural economy in Kenya. Ambio, 29(1), 35-41.
Otamatea Ecovillage. (2009). Otamatea Ecovillage. Retrieved February 13, 2009 from:
http://www.otamatea.org.nz/index.htm .
Pagdee, A., Kim, Y., Daugherty, P. (2006). What makes community forest management
successful: A meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Society
and Natural Resources, 19, 33-52.
147

Pandey, S., & Yadama, G. (1990). Conditions for local level community forestry
action: A theoretical explanation. Mountain Research and Development, 10(1),
88-95.
Parris, T., & Kates, R. (2003). Characterizing and measuring sustainable development.
Annual Review of Environmental Resources, 28, 559-586.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research evaluation and methods (3rd Edition).

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Philippines National Statistics Office. (2002). Negros Occidental: The fourth most
populated province in the Philippines. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from:
http://www.census.gov.ph/data/sectordata/datapop.html.
Phillips, V. (2006). Small, simple, sustainable. GEM Carat Juice. Retrieved April 14,
2009 from: http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/gem/DirectorsCommentary/DCFall06.htm .
Phillips, V., Miskowiak, D., and Stoll, L. (eds.) (2007). Proceedings of International
Conference on Planning for Land Use and Healthy Watersheds. Racine, WI, Sept.
25-27, 2006. Global Environmental Management Education Center publication.
Phillips, V. (2008a). Notes on Rapid Resource Assessment Methodology. Unpublished

Manuscript. Global Environmental Management Education Center. Stevens Point,
WI: University of Wisconsin: Stevens Point. 6 pp.
Phillips, V. (2008b). Governance and changing responsibilities needed to build a

sustainable future. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on
Environmental Management for Sustainable Universities, Barcelona, Spain, Oct.
15-17.

Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative
Strategies (Volume 3). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Redclift, M. (1993). Sustainable development: Concepts, contradictions, and conflicts.

In P. Allen (Ed.), Food for the Future: Conditions and Contradictions of
Sustainability (pp. 169-192). New York: John C. Wiley and Sons.
Rich, S. (2007). Africa’s village of dreams. Wilson Quarterly, Spring:14-23.
Rist, S., Chidambaranathan, M., Escobar, C., Weismann, U., & Zimmerman, A. (2007).
Moving from sustainable management to sustainable governance of natural
resources: The role of social learning processes in rural India, Bolivia, and Mali.
Journal of Rural Studies, 23, 23-37.
148

Robinson, W. (2004). Global crisis and Latin America. Bulletin of Latin American
Research, 23(2), 135-153.
Rocky Mountain Institute. (2003). Framework for community sustainability: Ten

ingredients for long-term success. Rocky Mountain Institute. Retrieved November
11, 2007 from: http://www.rmi.org/ .
Romano, F. (2007). Forest tenure changes in Africa: Making locally based forest
management work. Unasylva, 228 (58), 11- 17.
Roseland, M., Cureton, M., & Wornell, H. (1998). Toward sustainable communities:
Resources for citizens and their governments. (2nd Edition). Gabriola Island,
British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers.
Rydin, Y., & Holman, N. (2004). Re-evaluating the contribution of social capital in
achieving sustainable development. Local Environment, 9(2), 117-133.
.Rydin, Y. & Pennington, M. (2000). Public participation and local environment

planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local
Environment, 5(2), 153-169.
Seymour, F. (1994). Are successful community-based conservation projects designed

or discovered? In D. Western and R. Wright (Eds.), Natural connections ( pp.
472-496). Washington D.C.: Island Press.
Shutkin, W. (2000). The Land that Could Be: Environmentalism and Democracy in the
Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Smith, P., Chhetri, B., & Regmi, B. (2003). Meeting the needs of Nepal’s poor:
Creating local criteria and indicators of community forestry. Journal of Forestry,
101 (5), 24-30.
Spangenberg, E., McGinley, J. & Tschida, R. (eds.) (2004). Proceedings of

International Conference on Local Capacity Building for Healthy Watersheds.
Wingspread Conference Facility, Racine, WI, June 24-26, 2004. Global
Environmental Management Education Center, Stevens Point, WI. 47 pp.
Sobel, D. (2005). Place-based education. Great Barrington, MA: Orion Society.
Solheimar. (2009). Solheimar. Retrieved February 5 2009 from:

http://www.solheimar.is/default.asp .
Stake, R. (1988). Methods in educational research: Seeking sweet water. In R.M. Jaeger
(Ed.), Complementary Methods for Research in Education (pp. 252-278).
Washington D.C: American Educational Research Association.
149

Stake, R. (2006). Multiple Case Study Research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Sustainable Communities Network. (1996). Curitiba’s voluntary sustainability.

Retrieved September 3 2008 from:
http://www.sustainable.org/casestudies/international/INTL_af_curitiba.html.
Sustainable Communities Network. (1997). Alliance for sustainable communities.

Retrieved September 3 2008 from:
http://www.sustainable.org/casestudies/SIA_PDFs/SIA_maryland.pdf .
Sulak-Sivaraksa. (2009). Wongsanit Ashram. Sulak-Sivaraska. Retrieved January 27

2009 from : http://www.sulak-
sivaraksa.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=154&Itemid=14
5.
Svanholm. (2008). What is Svanholm? Svanholm. Retrieved April 10, 2009 from:
http://svanholm.dk/en.php .

Taylor, S. & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods (3rd
Edition). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Taylor-Ide, D., & Taylor, C. (2002). Just and Lasting Change: When Communities Own
Their Futures. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Temu, J. & Due, A. (2000). Participatory appraisal approaches versus sample survey
data collection: a Case of smallholder farmers well-being ranking in Njombe
District, Tanzania. Journal of African Economies 9(1), 44-62.
Thomas-Slayter, B. (1992). Politics, class, and gender in African resource management:

the case of rural Kenya. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 40(4),
809-828.
Thresher, P. (1981). The present value of an Amboseli Lion. World Animal Review, 40,
30-33.
Thrupp, L. (1993). Political ecology of sustainable rural development: Dynamics of

social and natural resource degradation. In P. Allen (Ed.), Food for the Future:
Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability (pp. 47-73). New York: John C.
Wiley and Sons.
Torri Superiore. (2009). Torri Superiore. Retrieved February 10 2009 from:

http://www.torri-superiore.org/index.php?s=home&p=benvenuto&l=en .
150

Trainer, T. (2000). The global ecovillage movement: A simpler way for a more
sustainable society. Social Alternatives, 19(3), 19-24.
Tucker, C. (2000). Striving for sustainable forest management in Mexico and

Honduras: The Experience of two communities. Mountain Research and
Development, 20(2), 116-117.
Turner, G. & Shepard, J. (1999). A method in search of a theory: Peer education and
health promotion. Health Education Research 14(2), 235-247.
UNCED (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development). (1992).

Agenda 21. New York: United Nations.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2008). Capacity Development:

Empowering People and Institutions, Annual Report, 2008. New York: United
Nations Development Programme.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (1992). Convention on Biological

Diversity. Nairobi: UNEP.
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). (2009).

UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development -
Moving into the Second Half of the UN Decade. UNESCO. Retrieved April 10
2009 from: http://www.esd-world-conference-2009.org/ .
United States Census Bureau. (2009). Cleveland, Ohio. United States Census Bureau.
Retrieved April 7, 2009 from:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/3916000.html .
The Village. (2009). The Village. Retrieved February 9, 2009 from:

http://www.thevillage.ie/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1 .
Walsh, J., Jamrozy, U. & Burr, S. (2001). Sense of place as a component of sustainable
tourism. In S. McCool & R. Moisey, (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and
sustainability: Linking culture and the environment, (pp. 177-195). Oxon, UK:
CABI Publishing.
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our Common

Future. New York: Oxford University Press.
Western, D., & Wright, R. (Eds). (1994). Natural Connections. Washington D.C.:
Island Press.
Weismann, A. (1998). Gaviotas: A village to reinvent the world. White River Junction,
Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.
151

Wiggins, S., Markfo, K., Anchirinah, V. (2004). Protecting the forest of the people?
Environmental policies and livelihoods in the forest margins of southern Ghana.
World Development, 32(11), 1939-1955.
Wint, E. (2000). Factors encouraging the growth of sustainable communities: a

Jamaican case study. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 27(3), 119-132.
Yanarella, E., & Levine, R. (1992). Does sustainable development lead to

sustainability? Futures (October), 759-774.
Yin, R. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (3rd Edition). Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
Young, S. (1997). Local Agenda 21: the renewal of democracy? In M. Jacobs (Ed.),
Greening the Millennium? The new politics of the environment (pp. 138-147).
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Zanetell, B., & Knuth, B. (2002). Knowledge partnerships: Rapid rural appraisal’s roles
in catalyzing community-based management in Venezuela. Society and Natural
Resources, 15, 805-825.
Definitions
Agenda 21: “a participatory, multi-stakeholder process to achieve the goals of Agenda 21

at the local level through the preparation and implementation of a long-term, strategic
plan that addresses priority local sustainable development concerns (ICLEI, 2001, page
5)”.
Case study research: a form of research used primarily in the social sciences and are
selected when the study proposes “how” or “why” questions about the topic at hand, the
researcher has little control over events, and the study is investigating contemporary
phenomenon in the context of events in the real world (Yin, 2003).
Foundation for Ecological Security: (FES) a non-profit organization located in India.
Mission statement: “to strengthen, revive, or restore, where necessary, the process of
ecological succession and the conservation of land, forest, and water resources in the
country” (FES, 2007).
External actors: institutions, agencies, both state and nongovernmental that interact with
local communities and individuals
Internal actors: institutions, and groups living in a community that interact with each
other and with external actors.
Global Environmental Management Education Center: (GEM) a non-profit organization
housed in the College of Natural Resources at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.
The mission of GEM is: “pioneering and applying practical learning methods and
technology to solve natural resource problems by linking faculty, students, and citizens
worldwide”(GEM, 2009).
152

Institutions: the rules, regulations, and norms that govern behavior

Local-level sustainable development: sustainable development initiated at local levels,
with or without financial, technical, or logistical support from external actors.
Nyumbani Village, Kenya: Operated by the Children of God Relief Institute. The mission
of the village is: “to be a self-sustaining community to serve orphans and elders who
have been left behind by the ‘lost generation’ of the AIDS pandemic” (Nyumbani, 2008).
Panchayat: a local governing body in Indian villages consisting of five village elders
(Kaushik, 2005).
Participatory rural appraisal: “a family of approaches and methods to enable rural people
to share, enhance, and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan and to act”
(Chambers, 1994, page 953).
Sustainable development: meeting the needs of current generations without
compromising the ability of future generations to do the same (WCED 1987).
Three-pronged framework: A framework for sustainability that includes ecological, social
and economic goals (Roseland et al. 1998).
Abbreviations
AU: agroprocessing unit in NV

CGL: Common Grazing Lands in India
COGRI: Children of God Relief Institute, Kenya
FES: Foundation for Ecological Security, India
GEM: Global Environmental Management Education Center
ICLEI: International Council for Local Environment Initiatives
NGO: non-governmental organization
NTFP: non-timber forest product
NREGA: National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, India
NV: Nyumbani Village, Kenya, operated by COGRI
PRI: panchayati raj institution system of local governance, India
PRA: participatory rural appraisal
PS: perimeter shamba system in NV
RRA: rapid resource assessment
SKB: Sanjadi-ka-badia Village, India
UN: United Nations
UNCED: United Nations Commission on Environment and Development
UNDP: United Nations Development Program
USAID: United States Agency for International Development
153
APPENDIX ONE: RESULTS FROM SANJADI-KA-BADIA
Outline
I. Interviews from Sanjadi-ka-badia village

a. Community Member Interviews
b. Interviews with FES Staff and Community Leaders
II. Results Categorized by Objective
III. Rapid Resource Assessment Results
IV. Observations of Sanjadi-ka-badia
Interviews from Sanjadi-ka-badia Village
Community Member Interviews
Interviewee Code: SCI1

Title: community member of Sanjadi-ka-badia
Interviewers: Iva, Joshi, Lindsey
Time/Date: 4 June 2008 130-230PM
Questions asked: needs
1. What were the largest issues in the community prior to initiation of the project by FES?
(Circumstances/Perspective). This question will be modified in order to allow the participant
to provide a historical context of the needs prior to the project’s implementation.
It has been 8 years since initiation of work. Were working with another organization first (magar
mewar) and then contacted FES staff. Fodder, water, and encroachment were the largest issues.
Water also related to low productivity in agriculture, now enough water in wells for irrigation
and other uses. Related problems with fodder to water as well. Connects issues to water
2. What has been done to address these issues (Circumstances/Perspective)? Please describe
successes or failures of efforts to address these issues (Opinion).
SKB was one of the first plots developed and other villages also wanted to work with FES when
they found that they weren’t trying to take their land. They saw what happened in Chitamba and
the problems they had there- after the problems were solved it made it easier for other villages to
do projects. Building trust with an outside organization (securing land tenure). FES put in
plantations, fencing of area to stop encroachment, check dams and anicuts (small structures built
to conserve) for water conservation.
After the project they got employment (economic); leaves for goats and sheep and fodder for
larger animals (economic, ecological). Wells were recharged (social, economic, ecological). The
biggest benefit was that the land was no longer encroached (socio-political). Feels that the
project has fulfilled all their needs and very successful.
3. What are the current and long term needs for you and your family?
“The future is about water”. Education and employment.
4. What has been done to address these current and long term needs?
(Circumstances/Perspective)? Please describe successes or failures of efforts to address these
issues (Opinion).
Appendix One 1
The NREGA (National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) project is helping to meet long term
needs because it is providing employment and helping them for the future. The program is very
well planned because it is building roads, clearing water courses to water harvesting structures
and to help develop water resources. The project is helping develop a good water source.
Need education for future. His needs are met, but children need to be able to build better lives for
themselves. Before there was no school but they contacted a MP to establish a school up to class
5. Now have initiative that all kids go to school. If girls are not sent then the family pays a 1100
rupee penalty. For boys a bag of grain for the pigeons.
5. What would you like to see happen in the community for the future?
(Circumstances/Perspective/Opinion)
School up to eighth class then kids can go on to Chitamba for the rest. Wants everyone to be
educated and do small but good things, do them well. Livestock small herd but very productive;
stop wasting money on feasts. Have had Village discussions about education and reservations (to
be scheduled caste). If they have education then they wont need reservations.

Interviewers: Iva, Lindsey
Date/Time: 6 June 2008 12 pm
(Circumstances/Perspective).
Needed water and fodder.
Plantation program within the plot; wells; check dams; contours within the plot for irrigation of
plants. The project has increased fodder; they now have it for their animals. Before the project,
during times of no rainfall there was no water for irrigation and no water for fodder plants. Sees
program as very successful. Economic benefits: got employment from FES; Social: women were
given importance, now when there is a meeting women participate. Also the development of
institutions to make children go to school.
3. What are the current and long term needs for you and your family? What are the needs of the
community as a whole?
3a- education; medical facilities; water (wants tube wells); long term needs- proper education for
children to build a better future. Address water scarcity.
3b-wants greenery all over not just in the plot; water
issues (Opinion).
FES is helping them solve problems to a certain degree.
Water- After the FES project wanted a village well to bring water from the river to the villagers-
currently underway. Saved/pooled money to do so.
Education- institutions for people to send kids to school, especially girls. Up to class 5.
Women’s group to mobilize the community; women should form self-help groups. Save money
from work to add to village’s boundaries.
Appendix One 2
Date/Time: 6 June 2008 12 pm
Title: (two) community members of Sanjadi-ka-badia, from same family
No water before FES project; no greenery; no fodder; no medical facility- had to go to Chitamba
or to Bhilwara for serious injury. Education- but 5th class school developed by the government
around the same time as when FES came.
Check dams; contours; nadi (digging ditches to conserve water) which solved the water problem,
Plantation program brought greenery and fodder for animals; cattle trenches created a boundary
around the plot. Every evening one family goes and guards the plot, called the “ora system” .
They benefited from the programs. During the rainy season they close the plots and can open
them for irrigation of the plantation. Ecological benefits- now there are plants. Couldn’t see
plants before, now they are all around. Economic benefits- they received employment through
FES. Social benefits- brought unity to the village; a women’s Self-help group was formed to think
about future plans; they opened a bank account and can now get loans if someone needs it.
Currently- the family needs employment, food security; education for children
For the village- education-better school facility at least to the 8th class; medical facility;
veterinarian for animals.
issues (Opinion).
Future plans- they encourage students to study and go to school instead of working or doing
other things.
Would like to see cement or brick houses with furniture instead of clay. Proper infrastructure;
medical facilities; more wells for irrigation especially during times of scarcity. Electricity at the
water wells to pump water so they don’t have to travel far during the middle of the day like they
currently do.

Date/Time: 6 June 2008
Water and fodder, everything was linked to water and fodder; no employment
Appendix One 3
Check dams; contours; pits used as water harvesting structures built- solved water problem.
Plantation building helped solve fodder problem. After FES came many things improved and they
benefited a lot. No longer had to migrate far away for fodder any more. Economic benefits-
received employment. Social- created unity and women were given more importance through the
SHG and were involved in planning, FES helped them do this. Feels that the FES program was
very successful.
Water scarcity- he wants that to change so he can do more agriculture. Education for kids wants
to have up to 8th or even 10th class. Wants improved medical facilities in the village. Proper
infrastructure.
issues (Opinion).
He goes to work in his fields every day so his kids can go to school and get a good education. His
son has finished class 8 and he wants him to continue,
Better water facilities; education; medical facility; proper infrastructure.

Water; boundaries for private land; fodder
FES formed a women’s group, organized meetings, put in a plantation. The problem of fodder is
being solved. The water problem is being solved by the check dams and contours. The ditches that
were dug for water harvesting is also helping. The benefits of these actions- economic- got
employment and fodder for animals; social- unity among women; ecological- now there are
plants, there were not any before.
3a- wants electricity in her home
3b-medical facility; Education for children; wants a school up to age 10- can’t send girls to
Chitamba because it is not socially appropriate. Pipe lines for water; infrastructure- mainly
roads.
issues (Opinion).
She has filled out the requisite forms for electricity but has not yet received it. She is working
hard so her kids can go to school and not have to work.
Appendix One 4
School up to class 10; hospital. Wants a sarpanch in the village and a panchayat system in the
village.

Water, fodder, and no employment.
Feels that the program was successful. Fodder and water problems were solved. Fencing the 50
hectare grazing land plot really helped because they developed regulations on grazing (none
during the monsoon). Now FES is helping them on the remaining 1300 hectares of the village to
do soil and water conservation. Water in the wells has increased because of this.
Currently- More food grains; shelter; money for marriages and family functions; water. Future
needs-he has children and they need education to help them get better jobs and improve the lives
of the whole family and to benefit marriages.
The most necessary thing for the community is water for both drinking and irrigation. .
issues (Opinion).
Water- they are digging the well at the river but they are still not sure when it will be complete.
Have been talking to government officials to help solve the problem.
Education- he works hard to help his family and provide education. He feels as though he is able
to meet family’s needs.
Better infrastructure- roads and access to transportation; hospital in the village so they don’t
have to travel for medical care; higher grade level in the school.

Fodder, lack of plants led to migrating for livestock. Water.
Appendix One 5
Water- anicuts, contours, check dams helped bring more water into their wells. The plantation
program brought greenery and increased fodder. FES also provided awareness, e.g. to keep
fewer, more productive animals rather than more less productive ones. Also, the program gave
them employment and brought money into the village. Feels it was successful because it benefited
them a lot.
Employment for more money; shelter.
Village needs- electricity, water, a village doctor; and a higher level in the school.
issues (Opinion).
Family needs- she works with the NREGA to make money. Before she would work in Chitamba
for about 50 Rs a day, but with the NREGA she makes 70-100 Rs (depending on the type of
labor). It is difficult to survive because they don’t have a lot of land or money to sustain them.
Railway to Bhilwara.

Water- they wanted something to help them conserve more.
FES helped them construct ditches, check-dams, which helped fill their wells. This enabled them
to have more water for irrigation to grow grains. The project also gave them employment which
helped bring money into their homes. Feels that FES has really helped them sustain their lives.
Primarily employment and higher level of education in the school because it is difficult to send
the children to Chitamba.
Village needs- water and infrastructure to being water to them easily. Roads improvement.
Future needs- improve housing conditions so they can be more hygienic, Food and education.
issues (Opinion).
She works hard to provide for her family- cleaning to improve hygiene and working in the fields.
Water storage facilities and an improved environment for the village to make it more hygienic.
Proper infrastructure. Higher level in the school.
Appendix One 6
Water, fodder for cattle; boundaries around private land to prevent encroachment.
At the time he wanted a plantation for fodder and fruit trees.
Plantations- brought fodder. The trees planted around the CGL demarcated the boundary. Feels
that the program was successful.
Major needs are related to water because most of their problems are related to water scarcity.
Future needs- shelter, food, education; clothing.
issues (Opinion).
Could not answer this one.
The village needs water infrastructure- pipelines and tube wells- to help to village.

Water and ability to conserve it.
FES helped them dig ditches. Plantations helped them have more fodder. Employment brought
money to the family. Thinks the program was successful.
Water for irrigation to make agriculture better so they can have more food.
There isn’t any employment and the villagers have to migrate to find it.
(She had to leave so we were unable to finish asking her questions.
issues (Opinion). N/A
Appendix One 7
(Circumstances/Perspective/Opinion) N/A

No fodder for cattle. It was very difficult to manage.
The plantation program helped solve the fodder problem. FES also planted the type of trees that
their cattle needed. The increased fodder has increased milk production. The FES work has
helped them a lot.
Money; need employment opportunities. They often have to leave the village to get wages and
they must also grow food. They are managing but it is very difficult.
Village needs- organizations helped them, she would like them to keep coming to help them
develop and fulfill basic needs. She sees the organizations as being able to provide them with
employment- it’s very sad when people have to leave to look for work. Fodder and water. More
hand pumps for water.
issues (Opinion).
She works hard to meet their needs and sometimes has to travel. Doesn’t want her children to
suffer so she works hard.
More ditches and pumps for water to provide easier access to their houses.

Water and trees. Said that trees bring rain, rain helps trees grow so they have more fodder for
cattle, the rain then helps them do more agriculture.
They were able to make money and helped improve fodder availability. Project successful.
Appendix One 8
They have to go out to work during the day when it’s really hot. They need better education.
Village needs- employment. No one in the village is rich so they all have to work.
issues (Opinion).
She is helping to give her kids a good education. Receives food from the Mother/Infant care
center. Works for wages.
Better roads, and access to transportation, education, hygiene,

Water and fodder.
Plantation program helped grow fodder for livestock. Contours/ditches helped conserve water.
Check dams helped to fill wells. The CGL plots for grasses- a town meeting was held and they
agreed upon a rate to graze livestock in those plots larger animals had to pay more and the
money went to pay the family that guards at night in the ora system. Has been beneficial to them.
There is no longer encroachment on the CGL because of the boundaries. Social benefits- unity in
the village.
Basic needs for family are food, shelter and clothes.
Village needs- to re-dig the contours because they have filled up with soil. Need more water.
issues (Opinion).
She works hard as a daily laborer and with the livestock.
Village- houses to be made of concrete and brick; education for all of her children.

Fodder and water. Didn’t have good fodder for goats.
Appendix One 9
FES helped them solve the fodder problem through the plantation program. Contours, check
dams, helped with water conservation. Work was beneficial to them. They no longer have to
migrate to feed their livestock. The boundary helped them establish grazing schedules. More
water for irrigation now.
Family needs- employment, food, money, food security during the dry season- grain outputs are
less now that there is a drought.
Future needs- doesn’t know what will happen in the future.
Village needs-electricity; rise above below poverty line.
issues (Opinion).
Working in the NREGA program.
Better road infrastructure; better housing.

Had to migrate to feed livestock. Water/fodder
FES helped them build contours, check dams to help with water problem. Fodder problem solved.
Bunds created a boundary to reduce encroachment. Grazing regulations helping reduce
overgrazing and solving migration problems.
Family needs are food, shelter. Food security especially during the dry season- then they have to
work as wage laborers to earn money to buy food. Education for grandchildren. Better milk
production in livestock.
Village- water, electricity, hospital, hygiene.
issues (Opinion).
NREGA, but they have only been paid once after 7 weeks of work. Milk for consumption- not
enough to sell. Hard work.
Better roads; better housing.
Appendix One 10
Water and fodder. Had to migrate but this caused a lot of problems with the people who lived in
the areas to which they went.
Contours and check dams. Plantations with babul plants that serve as a boundary. Work
beneficial to them. The grazing regulations helping to provide fodder. Unity in the community;
they can now discuss village problems. There are now trees.
Current needs- doesn’t have any now.
issues (Opinion).
Works hard to help family meet their own needs.
Water.

Fodder and water
After FES came the village still looks after the plants that were planted in the plantation
program. Check dams and contours. Work has been beneficial to them. Grasses planted along the
contours are especially beneficial and nutritious for livestock.
Family needs- shelter, food, water, marriage, milk, employment.
Village needs- water, better livestock to increase milk production; better ag. Practices. Social
benefits- the community can now meet together to discuss issues. Unity. More greenery than
before.
issues (Opinion).
Appendix One 11
He works in the fields and as a laborer.
Better housing. Television and entertainment. Better roads.

Fodder and water.
Plantations helped bring fodder. Ditches and contours helped bring water for irrigation and
livestock. Beneficial. Water and fodder were improved. No longer have to migrate.
Food
issues (Opinion).
Thinks FES will provide them with what they need.
Up to God.

Fodder scarcity so had to migrate.
Contours, bunds, ditches. Plantations helped fodder problem. Successful, especially because of
the grazing regulations grasses planted on contours beneficial as well. Get fuelwood from dead
trees that were planted.
Food, shelter, grains, ration cards for public distribution centers.
Village needs- roads and water
Appendix One 12
issues (Opinion).
Works hard.
Health care, electricity, better houses, education.

Fodder resulting in migration.
FES helped them solve the fodder problem by planting Acacia spp., other species. Contours,
check dams for water conservation. Cattle trenches. Very successful. The regulations they made
have helped with the fodder problem as well. Social- village had a platform to make decisions
together. SHG for women. Unity. Economic- employment.
Water for agriculture.
Village- water infrastructure.
issues (Opinion).
Brings water from wells, work as laborers, and in agriculture.
Water infrastructure and electricity to pump water from the wells. Roads.

Fodder scarcity, water scarcity, had to migrate for fodder.
Plantations brought fodder. Ditches, contours, check dams helped with water conservation.
Boundary around the plot reduced encroachment. The grazing regulations helped preserve
fodder. Successful. Was not there during the whole program. She knows that there are now more
Appendix One 13
plants than before. Thinks the program brought unity in the village and collective decision-
making.
Family- food, shelter, clothes.
Village- more water and water infrastructure. Need more storage capacity.
issues (Opinion).
NREGA.
Nabhad watershed project. Project works on water infrastructure and storage.

Fodder, water. Migration for fodder.
To a certain degree these problems have been solved. Plantation and boundary development has
helped with fodder availability. The ora system also helps them protect the plot. The regulations
are very helpful. Check dams and ditches have helped the wells have more water. More foliage.
Employment received. SHG for women. Unity in the village.
Food, milk, grains, masala, fodder,
Village- employment, especially during the dry season. Doctor.
issues (Opinion).
Grow crops during the rainy season. Daily labor. Animal husbandry. See excess crops for money.
More forums for women, a town account to give loans when people need them and save in the
mean time. Higher education.
Appendix One 14
Interviews with FES Staff and Community Leaders
Interviewee Code: SLI1

Interviewers: Iva, Lindsey, Vaibhav
Date: 13 June 2008
Questions asked: actions
1. Describe the history of your efforts towards sustainability with this community (hopefully
this question will give a history of the actions taken-identify what the biggest issues of this
community were and how the project has addressed these issues {ecological, social, and
economic issues}). How were needs identified?
In 1997 they went to SKB to see what work was needed. Met with the panchayat members and
locals to get secondary data. They first met the village leaders and identified problems and
existing natural resources. After community discussions they felt they needed to work on natural
resource development and the best way to do this was through the development of a strong local
institution. Did PRAs in the village (need analysis, plot mapping). After the need analysis they
discussed the most important needs- especially degradation of natural resources, scarcity of
fuelwood and fodder, continued depletion of the groundwater table, top soil erosion, break in
nutrient cycles, retrograde succession process. After, they decided that these were the major
factors affecting the community’s ability to meet their livelihoods. FES felt that a conservation
agenda and institution development were the way to solve those problems.
Prior to the project the institutions in the village were mixed. There was a strong women
leader who acted as community sarpanch at the time. She pushed the women to act and to engage
in decision-making. At the same time there was an overall lack in participation in the village,
especially in relation to management of the common grazing lands. No institutions to guide
behavior on the land under the panchayat. They were only thinking about themselves in their use
of the land. There was a lack of accountability and no written by-laws for the community. There
were many child marriages and very few girls went to school. There was also a lot of money
wasted on funeral feasts which are costly.
The economic condition of the village was also very poor. The drought was more harsh
on alternate years, which resulted in crop failure and poor animal husbandry due to the resulting
lack of fodder. There were no employment opportunities in the village so there was a lot of
migration for wage labor and fodder grazing.
The process of FES work there- after the needs analysis phase was finished they did
household surveys, stayed in the village to build a rapport with the villagers and understand each
other. After one year they were ready to begin work. They organized the institution (?) built
capacity (through puppet shows, cultural programs that showed their connection with the land
and the necessity of managing natural resources well); developed a 5 year plan (which included
their needs and the work to meet those needs, budget, culpability, a monitoring system, money
distribution program for work) ; developed Management and Land Use Committee, Farmers
Induction Program, Women’s Orientation Program; technical trainings on account management
and biophysical processes. The panchayat was always involved in this process.
2. What is the level of community involvement in these efforts?

All community members were involved.
3. What evaluation techniques have been used to assess these efforts?
Village meetings every Monday in which they would monitor participation, monitoring of natural
resources, revision of by-laws when necessary, the transparency of the payment system, how
many girls were registered in the school, rate of child marriages, the amount of money spent on
feasts. Contributions to labor from community members. Level of participation in the decision
making process especially from poorer castes and women.
Appendix One 15
4. What are the challenges or difficulties encountered with these efforts (e.g. has one solution
led to another problem, etc.)?
• Initially there was a lack of trust, the villagers thought that FES would take their land.
But after they had seen work that FES did on other lands and established a relationship
there was trust.
• Small ruminant grazing in the initial phases of the project, villagers thought it would be
okay to graze them on the new growth but they had to establish rules against this. They
adopted rotational grazing methods and even owners with more animals were satisfied.
• Some people resisted a strong women’s participation in the public sphere. But slowly the
village accepted women’s participation.
5. What are the successes of these efforts (ecological, social, economic)?

Ecological successes- now in a positive succession. Food chain and nutrient flows restored in the
plots, more wildlife within the plot. Community is more aware of what a healthy landscape
should look like.
Economic- increase in household income through the direct employment. They are more able to
establish linkages between the environment and their livelihood. Increased fodder and
fuelwood.
Social- they have become a strong cohesive unit. Progressive leadership to make the village go in
the right direction. More awareness about child marriage and education for girls. More
sensitive to gender. Stop in human migration for fodder. Lower castes now more involved.
6. What are other issues that exist which are currently unaddressed, but may become a concern
in the future?
Health, hygiene, education, FES cannot be involved in these levels, other organizations must be.
7. What are future plans for your work in this community? Is there a specific plan that has been
developed?
Continue to provide support to the village institutions, to create links between the village, its
institutions, the panchayat, and other agencies. Another project in the watershed in which
SKB lies is being initiated. They have developed the work plan but are not providing the
money. Work on private lands to increase production and teach about impact of animal
husbandry. Analyzing strengths and weaknesses and available resources. Possibility of
adding horticultural species as an additional means of sustainable livelihoods, especially
during drought conditions.
8. Has the community developed a shared vision for the future?
N/A

Interviewers: Iva, Lindsey, Vaibhav
Date: 16 June 2008
History- FES approached the Chitamba village to ask them what work would be helpful for them
on the revenue wastelands within their area. They then met with SKB villagers to see what their
needs were because the main livelihood in the village is animal husbandry, most of their
problems were related to fodder, as well as low agriculture output. There was a lot of migration
Appendix One 16
due to fodder scarcity. They involved the community in meetings and to motivate them they took
them to see examples of work. Formed a Women’s Management Committee,
Kesi bai and the women in the group would go to other villages to share their experiences and
motivate other communities to work with FES.
Capacity building workshops on: how to cut plants for fodder, soil and water conservation.
The whole community was involved but the major role was played by the women’s group. The
women have been most active in mobilizing the whole community.
Monitoring of soil and water table; presence of more foliage and plants; village meetings and
group discussions; visits to the site to talk to villagers and see how work was progressing. People
could see the benefits of the work.
people were scared that FES would steal their land and people are dependent on the common
lands so they were very reluctant to begin work with FES. 2) during construction of the ditches,
bunds, people had a hard time with the techniques, especially that FES wanted them to measure
the size of the ditches. He feels this is because before they had been employed by the government
on projects but had no monitoring and no ownership. They had to show them that the size of the
ditches did matter and that the act of measuring the size was directly affecting them.
Social- unity in the village, collective decision making, girls are now sent to school, reduced
spending on death feasts and less drug use during the feasts. Fuel wood availability from the
dead trees.
Economic- they received direct employment and were able to use this money to pay off debts,
fodder helped reduce migration and the need to buy fodder, people could keep more livestock
because of the increase in fodder.
Ecological- more foliage, people had the realization that managing the environment is helpful to
them and are starting to apply the same concepts on their private lands. Groundwater recharge.
Less cutting, more efficient grazing.
in the future?
No proper links between the village and other development agencies. Need someone to speak for
the village. Water scarcity. No stable source of income. Little access to higher education,
especially for girls.
developed?
Nabhad project is the current plan, after this they will work on creating a dairy to have access to
markets in Bhilwara.
The dairy.

Questions: actions
Appendix One 17
No boundaries, soil erosion was prolific so all nutrients were lost and the soil quality was very
poor. Fodder scarcity. FES helped the community build boundaries, develop the ora system for
grazing regulations. The communities don’t have to take fodder from private lands or other
sources any longer. Before there was not any form of employment, and they would often have to
do wage labor in other areas.
Very involved. Meetings were held at least once a month and more frequently as problems arose.
Each year they determine the grazing regulations and make decisions based upon the fodder
availability that year.
They see less migration so they know that it has been successful.
Initially people thought their land would be stolen and they had to meet many times to show the
villagers that it was going to be a good project for them. It took a long time but eventually the
community accepted the project and wanted to do it.
Now there is fodder. The grazing regulations are very helpful. They can use more than one plot if
one gets too depleted. They have a platform to make decisions. Unity in the village. Economic
benefits- employment, and the money earned helped them develop.
in the future?
Water conservation, especially for private farms. Redig contours. Build anicuts.
developed?
Small hospital in Chitamba. A boundary for the village.
8. Has the community developed a shared vision for the future? N/A

Time/Date: 4 June 2008 11AM-1PM
Interviewers: Joshi, Lindsey, Iva
Questions asked: Actions taken
this question will identify what the biggest issues of this community are and how the project
has addressed these issues {ecological, social, and economic issues}). What were the issues
of the community prior to initiation of the project? How were needs identified?
The village saw work that was done in other villages on grazing lands and thought it would be a
good project for the area as well because the village was facing issues related to a lack of fodder;
migration to other areas to graze livestock, drought, scarcity of water, which also led to poor
agricultural outputs. People who depended on agriculture were also having to depend more on
wage labor and were migrating to do so.
Grazing is open in all plots. Plots are available to all villages in the panchayat but villagers
generally use the one closest to their own village. But in times of acute scarcity they will close
down a plot and rotate which plots can be grazed. (developing institutions)
He could not remember the prioritization process that was done in 1999.
Employment was targeted first. The Grazing Lands Development increased fodder production,
which he related to employment because people didn’t have to migrate or buy fodder from
outside. Water for agriculture also.
Appendix One 18
Actively participating in the work- paid by FES for fence and trench digging, plantation creation.
Very active participation. Started having meetings after day’s work finished so all people could
attend and didn’t have a reason not to go. Had some help from teachers and outsiders for
accounting, but they by and large managed it all. At first women did not participate and then they
were allowed to sit on the Hatai. Now it is the only village in the FES project area where women
are allowed to sit. (I spoke with Goshi about this later- this is due to one of the villages
sarpaunchs being a very strong leader and was female)
He visits all sites weekly, gets reports from panchayat members, holds meetings to discuss the
projects. He has created capacity with the other villagers so they know exactly what he does as
the sarpaunch and so he is not the only person with authority; established good relationships, has
been sarpaunch for 25 years unopposed.
Some resistance was met at the beginning of the project because people who owned private lands
near the common grazing lands thought they would be able to move into those lands and lay a
claim to them for their own purposes. People also thought that the NGO (not FES, but another
NGO started the work) may try to sell the land. There were a lot of rumors about what was going
on. They had a meeting to clarify what they wanted to do. This led to an increased interest in the
project from about 10 people to more than 40. When people were ready to start the plot in
Chitamba the issue was protection of the area. Decided to have regulations- person cutting
fodder for animals would give 50% to the panchayat and keep the other 50%. The money
generated by this was used to hire a watchman. People owning private lands adjacent to the plot
were not convinced, he had to put his foot down and the watchman had to guard day and night
until the opponent groups accepted that the plot was going to stay.
2nd conflict in Sanjadi-ka-badia. Village accused (by a village headman in Chitamba) of
corruption- getting more money than they worked for. Held a village meeting; about 70 women
showed up, which was a lot more than before. Women took the man out to the plot to measure the
trenches dug, a FES staff member tried to mitigate but the women told him that they didn’t need
his help. They resolved the matter themselves and showed that they actually did more work than
they were paid for.
Encroachment on plots from other villages was a problem, resolved this issue by meeting with
villages. Had to bring in revenue officials to solve the conflict and establish the village
boundaries. The open discussion with other villagers and the government helped solve the
conflict.
5. What are the successes of these efforts?
The initial conflicts proved to be a unifying process for the community. The conflicts were
internal and no external help was needed to mitigate the problems. They were able to solve the
conflicts on their own, which they are very proud of doing. They were able to move similar work
to the other grazing lands within the panchayat’s jurisdiction. People accepted the project as
beneficial and they were able to get buy in from the community. The plot is a source of
groundwater recharge. The water levels in the wells have risen even though they have received
less rainfall than before. Social benefits- less migration to other areas for grazing and wage
labor seeking; unity in the villages; ability to make collective decisions. Education of girls-big
problem before because people didn’t see the benefit of educating girls. But, when women from
FES or other areas would come, he would say, look at these women, they are here because they
are educated. People began to see that it was a good thing and started sending girls to school;
most finish up to 2nd class and 10-20% move on to higher levels. In the Hatai- previsouly women
and lowere castes were not able to sit on the Hatai to make village decisions, but now in Sanjadi-
ka-badia women do participate in village decision-making. Ecological- visible benefits- before
the project there were no trees or grasses- now there are. Economic- do not have to buy trees and
Appendix One 19
fodder from outside the village for both small and large animals. Milk production is higher
because the animals get more nutritious fodder when they graze on greens rather than in the
stall. They don’t know about the quality of the milk because they don’t have a dairy cooperative.
Conflict resolution created unity.
6. What are other issues that exist that are currently unaddressed, but may become a concern in
the future?
Water is the main problem. Would like a dam to bring water to the villagers.
7. What are future plans for your work in this community?
More water conservation, improve current structures, continue work in plots.

Interviewers: Iva, Lindsey; FES field staff
this question will identify what the biggest issues of this community are and how the project
has addressed these issues {ecological, social, and economic issues}). What were the issues
of the community prior to initiation of the project? How were needs identified?
The main problem was lack of fodder which led to migration to far off places (e.g. Madhya
Pradesh). The second problem was the scarcity of water. FES came to the village to motivate
them through various meetings to show that the work would aid in the village’s development.
Encroachment on the commons was also a problem.
Very involved. Community meetings held to guide actions.
Through community meetings and the Federation Pariyarnjanchtna manch (People’s
environmental awareness federation) meetings (which is also helping other villages to start
similar work). Through these meetings they could see that the community was appreciative and
that the actions taken were successful.
Initially the community thought that FES was trying to take their land, so FES took them on a
field trip to Ajmer to see the work they’d done there and talk to villagers; after this they were
motivated to have FES help them.
Encroachment on the commons was also an issue but the women’s group approached the tehsil
leader to demarcate the boundaries and this stopped the encroachment.
Ecological- before there weren’t any plants; the plantation brought greenery.
Social- women were allowed to sit on the Hatai, as were all castes. The community came together
to have meetings.
Economic- FES employed the community members for the work. Fodder increased which made
milk production rise. Agriculture outputs also rose because there was more water in the wells for
irrigation.
Received training from FES on animal husbandry- e.g. keep less animals but of better breeds that
are more productive.
in the future?
Better education facilities and improve animal husbandry- keeping better breeds may help them
economically because they will produce more milk. Put more manure on fields to increase
agriculture outputs; proper medical facilities.
Appendix One 20
developed?
The well is the biggest plan, also want to start work on private lands to improve them.
Didn’t really understand this question- the shared vision is the well.

Questions: actions
No trees or fodder. People had to migrate. They created boundaries around the plot and planted
grasses. They keep the plots closed during the monsoon season. Encroachment on lands also a
problem. They had meetings and developed societies to make decisions. Grazing regulations were
put into place, decide grazing rates, decide whether an area should be closed after livestock are
in it, and guards protect the plots.
The communities form societies. One person from each caste is chosen and then that person
chooses 2-3 more people to join the committee. Decisions are made collectively in these groups.
Through the level of community participation in the meetings they can tell how the project is
going. They do a free work day every 7 days, which shows that they are committed to the project
even if they don’t get wages for that day.
Difficulties in convincing the community that they would not steal the land from them.
Different ways of thinking, they had to work very hard to build confidence and trust.
No longer encroached.
Ecological- Now there is foliage where there was not before. Groundwater levels have been
raised. Trees have been planted. Described the hydrology cycle and feels that there is more rain
now that there are more trees.
Social-the villages are interacting to create mutual agreements about development.
Economic- employment has helped them to move forward and helped reduce poverty and improve
living standards.
in the future?
Need to work on private lands to help farmers improve water retention.
developed?
The Nabhad project, they have formed a larger society from all of the villages within the
panchayat to deal with the watershed development project. Within the project they will do
boundaries and contours, check dams, SHGs, and plantations.
16 % of the work will be done by in-kind contributions. After this project they will work on
infrastructure development especially roads.
A dairy to bring employment and give loans and other support to the villages.
Appendix One 21
The watershed project.
Appendix One 22
Results Categorized by Objective-Sanjadi-ka-badia
Objective 2: Identify the needs of each community prior to initiation of the project.
The interviewees answered the question in terms of needs, but also understood the
term “needs” as issues that affected the community as a whole.
Propositions
Community Member Interviews (22 interviews, 23 interviewees)

Need or Issue Additional responses Number of Interview Codes
Responses
“fodder…(one Researcher note-most 20/22 SCI1 ; SCI2 ; SCI3 ;
of)largest respondents mentioned SCI4 ; SCI5 ; SCI6 ;
issue(s)” “fodder” or “lack of SCI7 ; SCI9 ; SCI11 ;
(scarcity) fodder” directly. SCI12- SCI12 ; SCI13 ; SCI14 ;
“no trees…(no rain, no SCI15 ; SCI16 ; SCI17 ;
fodder)” SCI18 ; SCI19 ; SCI20 ;
SCI21 ; SCI22
“water …(one Researcher note- most 19/22 SCI1 ; SCI2 ; SCI3 ;
of)largest respondents mentioned SCI4 ; SCI5 ; SCI6 ;
issue(s)” “water” or “lack of SCI7 ; SCI8 ; SCI9 ;
(scarcity) water” SCI10 ; SCI12 ; SCI13 ;
SCI14 ; SCI15 ; SCI16 ;
SCI17 ; SCI18 ; SCI21 ;
SCI22
“lack of plants “had to migrate to feed 7/22 SCI7 ; SCI15 ; SCI16 ;
(fodder) led to livestock”; “had to SCI19 ; SCI20 ; SCI21 ;
migrating for migrate”; “fodder SCI22 (Researcher note-
livestock” scarcity so had to all respondents from
migrate”; “fodder Balai caste)
resulting in migration”;
“had to migrate for
fodder”; “migration for
fodder”
“no ” 2/22 SCI4; SCI6
employment”
“(no) “boundaries around 2/22 SCI5; SCI9
boundaries for private land to prevent
private land” encroachment”
“water and “wanted something to 2/22 SCI10; SCI8
ability to help them conserve
conserve it” more”
“encroachment” 1/22 SCI1
(on CGL)
Appendix One 23
“(lack of) 1/22 SCI1
water…related
to low
productivity in
agriculture”
“no medical 1/22 SCI3
facility”
“no greenery” “(no) trees” 2/22 SCI3: SCI12
“trees bring rain 1/22 SCI12
…rain helps..do
more
agriculture”
(explaining
break in water
cycling)
“migrate…caus 1/22 SCI16
ed a lot of
problems with
the people who
lived in the
areas to which
they went”
“everything was 1/22 SCI4
linked to fodder
and water”
Community Leader and FES Staff Interviews (6 interviews, 6 interviewees)

Need or Issue Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“degradation of natural 1/6 SLI1
resources”
“scarcity of fuelwood” 1/6 SLI1
“scarcity of…fodder” “main livelihood…is 6/6 SLI1; SLI2;
animal husbandry, most SLI3; SLI4;
of problems related to SLI5; SLI6
fodder”; “fodder
scarcity”; “lack of
fodder”; “main problem
was lack of fodder”; “no
trees or fodder”
“continued depletion of 1/6 SLI1
groundwater table”
“top soil erosion” “soil erosion prolific so 2/6 SLI1; SLI3
all nutrients were lost
and & the soil quality
was very poor”
Appendix One 24
Responses Codes
“break in nutrient “soil erosion prolific so 2/6 SLI1; SLI3
cycles” all nutrients were lost
and & the soil quality
was very poor”
“retrograde succession” 1/6 SLI1
“(environmental 1/6 SLI1
degradation) affecting
the community’s
inability to meet
livelihoods”
“lack in participation in 1/6 SLI1
village”
“no institutions to guide 1/6 SLI1
behavior on (CGL)”
“lack of accountability” 1/6 SLI1
“no written by-laws” 1/6 SLI1
“few girls went to 1/6 SLI1
school”
“many child marriages” 1/6 SLI1
“lot of money wasted 1/6 SLI1
on funeral feasts”
“economic 1/6 SLI1
condition…poor”
“droughts” “drought, scarcity of 3/6 SLI1; SLI4;
water” SLI5
“droughts…resulted in “drought, scarcity of 3/6 SLI1; SLI4;
crop failure” water…let to poor SLI5
agricultural output”;
“scarcity of water”
“droughts…resulted in 1/6 SLI1
poor animal husbandry
due to resulting lack of
fodder”
“no employment… so “not any form of 2/6 SLI1; SLI3;
there was a lot of employment…have to
migration for wage wage labor in other
labor” areas”;
“low agriculture “poor agricultural 2/6 SLI2; SLI4
output” output”
“no boundaries” “encroachment on the 3/6 SLI3; SLI5;
commons”; SLI6
“encroachment on lands”
Appendix One 25
Responses Codes
“no employment… so “lot of migration due to 5/6 SLI1; SLI2;
there was a lot of fodder scarcity”; SLI4; SLI5;
migration for…fodder “migration to other areas SLI6
grazing” to graze livestock”; “lack
of fodder…led to
migration to far off
places”; “no trees or
fodder.people had to
migrate”
“people who depended 1/6 SLI4
on agriculture were also
having to depend more
on wage labor and were
migrating to do so”
Categorization of Objective Two Results

The propositions mentioned in the tables above are needs the community had or
issues they were facing prior to the FES project. The propositions were put into one or
more of three categories depending on whether the proposition was related to ecological,
economic or social factors. The data were then placed into subcategories depending on
how the propositions were related to each other.
1.Ecological
The needs or issues that fall under the category of ecological factors were put into
two main themes: degradation of natural resources and drought. These themes are related
to anthropogenic factors (degradation of natural resources) and natural environmental
factors (drought).
Degradation of natural resources

• “break in nutrient cycles”
• “no greenery”
o “scarcity of fuelwood”
o “scarcity of fodder”
o “trees bring rain …rain helps…do more agriculture” (explaining break in
water cycling)
o “continued depletion of groundwater table”
o “topsoil erosion”
o “retrograde succession”
o “low agricultural output”
• “Droughts and water scarcity”
o “droughts…resulted in crop failure”
o “continued depletion of groundwater table”
o “water and ability to conserve it”
Appendix One 26
o “trees bring rain …rain helps…do more agriculture” (explaining break in
water cycling)
Many of the problems associated with the community’s issues and needs were
directly related to the degraded condition of the surrounding natural resources. SKB
community members depend directly on natural resources for subsistence and livelihood
activities, comprised almost solely of agriculture and animal husbandry, so they were
impacted greatly by the reduced capacity of the land to provide ecosystem services. This
is evident from the interviews because scarcity of fodder and water were commonly cited
as major issues for the entire community. Interviews with FES staff highlight some of
the more technical forms of environmental degradation that impacted the community’s
ability to meet their needs, such as top-soil erosion, retrograde succession, breaks in
nutrient cycling and groundwater depletion.
The underlying reasons for natural resource degradation are both anthropogenic
and natural and are directly connected. The water scarcity issue is an example of this.
Situated in a semi-arid dryland, SKB village is at a natural climactic disadvantage in
terms of water availability, with severe droughts occurring every couple of years.
However, human-caused environmental degradation (primarily the removal of vegetation
caused by agriculture, overgrazing of fodder and fuelwood extraction) significantly
exacerbated the problem of water scarcity and resulted in desertification and less recharge
to the aquifer through compacted, bare soil. Groundwater is the primary source of water
for household and agricultural use in the community, so as the aquifer was depleted,
wells became increasingly less productive, especially during the dry season. Water
scarcity served as a compounding factor towards fodder scarcity, which affected livestock
health and production. Low outputs of agricultural plots is also an effect of water
scarcity and lack of soil conservation measures. In sum, processes of environmental
degradation resulted in reducing the productivity of the land in numerous ways.
2.Economic Factors
The economic condition of the community was another issue/need of the
community prior to the FES project. The propositions were placed into three categories:
environmental factors that impacted the economic activities of animal husbandry and
agriculture; lack of employment opportunities; and mismanagement of money.
• Environmental Factors that Impacted Economic Activities [“(environmental
degradation) affecting the community’s inability to meet livelihoods”]
o “everything was linked to fodder and water”
o Animal Husbandry
“lack of fodder”
• Lack of fodder leading to migration
• “migrate…caused a lot of problems with the people who lived in
the areas to which they went”
• “lack of plants (fodder) led to migrating for livestock”
“droughts…resulted in poor animal husbandry due to resulting lack of
fodder”
“lack of water”
“water and ability to conserve it”
o Agriculture
Appendix One 27
“people who depended on agriculture were also having to depend more on
wage labor and were migrating to do so”
“droughts…resulted in crop failure”
“(lack of) water…related to low productivity in agriculture”
“water and ability to conserve it”
“top soil erosion”
“break in nutrient cycles”
“low agriculture output”
• “economic condition…poor”
• Lack of employment opportunities [“no employment”]
o “no employment… so there was a lot of migration for…fodder grazing”
o “no employment… so there was a lot of migration for wage labor”
• Mismanagement of Money
o “lot of money wasted on funeral feasts”
As mentioned above, the primary economic activities in the community are

agriculture and animal husbandry. The reduced benefits of these activities due to
environmental degradation forced community members to look for other ways to meet
their needs. The fact that no other employment opportunities existed in the community
made it difficult for SKB community members to secure money to buy food or fodder, so
they had to go outside of the immediate area in search of work, which was not always
available and not necessarily lucrative enough to provide them with financial security.
Many men were forced to migrate with livestock in search of fodder since it was
unavailable in SKB area. Migration for work or for fodder caused social and economic
problems at home as well as in the areas where they were forced to migrate and most
likely negatively impacted the environments in those regions as well. A lot of money
was also spent on feasts for funerals, which was viewed by some respondents as wasteful.
3.Social Factors
Social issues that affected community members’ ability to meet needs can be
categorized into two themes: a lack of institutions to regulate and guide behavior; and a
lack of social services and infrastructure.
• Lack of Institutions to Regulate and Guide Behavior
o “(no) boundaries for private land”
o “no boundaries” (encroachment on CGL)
o “no institutions to guide behavior on (CGL)”
o “many child marriages”
o “few girls went to school”
o “lack of participation in village”
o “no written by-laws”
o “lack of accountability”
• Lack of Social Services and Infrastructure
o “no medical facility”
o “water and ability to conserve it”
Appendix One 28
The data show that there were also sociopolitical issues associated with SKB’s
issues. A lack of local institutions, much less accepted written by-laws, to govern
behavior resulted in encroachment on CGL and overgrazing of fodder resources.
Community members were not involved in making decisions that affected their ability to
earn sustainable livelihoods and there was a lack of accountability for those who did
participate. Other social factors indicate misdistribution of social equity, such as the fact
that few girls were attending school and that child marriages were common. SKB’s
access to social services and infrastructure was also limited, especially related to health
care and water infrastructure.
Discussion of Objective Two Results

Documents collected from FES and the 1999 Needs Analysis confirm what the
interviewees mentioned. In the Needs Analysis, the community cited the following as
needs: water (for drinking, irrigation, and livestock); agriculture (low productivity);
animal husbandry (poor quality animals, fodder scarcity); education; health and health
facilities; employment opportunities; drought; and information on government schemes.
A paper written by FES also indicate degradation of the CGL, lack of participation of
women and lower castes and lack of leadership as issues affecting the needs of SKB
(Joshie, et al., 2008). The researcher also witnessed the poor economic condition, lack of
social services and extremely harsh environmental conditions of the area.
Prior to the initiation of the FES sustainable livelihoods and ecological restoration
project, citizens of SKB had a very difficult time meeting their daily basic needs. The
primary causes of this situation were degradation of natural resources used for livelihoods
and subsistence, a poor economic state, lack of institutions and lack of social services and
infrastructure. All of these forces are deeply connected, especially the relationship
between environmental health and livelihoods. Lack of regulation made it easy for
environmental degradation to occur, specifically overgrazing, which in turn affected
water and fodder quantity and subsequently reduced their ability to meet livelihoods.
Objective Three: Identify what needs were prioritized by each community.
Propositions
Community Leader and FES Staff Interviews

Prioritized Need Additional Number of Interview Codes
Responses Responses
“(address” major factors 1/6 SLI1
affecting the community’s
abilities to meet their
livelihoods”
“felt they needed to work on 1/6 SLI1
natural resource
development”
“employment was targeted 1/6 SLI4
first”
Appendix One 29
Prioritized Need Additional Number of Interview Codes
Responses Responses
“fodder” (scarcity) 1/6 SLI4
“water” 1/6 SLI4
Objective Three Narrative of Results

The interviews with community leaders and FES show that ability to secure
livelihood, development of natural resources, employment, fodder production and water
retention were the needs prioritized in the FES project.
Discussion of Objective Three

In 1999 FES conducted a needs analysis with SKB community members that
prioritized the following as important needs and issues that needed to be to be addressed:
water (quantity and infrastructure); low agricultural outputs; poor animal husbandry
techniques; lack of education opportunities; fodder scarcity; lack of medical facilities;
lack of employment opportunities; droughts; and the need for more information on
government schemes. It is not within the scope of FES’ work to address all of these
issues, so it focused the project on work it was prepared to do. Given the expertise of
FES in ecological restoration and institution development, the project was primarily
focused on meeting needs by reinforcing the panchayat institution, developing local
informal institutions within SKB, increasing fodder production and restoring water
conservation (Joshie et al., Undated). In the interviews respondents mentioned the
following as prioritized needs in the project: issues related to the community’s ability to
meet needs, natural resource development, employment, fodder and water.
Objective Four: Describe what planning and work initiatives have been implemented to
meet the prioritized needs by each community.
Propositions

Action Additional Responses Number Interview Codes
of
Responses
“put in SCI2-“plantation program within 18/22 SCI1; SCI2; SCI3;
plantations” the plot”; “plantation program”; SCI4; SCI5; SCI7;
“plantation building”; “put in a SCI9; SCI10;
plantation”; “plantation SCI11; SCI13;
program”; “plantations” ; ”; SCI14; SCI16 ;
“plantation program”; ”; ”; ”; SCI17 ; SCI18;
“plantations”; ”; “planting SCI19 ; SCI20 ;
Acacia, other species”; SCI21 ;SCI22
“plantations”;
“plantation…development”
Appendix One 30
of
Responses
“fencing of “cattle trenches created 11/22 SCI1; SCI3; SCI6;
(CGL) area to boundary around the plot”; SCI 9; SCI13;
stop “fencing the 50 hectare land SCI14; SCI15;
encroachment” plot”; “trees planted around SCI16; SCI20;
CGL demarcated the boundary”; SCI21; SCI22
“boundary”; “created a boundary
to reduce encroachment”; “cattle
trenches”; “boundary around
plot”; “boundary development”
“check dams” Researcher note- all respondents 15/22 SCI1 ; SCI2 ;
mentioned same words, “check SCI3 ; SCI4 ;
dams” SCI5 ; SCI7 ;
SCI8 ; SCI13 ;
SCI14 ; SCI15 ;
SCI16 ; SCI17 ;
SCI20 ; SCI21 ;
SCI22
“contours within ”; “nadi(ditches to conserve 17/22 SCI2 ; SCI3 ;
the plot” water); “contours…pits”; SCI4 ; SCI5 ;
“contours”; “anicuts, contours”; SCI7 ; SCI8 ;
“FES helped them construct SCI10 ; SCI13 ;
ditches”; “dig ditches”; SCI14 ; SCI15 ;
“contours, ditches”; “contours”; SCI16 ; SCI18 ;
”; ”; “ditches and contours”; SCI19 ; SCI20 ;
“contours, bunds, ditches”; SCI21, SCI22
“contours”; “ditches, contours”;
“ditches”
“initiative that all “institutions for people to send 2/22 SCI1 ; SCI2
kids go to kids to school, especially girls”
school…penalty”
“ora system (for “money went to pay the family 3/22 SCI3; SCI13;
guarding CGL)” that guards at night in the ora SCI22
system”; “ora system…protects
plot”
“(rotational “developed regulations on 10/22 SCI3 ; SCI6 ;
grazing) during grazing”; “agreed upon a rate to SCI13 ; SCI14 ;
the rainy season graze livestock in those plots”; SCI15 ; SCI16 ;
they close the “grazing schedules”; “grazing SCI19 ; SCI20 ;
plots” regulations”; ”; ”; “the SCI21 ; SCI22
regulations”; “grazing
regulations”; “regulations”
Appendix One 31
of
Responses
“a women’s self- “self-help group”; “formed a 5/22 SCI3 ; SCI4 ;
help group was women’s group”; “self-help SCI5 ; SCI20 ;
formed” group from women”; ” SCI22
“opened a bank 1/22 SCI3
account (for
community)”
“organized “town meeting”; “discuss village 6/22 SCI5 ; SCI13 ;
meetings” problems”; SCI16 ; SCI17 ;
“community…discuss issues”; SCI20 ; SCI21
“platform to make decisions
together”; “collective decision-
making”
“FES also 1/22 SCI7
provided
awareness
(information)”
“program gave “employment” ; ”; ”; 5/22 SCI7 ; SCI8 ;
employment” “employment received” SCI10 ;
SCI20 ;SCI22
Community Leaders and FES Staff Interviews (6 interviews, 6 participants)

Action Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“see what work was 1/6 SLI1
needed”
“met with the “approached the Chitamba 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
panchayat members village”; “(sarpanch’s SLI4
and locals” quotes);
“identified problems” “FES approached…to ask 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
them what work would be SLI4
helpful”;
“fodder…migration…water”
“identified…existing 1/6 SLI1
natural resources”
“community “involved the community in 5/6 SLI1; SLI2;
discussions” meetings”; “started having SLI4; SLI5;
meeting’s after day’s work”; SLI6
“various meetings”;
“meetings”
“did PRAs…needs 1/6 SLI1
analysis”
“discussed most 1/6 SLI1
important needs”
Appendix One 32
“conservation agenda” 1/6 SLI1
“institution “regulations” 2/6 SLI1; SLI4
development”
“did household 1/6 SLI1
surveys”
“stayed in the village “took them to see examples 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
to build rapport with of work”; “FES took them SLI5
villagers” on a field trip to Ajmer to
see work (trust building)”
“after one year ready to 1/6 SLI1
begin work”
“built capacity “capacity building 4/6 SLI1; SLI2;
(through puppet shows, workshops how to cut plants SLI4; SLI5
cultural programs, that for fodder, soil and water
showed their conservation”; “some help
connection with the from teachers and outside
land)”; “technical consultants”; “received
trainings on accounting training from FES on animal
and biophysical husbandry”
processes”
“developed a 5 year 1/6 SLI1
plan (which included
their needs and work to
meet those needs,
budget, culpability, a
monitoring system,
money distribution
program for work)”
“developed “Women’s Management 4/6 SLI1; SLI2;
(committees) Committee”; “Federation”; SLI5; SLI6
Management and Land “communities form
Use Committee, societies…one person from
Farmers Induction each caste is chosen and
Program, Women’s then that person chooses 2-3
Orientation Program)” more people to join
committees”
“panchayat always 1/6 SLI1
involved”
“FES helped “protection of the area”; 3/6 SLI3; SLI4;
community build “created boundaries around SLI6
boundaries” the plot”
“develop the ora “regulations…cutting 3/6 SLI3; SLI4;
system for grazing” fodder”; SLI6
“women’s participate “women…community came 2/6 SLI4; SLI5
in village decision- together to have meetings”
making”
Appendix One 33
“fodder production” “plantation”; “planted 3/6 SLI4, SLI5;
grasses” SLI6
“trenches” 1/6 SLI4
Categorization of Propositions
• Engaging the community and planning
o “after one year ready to begin work”
o “discussed most important needs”
“did household surveys”
“did PRAs…needs analysis”
“identified problems”
“see what work was needed”
o “stayed in the village to build rapport with villagers”
o “community discussions”
“panchayat always involved”
“met with the panchayat members and locals”
“organized meetings”
o “developed (committees)”
“a women’s self-help group was formed”
o developed a 5 year plan”
“conservation agenda”
o “built capacity”
“FES also provided awareness (information)”
o “program gave employment”
o “opened a bank account (for community)”
• Natural resource development
o “identified…existing natural resources”
o Water and soil conservation
“check dams”
“trenches”
“contours within the plot”
o “plantations”
“(rotational grazing) during the rainy season they close the plots”
“fodder production”
“ora system (for guarding CGL)”
o “FES helped community build boundaries”
“fencing of (CGL) area to stop encroachment”
• “Institution development”
o “women’s participate in village decision-making”
o “develop the ora system for grazing”
o “initiative that all kids go to school…penalty”
Objective Four Narrative of Results

In order to address the prioritized needs (livelihoods and employment, natural
resource development, fodder production and water retention) of the SKB community,
FES initiated programs related to natural resource restoration and development of
Appendix One 34
institutions to regulate behavior on the CLG plot and within the community. All of the
actions taken were decided upon in community meetings and required significant
planning and commitment by the community to do the work. The work can be
categorized into the following: engaging the community and planning, natural resource
development and institution development.
1.Engaging the Community and Planning

Beginning work with SKB took significant planning and patience on behalf of
FES. There was initial mistrust of an outside organization, primarily that FES would take
control over the CGL plot they depend upon for their livestock. It took a while to build
rapport with the villagers and physical work did not begin until a year after the initial
contact. The first year was spent deciding what work was needed to meet the villagers’
needs (e.g., conducting the 1999 Needs Analysis and Participatory Rural Appraisals to
assess and map resources); having community meetings; meeting with leaders of the
Chitamba panchayat; developing committees, including a women’s management
committee that acted like a self-help group; coming up with a conservation agenda and a
five-year work plan; and building knowledge and capacity of the community members,
especially in management of the CGL.
2.Natural Resource Development

FES paid villagers to do work on the CGL for fodder production, water retention
and soil conservation (interviews and Joshie et al., 2008). FES brought in saplings for
plantation development, which were planted and maintained by the community. Check
dams, ditches and contours were constructed to conserve water and soil. A living fence
boundary was constructed around the CGL plot to clearly demarcate its area and provide
an easier way to guard it against encroachment from other communities as well as to
deter misuse by SKB community members. Capacity building workshops to manage
natural resources were also conducted, as well as development of knowledge and
understanding of ecological processes, such as rain cycles. These workshops were
conducted using culturally appropriate methods, such as puppet shows (Researcher
observation).
3.Institution Development
The development of institutions to guide behavior was a big part of FES’s
interaction with SKB. The panchayat system of local governance was a conduit for
developing institutions and FES acted within this existing structure to both reinforce it
and expand its scope. Protecting the CGL was a crucial element because it is one of the
main sources of livelihood for the community. SKB adopted a series of rotational
grazing schedules that coincided with natural cycles, namely the monsoon season, to
reduce or eliminate overgrazing on the CGL plot. Each year the schedule is reviewed
based upon the state of the plot and may be altered if the community decides that it needs
to have less grazing or if more grazing may be permitted. Each family pays a fee
depending on the size of the livestock (e.g., buffalo and cattle grazing is more costly than
sheep or goats, Researcher observation) and the size of the herd, which was decided by
the community. The money earned goes into the “ora system”, which is another
institution created to protect the CGL. The ora system is where one family from the
Appendix One 35
community guards the plot for one week, ensuring that there is not encroachment, and is
paid for their time. After a week another family takes over, so that responsibility is
assigned to each family in the community.
Improving the stance of women was also targeted in the development of
institutions, primarily by making sure that women had a place in decision-making.
Women were previously not allowed to sit on the Hatai, the sacred community space for
decision-making, but SKB went against cultural tradition and allowed women to sit on
the Hatai, as well as allowing lower castes to sit. Incentives for education of both sexes
was another institution developed which has empowered women and lower castes. Girls’
enrollment in school was very low, so the village decided to incur fines to families that
did not send their kids to school. The fine for not sending girls is about 1200 rupees and
the fine for not sending boys is lower (they are required to buy a bag of grain to feed the
pigeons, which are highly regarded by the community).
Discussion of Objective Four Results

All of these activities were done with the majority of the community participating
in the decision-making and implementation of the process. It is clear that FES
empowered the community to develop itself according to its own culture. There was a
focus on engaging women and lower castes, which were previously uninvolved in
community decisions (Joshie et al., 2008). This served to increase the amount of
participation and create a more holistic program of work that did benefited the majority
of the community, including the marginal groups.
One of the major aspects of the FES project that was mentioned, though with little
depth, in the interviews and was documented in Joshie et al., (2008) was the development
of informal institutions within the community. This is important to mention because of
the governmental structure that places SKB under the jurisdiction of the Chitamba
panchayat, which is responsible for four other villages, and could not necessarily manage
the CGL by itself. FES worked with the panchayat to form groups, Charagah Vikas
Samitis (CVS), that had the authority and support of the panchayat to manage the CGL.
The panchayat’s acceptance of the CVS allowed the SKB villagers autonomy to make
decisions about their CGL while allowing the panchayat to oversee work to ensure
proper management to reduce overgrazing and encroachment. Other CVS were formed
to manage additional issues, and a federation of CVS was created to report to the
panchayat. The federation proved a good forum to discuss village issues and bring them
to the panchayat if they could not be resolved within the community.
Objective Five: Determine if and how the initiatives taken by each community meet the
Propositions
These data were categorized using the prioritized needs from Objective 3
(livelihoods and employment, natural resource development, fodder production and water
retention). Any other data related to benefits, needs met, or achievements were placed
under Objective 6a.
Appendix One 36
Prioritized Need/Issue Additional Responses Number of Interview
Need Addressed Responses Code
Water “wells were “before the project, during 15/22 SCI1; SCI2;
Retention recharged” times of no rainfall there was SCI3; SCI4;
no water for irrigation and no SCI5 ; SCI6 ;
water for fodder plants”; SCI7 ; SCI8 ;
“check dams, contours, SCI13 ;
nadi…solved water problem”; SCI14 ;
“solved water problem”; SCI15 ;
“water problem being solved”; SCI18 ;
“water problems solved”; SCI20 ;
“helped bring more water into SCI21 ;
their wells”; “helped fill their SCI22
wells”; “helped conserve
water”; “helped with water
conservation”; “help with
water problem”; “ditches and
contours helped bring water”
“more water “more water for irrigation 2/22 SCI8; SCI14
for now”
irrigation to
grow
grains”
Fodder “got…leave “project has increased fodder”; 21/22 SCI1;SCI2;
Production s for goats “brought greenery & fodder SCI3;SCI4;
& sheep & for animals”; “helped solve SCI5;
fodder for fodder problem”; “problem of SCI6;SCI7;
large fodder is being solved”; SCI9; SCI10;
animals” “fodder…problems were SCI11; SCI12
solved”; “increased fodder”; SCI13 ;
“plantations brought fodder”; SCI14 ;
“more fodder”; “helped solve SCI15 ;
the fodder problem”; “helped SCI16 ;
improve fodder availability”; SCI17 ;
“helped grow fodder”; “helped SCI18 ;
solve fodder problem”; “fodder SCI19 ;
problem solved”; “grazing SCI20 ;
regulations helping to provide SCI21 ;
fodder”; “grasses…especially SCI22
beneficial”; “helped bring
fodder”; ”; ”; “helped preserve
fodder”; “helped with fodder
availability”
Appendix One 37
“land no “guards the plot”; “no longer 7/22 SCI1 ; SCI3 ;
longer encroachment on the CGL”; SCI13 ;
encroached” “reduce encroachment”; SCI15 ;
“grazing regulations”; SCI19; SCI20
“regulations have helped with ; SCI22
the fodder problem”; “grazing
regulations”; “regulations very
helpful”
“fencing… “trees planted around CGL 6/22 SCI6; SCI9;
has demarcated the boundary”; SCI13;
helped… “boundaries”; “bunds”; “babul SCI15;
developed plants serve as a boundary”; SCI16; SCI21
regulations “boundary around the plot
on grazing” reduced encroachment”
“no longer “no longer have to migrate”; 4/22 SCI4; SCI14;
had to “solving migration problems”; SCI15; SCI18
migrate far “no longer have to migrate”
away for
fodder”
“increased 1/22 SCI11
fodder has
increased
milk
production”
Livelihoods “got “got employment from FES”; “ 10/22 SCI1; SCI2;
and employment received employment”; ”; “got SCI3; SCI4;
employment ” employment”; “gave them SCI5; SCI7;
employment”; ”; SCI8; SCI10;
“employment”; ”; ”; SCI20; SCI22
“brought “helped bring money into their 4/22 SCI7; SCI8;
money to homes”; “brought money to SCI10;SCI12
the village” the family”; “able to make
money”
Natural “now there “brought greenery”; “there are 7/22 SCI3 ; SCI5 ;
resource are plants, now trees”; “village still looks SCI7 ; SCI16
restoration there were after the plants”; “planting”; ; SCI17 ;
not any “more foliage”; SCI20 ;
before” SCI22
Appendix One 38
Very “very ”; “they benefitted from the 17/22 SCI1; SCI2;
successful, successful” programs”; “FES program was SCI3; SCI4;
meeting very successful”; “program SCI6 ; SCI7 ;
needs was successful”; “benefitted SCI8 ; SCI9 ;
them a lot”; “FES has really SCI10 ;
helped them sustain their SCI11 ;
lives”; “program was SCI12 ;
successful” ; ”; “work has SCI13 ;
helped them a lot”; “project SCI14 ;
successful”; “has been SCI17 ;
beneficial”; “work was SCI19 ;
beneficial to them”; ”; ”; SCI21; SCI20
“successful”; “very
successful”; “successful”
Community Leaders and FES Staff (6 interviews, 6 interviewees)

Prioritized Need/Issue Additional Number Interview
Need Addressed Responses of Code
Responses
Water “groundwater “plot is a source of 4/6 SLI2; SLI4;
Retention recharge” groundwater SLI5; SLI6
recharge”; “more
water in wells”;
“groundwater levels
have been raised”
Fodder “increased fodder” “increase in fodder”; 5/6 SLI1; SLI2;
Production “now there is fodder”; SLI3; SLI4;
“do no have to buy”; SLI5
“fodder increased”
“stop in human “fodder helped reduce 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
migration for migration”; “less SLI4
fodder” migration to other
areas for grazing and
wage labor”
“people could keep 1/6 SLI2
more livestock”
“reduce…need to “do not have to 2/6 SLI2; SLI4
buy fodder” buy…fodder”
“don’t have to take “ 2/6 SLI3; SLI5
fodder from
private lands”
“milk production “fodder increased 2/6 SLI4; SLI5
higher” which made milk
production rise”
Appendix One 39
Prioritized Need/Issue Additional Number Interview
Need Addressed Responses of Code
Responses
Livelihoods “received direct “before there was not 4/6 SLI2; SLI3;
and employment” any form of SLI5; SLI6
employment employment”; “FES
employed the
community”;
“employment has
helped them to move
forward”
“increase in “employment…reduce 2/6 SLI1; SLI6
household income” poverty and improve
living standards”
“agricultural 1/6 SLI5
outputs also rose”
“reduce…need to “do not have to 2/6 SLI2; SLI4
buy fodder” buy…fodder
Natural “positive “now there is foliage 2/6 SLI1; SLI6
resource succession” where there was not
development before”
“food chain and 1/6 SLI1
nutrient flows
restored in the
plots”
“more wildlife in 1/6 SLI1
plot”
“adopted rotational “more efficient 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
grazing methods” grazing”; “grazing SLI3
regulations are very
helpful”
Categorization of results
Water retention
• “groundwater recharge”
• “wells were recharged”
o “more water for irrigation to grow grains”
Fodder production
• “increased fodder”
• “don’t have to take fodder from private lands”
• “land no longer encroached”
• “fencing…has helped…developed regulations on grazing”
• “stop in human migration for fodder”
o “no longer had to migrate far away for fodder”
• “people could keep more livestock”
Appendix One 40
• “reduce…need to buy fodder”
• “milk production higher”
Livelihoods and Employment
• “received direct employment”/ “got employment”
o “brought money to the village”
o “increase in household income”
• “agricultural outputs also rose”
o “more water for irrigation to grow grains”
• “reduce…need to buy fodder”
Natural resource development
• “adopted rotational grazing methods”
• “more wildlife in plot”
• “food chain and nutrient flows restored in the plots”
• “positive succession”
o “now there are plants, there were not any before”
Objective Five Narrative of Results

In addition to addressing prioritized needs, community members often stated that
they felt the project was very successful in meeting their needs.
1.Water retention
The need to increase water retention for household and agricultural use was
addressed by the FES project and responses indicate that many of the interviewees felt
that the project did serve this need. Groundwater recharge was increased and overall
water availability and supply for irrigation increased as well.
2.Fodder production
Nearly all of the respondents mentioned that fodder had increased as a result of
the FES project. This resulted in less migration in search of fodder and the ability to have
more livestock. Encroachment on the CGL stopped as a result of the ora system and
rotational grazing methods, which helped to maintain the work done in the plot by the
villagers. People also noted better milk production from their livestock.
3.Livelihoods and employment

Respondents noted that livelihoods and employment were improved the FES
project. During the time of the FES project, villagers were able to secure employment
and earn money for the work they did on the CGL. This resulted in an increase in
household income. The ability to use the plot for fodder also reduced the need to buy
fodder from elsewhere. Agricultural outputs also increased, which has an effect on this
income-generating and subsistence activity.
4.Natural resource development

The need to improve conditions of SKB’s surrounding natural resources was
addressed by the project, most notably on the CGL plot. FES staff mentioned that the
project helped reverse retrograde succession and restored nutrient flows and the food
chain. It was also noted that there are more wildlife using the plot now. Rotational
Appendix One 41
grazing methods have increased the amount of greenery and placed less anthropogenic
stress on that area.
Discussion of Objective Five Results

The interviews show that most of the respondents were overall happy with the
FES project and that it did in fact help them meet previously unmet needs and resolve
some issues. The availability of fodder was mentioned the most, and it is clear from
photographs that the CGL is producing fodder whereas surrounding private lands
continue to be overgrazed. A study completed by FES confirmed the presence of more
fodder producing species after project completion. This study found that tree biomass
(11.7 t/ha) was significantly higher in the plot than on surrounding private lands (1.02
t/ha). Shrub biomass was also higher in the CGL plot (5.10 t/ha) than on the surrounding
private lands (3.66 t/ha). The use of the ora system, rotational grazing methods and the
boundary are no doubt the reason for the continued presence of fodder for livestock.
However, when one looks at answers to other questions, it is evident that the
needs of the community members were met partially, or were met during the time of the
project but did not continue after. As one respondent mentioned during an interview,
“their needs have been met to a degree”. Although respondents seemed to be happy with
the FES project, it certainly did not solve all of their problems.
This is true in the case of employment, because although community members
were paid by FES during the project, they are still without employment opportunities now
(although many women are working with the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act,
which is a federal program that pays villagers for development work. However, people
responded that sometimes they go unpaid for many weeks and that work is not always
guaranteed). This was evident in responses to Objective 8, where 10/22 interviewees
mentioned that employment is needed. Participants in the RRA completed on 29 August
2008 decided that a stable source of income was a priority for the village.
Water retention will remain an issue, especially if overgrazing, removal of
vegetation and soil loss continue on private lands. The community is currently building a
well at the nearby river, but infrastructure for transporting and saving water does not
exist. The RRA results show that water is an issue that still needs to be addressed.
Unfortunately, the dependence on the highly variable monsoons makes the village subject
to climactic conditions that only serve to confound the water scarcity issues they face.
People mentioned that there was more water in wells, which signals that the project
helped restore groundwater levels, but a study to compare previous levels relative to
rainfall was not conducted, so this information may be mostly anecdotal.
Natural resource development was addressed in the project, but all of the physical
work and plantation development occurred on the CGL, which is very significant, but
large areas of degraded land remain outside its borders. Studies conducted by FES
showed that higher biomass, higher soil moisture and more biodiversity are possible.
Hopefully the new knowledge and skills gained by the community will be used to restore
private lands to increase their productivity for human use and ecological health.
Appendix One 42
Objective Six-A: Identify the achievements and challenges of implementing the
initiatives to meet the needs of community members.
Propositions
Community Members (22 interviews, 23 interviewees)

Achievement Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Code
“women were given “women’s self-help 4/22 SCI2;SCI3;
importance” group”; women were SCI4; SCI20
given more importance
through the SHG”; SHG
for women”
“can get loans” 1/22 SCI3
“get fuelwood from dead 1/22 SCI19
trees”
“building trust with an outside 1/22 SCI1
organization”
“brought unity to the village” “created unity”; “unity in 8/22 SCI3; SCI4;
the village”; “unity in the SCI13 ;
community, they can SCI16;
now discuss village SCI20;
problems”; “village had SCI21;
a platform to make SCI22
decisions
together…unity”;
“brought unity in the
village and collective
decision-making”; “unity
in the village”
“unity among women” 1/22 SCI5
“FES provided awareness 1/22 SCI7
(capacity)”
“development of institutions to 1/22 SCI2
make children go to school”

Achievement Additional Number of Interview
Responses Responses Code
“established relationship, there was “people accepted the 2/6 SLI1;
trust (between community and project as beneficial SLI4
FES)” and they were able to
get buy-in from the
community”
Appendix One 43
“village accepted women’s “women were 2/6 SLI1;
participation” allowed to sit on the SLI5
Hatai”
“more aware of what a healthy 1/6 SLI1
landscape should look like”
“more able to establish linkages “people had the 2/6 SLI1;
between the environment and their realization that SLI2
livelihood” managing the
environment is
helpful to them”
“increased…fuelwood” “fuelwood 2/6 SLI1;
availability from dead SLI2
trees”
“have become a strong cohesive “unity in the village”; 3/6 SLI1;
unit” ”; SLI2;
SLI3
“progressive leadership “created capacity…so 2/6 SLI1;
(developed)” they know what he SLI4
does as sarpanch and
so he is not the only
person with
authority”
“more awareness about child 1/6 SLI1
marriages”
“more…education for girls” “girls are now sent to 3/6 SLI1;
school” SLI2;
SLI4
“more sensitive to gender” “before women… 2/6 SLI1;
were not able to sit SLI4
on the Hatai…women
do participate in
decision-making”
“lower castes now more involved” “before…lower 3/6 SLI1;
castes were not able SLI4;
to sit on the Hatai”; SLI5
“allowed to sit on the
Hatai…as were all
castes”
Appendix One 44
“collective decision-making” “platform to make 5/6 SLI2;
decisions”; “ability to SLI3;
make collective SLI4;
decisions”; SLI5;
“community came SLI6
together to have
meetings”; “villages
are interacting to
create mutual
agreements about
development”
“conflict (resolution)” 1/6 SLI4
Categorization of Results
Ecological
• “more aware of what a healthy landscape should look like”
Economic
• “increased…fuelwood”
• “more able to establish linkages between the environment and their livelihood”
• “FES provided awareness (capacity)”
• “can get loans”
Social
• “have become a strong cohesive unit”
o “unity among women”
o “collective decision-making”
“lower castes now more involved”
• “more sensitive to gender”
o “women were given importance”
o “village accepted women’s participation”
o “more…education for girls”
• “conflict (resolution)”
• “more awareness about child marriages”
• “progressive leadership (developed)”
• “building trust with an outside organization”
o “established relationship, there was trust (between community and FES)”
• “development of institutions to make children go to school”
o “more…education for girls”
Objective Six-A Narrative of Results

In addition to helping meet prioritized needs of SKB community members, the
FES project had other achievements and benefits, primarily social ones. These data are
categorized into ecological, economic and social benefits.
Appendix One 45
1.Ecological
The primary ecological benefits are more associated to how the community
relates to the environment rather than the physical health of it. The community became
more aware of what a healthy landscape for their area should look like and was able to
may a connection between making a livelihood and the health of the environment.
2.Economic
Some economic benefits of the FES project mentioned in the interviews were the
ability to get loans through the use of a community bank account and the provision of
fuelwood from the CGL plot so it did not have to be purchased.
3.Social
Most of the additional benefits noted by respondents fall into the social realm.
The development of a relationship between FES and the community was noted as a big
achievement because mistrust of an outside organization was the greatest challenge they
faced in the beginning and yet they were able to overcome it with time. Another big
benefit that was mentioned in several ways was women’s involvement and status.
Women’s empowerment is evident not only in the fact that girls were increasingly being
sent to school, but also that women felt as though they were given importance and could
work as a unified group. Developing a sense of unity throughout the community was also
expressed numerous times. Other achievements mentioned were: conflict resolution
skills; collective decision-making; more involvement by lower castes; more awareness
about child marriages; development of progressive leadership; and more awareness of
issues.
Discussion of Objective Six-A Results

The FES project had additional benefits and achievements beyond their work to
meet prioritized needs. Most of the notable achievements are in the social realm, because
the process of work helped to create more unity in the village and encourage more
participation from marginalized groups. The trust gained between FES and SKB will
hopefully allow it to work with other development organizations in the future, and
perhaps even with outside groups wanting to increase economic activities in the area.
Although these “fringe” benefits were not necessarily a part of the projects’ prioritized
work, they certainly are notable in terms of building a more equitable community that
works together to solve problems.
Objective Six-B: Identify the achievements and challenges of implementing the

initiatives to meet the needs of community members.
Propositions
Community members (22 interviews, 23 interviewees)

Challenges Additional Responses Number Interview
of Code
Responses
“building trust with an 1/22 SCI1
Appendix One 46
outside organization”
“to a certain degree “FES is helping them solve 2/22 SCI22; SCI2
problems have been problems to a certain degree”
solved”

Challenges Additional Responses Number Interview
of Code
Responses
“initially there was a “people were scared that FES 6/6 SLI1; SLI2;
lack of trust” would steal their land…so they SLI3; SLI4;
were very reluctant to being work SLI5; SLI6
with FES”; “had to meet many
times to show the villagers that it
was going to be a good project for
them”; “some resistance was met
at the beginning…lot of rumors”;
“initially the community thought
that FES was trying to take their
land”; “difficulties in convincing
the community that they would not
steal the land from them”
“(working through) 1/6 SLI1
grazing schedules”
“some people resisted 1/6 SLI1
a strong women’s
participation”
“people had a hard 1/6 SLI2
time with the
techniques (for
restoration of CGL)”
(fear that private land 1/6 SLI4
owners would take
common grazing
lands)
“village accused of 1/6 SLI4
corruption”
“encroachment on “encroachment on the commons” 2/6 SLI4; SLI5
plots from other
villages”
“(merging) different 1/6 SLI6
ways of thinking”
Appendix One 47
(Researcher note- results were not categorized because of the small number of
propositions.)
Objective Six-B Narrative of Results

All of the challenges associated with the project in SKB dealt with the human
dimension. Community members did not articulate many challenges, though there was a
mention of difficulties in building trust, which was also cited by all of the community
leaders and FES staff respondents. One community member mentioned that although
their needs were addressed by the FES project, they were met only to a certain degree and
that more work is needed. Some of the challenges mentioned in the interviews were:
figuring out the appropriate grazing schedule; overcoming resistance to women’s
participation; making sure that people were trained effectively to do the work on the CGL
plot; overcoming the fear that private land owners would take over the CGL; an
accusation of corruption; encroachment on the restored CGL plot from other villages; and
merging different ways of thinking.
Discussion of Objective Six-B Results

The challenges associated with the project seem to be ones that were overcome
with time. The building of trust issue is an example of this. FES had to ensure that the
community knew their intentions and did so by taking SKB community members to other
project areas so they could talk with people who were working with FES in similar
situations. Several meetings between the community and FES also helped to build trust
between the two parties. Changing cultural attitudes towards women and lower castes
was also a significant challenge, but the fact that both are now allowed to sit on the Hatai
and make decisions shows that progressive steps were made (Joshie et al., 2008). The
accusation of corruption was also a significant challenge that the community overcame.
An outsider accused the community of not completing the work they billed to FES, but
the accuser was forced to renege his accusations when it was proved that the community
had actually done more work than they were paid to do (Joshie et al., 2008).
Challenges that were not addressed were not mentioned. In fact, community
members were hesitant to mention challenges in general; this may have been in
reluctance to complain about the project to an interviewer and a translator that was a new
FES employee (Researcher observation).
Appendix One 48
Objective Seven: Identify what assessment techniques have been undertaken in each
community by either external or internal actors related to actions taken towards
sustainability.
Propositions

Assessment Techniques Additional Number of Interview
“village meetings” “village meetings 5/6 SLI1; SLI2;
and group SLI4; SLI5;
discussions”; SLI6
“meetings after
day’s work”;
“community
meetings”;
“meetings”
“monitor participation” 1/6 SLI1
“monitoring of natural resources” “monitoring of soil 2/6 SLI1; SLI2
and water table,
presence of more
foliage and plants”
“revision of by-laws when 1/6 SLI1
necessary”
“transparency of payment system” 1/6 SLI1
“how many girls were registered in 1/6 SLI1
school”
“rate of child marriages” 1/6 SLI1
“amount of money spent on 1/6 SLI1
funeral feasts”
“contributions to labor from 1/6 SLI1
community members”
“level of participation in decision- “through the level 2/6 SLI1; SLI6
making processes, especially from of community
poorer castes and women” participation”
“less migration” 1/6 SLI3
“they do a free work day every 7 1/6 SLI6
days, which shows that they are
committed to the project even if
they don’t get wages for that day”
“people could see benefits of the “visits sites weekly 2/6 SLI2; SLI4
work” (to see work)”
“through these meetings they 1/6 SLI5
could see that the community was
appreciative”
Appendix One 49
Objective Seven Narrative of Results
Most of the evaluation techniques for the project were informal. The primary way
the project was evaluated was through regular community meetings. Participation
throughout the five year period also served as an indicator of meeting goals, particularly
related to participation in decision-making by women and lower-castes and labor
contributions, especially when the villagers were found working in the plot even when
they were not paid by FES. For the ecological component of the project, FES measured
success by the presence of foliage and other types of natural resource management
monitoring such as soil moisture and biomass measurement. The transparency of the
payment system helped show that there was not corruption. Other indicators that
showed success were a reduction in the amount of money spent on funeral feasts, higher
enrollment of girls in school, lower rates of child marriages and less migration for fodder.
Visible measurements, such as the state of natural resources, community participation
and visible benefits were also indicators of the project’s success.
Discussion of Objective Seven Results

The evaluation component of the FES project throughout its five-year tenure and
after its completion was sufficient to show success in terms of fodder production and
natural resource restoration within the CGL plot. However, the absence of measurable
objectives makes a thorough evaluation and estimation of success difficult. Baseline
information was collected by another organization, but this was more related to
community demographics rather than information that would indicate improvement in
topics such as household income or debt repayment as a result of the project. The use of
measurable objectives may be helpful in future projects and for the community as it
continues towards development (Researcher’s observations)
Objective Eight: Identify what are the current needs of community members.
Propositions
In the interviews, respondents were asked about current and future needs. These
needs were merged into one and put in the table below. Responses refer to overall village
needs or desires for the future state of the village. Cases where respondents mentioned
basic needs in general (i.e., food, shelter, water, clothing) were not put into this category.
Community members (22 interviews, 23 interviewees)

Current Needs Additional comments Number of Interview Code
Responses
“education” ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; ”; 12/22 SCI1, SCI2;
SCI3; SCI4;
SCI5 ; SCI6;
SCI7 ; SCI8 ;
SCI12 ; SCI13;
SCI15; SCI19
Appendix One 50
Responses
“school up to eighth “better school facility at 7/22 SCI1; SCI3;
class” least up to the 8th class”; “up SCI4; SCI5;
to 8th or even 10th class”; SCI6; SCI8;
“school up to age 10”; SCI22
“higher grade in the school”;
“higher level of education in
the school”; “higher
education”;
“employment” ”; ”; ”; ”; “employment 10/22 SCI1; SCI3;
opportunities”; SCI7; SCI8;
“employment”; ”; ”; SCI10 ; SCI11 ;
“employment especially SCI12 ; SCI14 ;
during the dry season” SCI17 ; SCI22
“tube wells” (water “more wells for 10/22 SCI2;SCI3;
infrastructure) irrigation…electricity at the SCI4; SCI5;
water wells”; “better water SCI6; SCI8;
facilities”; “pipe lines for SCI 11; SCI9;
water”; “digging a well”; SCI20 ; SCI21
“infrastructure to bring
water to them easily”;
“village needs water
infrastructure”; “more hand
pumps for water”; water
infrastructure and electricity
to pump wells”; “water
infrastructure”
“medical facilities” ”; ”; ”; “hospital in the 8/22 SCI2; SCI3;
village”; “village doctor”; SCI4; SCI5;
“hospital”; “health care”; SCI6; SCI15;
SCI19; SCI22
“ food security” “food security during the dry 7/22 SCI3; SCI14;
season”; “food security SCI15; SCI17 ;
especially during the dry SCI19 ; SCI21 ;
season”; “better agricultural SCI22
practices”; “food”; ”;
“veterinarian” 1/22 SCI3
Appendix One 51
Responses
“proper (transportation) “infrastructure-mainly 11/22 SCI4; SCI5;
infrastructure” roads”; “better SCI6; SCI7;
infrastructure-roads”; SCI8; SCI19;
“railway”; “roads SCI12; SCI14;
improvement”; “better roads SCI15; SCI17;
and access to SCI20
transportation”; better road
infrastructure”; “better
roads”; ”; “roads”; ”;
“more food grains” “grains”; 3/22 SCI6; SCI19;
SCI22
“money” ”; ”; 3/22 SCI6; SCI11;
SCI14
“water” “address water scarcity”; 16/22 SCI1; SCI2;
“water scarcity”; “the most SCI4; SCI6;
necessary thing for the SCI7; SCI8;
community is water”; SCI9; SCI10 ;
“water”; ”; “major needs are SCI11 ; SCI13 ;
related to water because SCI15; SCI17 ;
most of their problems are SCI19 ; SCI20 ;
related to water scarcity”; SCI21; SCI16
“water for irrigation”;
“water”; “more water”;
“water”; ”; ”; ”; “water for
agriculture”; “more water”;
“electricity” (in village) ”; ”; ”; 3/22 SCI7; SCI14;
SCI15; SCI19;
“organizations to help 1/22 SCI11
them”
“fodder” “greenery all over not just in 2/22 SCI11; SCI2;
the plot”
“re-dig contours” 1/22 SCI13
“rise above poverty 1/22 SCI14
line”
“better milk “better livestock to increase 2/22 SCI15; SCI17
production” milk production”
“hygiene” “more hygienic”; “hygiene” 3/22 SCI15; SCI8;
SCI12
“(better housing) “improve housing 7/22 SCI3; SCI8;
cement or brick houses conditions”; “houses to be SCI13; SCI14;
with furniture instead made of concrete and brick”; SCI15; SCI17;
of clay” “better housing”; ”; ”; SCI19
“better houses”;
Appendix One 52
Responses
“a town account to give 1/22 SCI22
loans to give when
people need them and
save in the mean time”
“sarpanch in the 1/22 SCI5
village”
“ration cards” 1/22 SCI19
“more forums for 1/22 SCI22
women”
Community Leaders and FES Staff

Current Needs Additional Needs Number of Interview
Responses Code
“health” 1/6 SLI1
“hygiene” 1/6 SLI1
“education” “little access to 3/6 SLI1; SLI2;
higher education, SLI5
especially for
girls”; “better
education facilities”
“no proper links between village 1/6 SLI2
and development agencies”
“someone to speak for the village” 1/6 SLI2
“(address) water scarcity” “water is the main 3/6 SLI2; SLI4;
problem”; SLI6
“watershed
development”
“stable source of income” 1/6 SLI2
“education, especially for girls” 1/6 SLI2
“water conservation” “would like a dam”; 4/6 SLI3; SLI4;
“well is the vision”; SLI5; SLI6
“watershed project”
“re-dig contours, build anicuts” 1/6 SLI3
“improve animal husbandry” 1/6 SLI5
“water conservation, especially for “need to work on 3/6 SLI3; SLI5;
private farms” private lands to help SLI6
farmers improve
water retention”
“increase agricultural outputs” 1/6 SLI5
“proper medical facilities” 1/6 SLI5
Appendix One 53
Categorization of propositions
Lack in social services and infrastructure

• “electricity” (in village)
• “proper (transportation) infrastructure”
• “proper medical facilities”/ “medical facilities”
o “health”
o “hygiene”
• “tube wells” (water infrastructure) /“water conservation”
• “education”
o “school up to eighth class”
o “education, especially for girls”
• “a town account to give loans to give when people need them and save in the
mean time”
• “(better housing) cement or brick houses with furniture instead of clay”
Livelihood insecurity
• “water”
• water conservation, especially for private farms”
• “stable source of income”
o “employment”
o “rise above poverty line”
o “money”
• “ food security”
o “increase agricultural outputs”
o “more food grains”
• “improve animal husbandry”
o “better milk production”
o “fodder”
o “veterinarian”
Information
• “improve animal husbandry”
• “organizations to help them”
o “no proper links between village and development agencies”
Natural resource management
• “re-dig contours, build anicuts”
o “re-dig contours”
• “(address) water scarcity”
Leadership
• “sarpanch in the village”
• “someone to speak for the village”
“more forums for women”
“ration cards”
Appendix One 54
Objective Eight Narrative of Interview Results
Many of the community’s overall current needs are related to a lack in social
services, particularly in terms of education; infrastructure for water, transportation, and
electricity; leadership; natural resource management; and more connection to the outside
for information and development assistance. A lack in local employment opportunities is
also an issue which affects overall development and complicates the need to rise above
the poverty line. The community needs information related to agricultural and animal
husbandry techniques to improve output and efficiency. Access to more food grains was
also mentioned as a need to improve agriculture. Restoration on private lands is needed
to help improve environmental quality, restore vegetation and provide sustainable
livelihoods. Interviewees also would like a leader to represent the village and more
representation of women. Improvements in hygiene and housing are also viewed as
needs for development. Some other needs mentioned were: ration cards, more money
and loans for the village account and a veterinarian.
Water remains an issue in spite of the FES project (i.e. 19 out of 28 respondents
mentioned it). A lack of water infrastructure is also a significant setback. Natural
environmental factors related to water scarcity were also noted. Work on the CGL plot,
especially maintenance of contours, is needed to continue water retention from that site.
Discussion of Objective Eight Interview Results

Most of the current needs of the community are related to development (e.g.
education, health services, better infrastructure), which, unfortunately, would require
significant financial and technical support from the government or a NGO or financial
inputs from the community itself. The lack of employment opportunities in the
community would make it difficult for community members to contribute too much
money. Given the development of institutions and increased participation and unity
created by the FES project, the community would have the ability to do similar work
towards natural resource restoration on private lands, electing a leader, and involving
women to a higher degree. The fact that the FES project helped create a positive,
empowering atmosphere would hopefully provide impetus for SKB to do what is within
their means and to seek help from the government or elsewhere when possible
(researcher’s observation). The current well-building project is evidence that they are
doing such things. The community provided 1 lakh (one lakh equals 100,000 rupees) and
was given 4 lakhs from the government as a cost-share program. The community applied
for this after the project and is hopeful that it will ease some of the water scarcity issues
(researcher discussion with FES staff).
Rapid Resource Assessment Results

The RRA for SKB was conducted on 29 August 2008 by FES staff. The diagrams
below show the spider-web formation and the full RRA report is located in this
Appendix. The villagers agreed that levels of participation and protection of standing
natural resources were their greatest assets. A source of income, water availability and
infrastructure, financial support (for development projects) and information were lower in
terms of assets and were also those that they wanted to expand, with information and
water being the highest priorities.
Appendix One 55
Discussion of Rapid Resource Assessment Results
The RRA confirmed that water is still a major issue that must be addressed,
especially because their livelihood heavily depends on it. The status of their natural
resources is deemed adequate in terms of the CGL plot, but private lands, which comprise
most of the community’s area, are not mentioned, which is unfortunate. However, it was
mentioned in the interviews that restoration needed to be focused on private lands, so
hopefully awareness of this issue will spread and the community will be able to use the
knowledge and skills gained from working on the CGL project. The institutions built
and levels of community participation were also viewed as major assets, which also
confirms information gathered in the interviews and documents.
The fact that many of the needs articulated in Objective Two were not mentioned
in the RRA is significant, especially that fodder is not viewed as such a major issue. The
adoption of the ora system and rotational grazing were again noted as the reasons for this
improvement. Maintaining the work they did during the project was also mentioned,
which shows commitment to continuing the project and hints at its overall value to the
community. Issues that still exist, such as income insecurity and access to and from the
outside community, were not explicitly addressed by the project and therefore cannot be
associated with its success.
Appendix One 56
Community Participation
Protecting the existing resources and putting in efforts
for developing newer ones.
Source of Income
Main dependence is on agriculture, which in
further dependent on monsoon. Erratic
monsoon is leading the community to other
options of livelihood in which migration is
prominent.
Financial support
For infrastructure development,
roads, hospital, school, roof on
hatai, shade in graveyards etc.
Water
Villagers have constructed water trough for
livestock. Need is felt to construct anicuts
and undergo SWC activities Information
Better agriculture practices, better
animal husbandry practices and
breed improvement.
Standing Natural Resource

Institutions formed have adopted rules
reached by common consensus of the
community for sustainable management
practices.
Appendix One 57
Source of Income
Financial support
Water
Information
Appendix One 58
Discussion of Objective Eight Results
Many of the community’s current needs are related to a lack in social services,
particularly in terms of education; health services; infrastructure for water, transportation,
and electricity; and the need for more connection to the outside for information and
development assistance.
The economic status of the community remains an issue because economic
opportunities are scarce. The NREGA program is an exception of this, but anecdotal
information indicated that payment of wages in this program are sometimes delayed and,
because it is a program funded by the government, there is no long-term guarantee that it
will continue. In the RRA and interviews respondents mentioned that economic
development is a high priority.
Water continues to an issue in spite of the FES project (i.e., 19 out of 28
respondents mentioned it as a current issue). A lack of water infrastructure is also a
significant setback. Natural environmental factors related to water scarcity were also
noted. Work on the CGL plot, especially maintenance of contours, is needed to continue
water retention from that site. The RRA confirmed that water is a main priority for the
village, as is infrastructure for transporting and conserving it.
SKB’s location and lack of development also puts it in a situation where it has
limited access to new information about topics such as agriculture, government assistance
programs, or hygiene. Therefore, gaining new access to information was considered a
main priority for the community.
The fact that fodder was not mentioned in either the interviews or the RRA is
significant because it indicates the FES project succeeded in this aspect. The adoption of
the ora system and rotational grazing were again noted as the reasons for this
improvement. Maintaining the work they did during the project was also mentioned,
which shows commitment to continuing the project and hints at its overall value to the
community. Restoring private lands was mentioned in the interviews, though not to a
large degree and was not mentioned in the RRA. This could be because respondents
were replying to questions about community needs, and private land does not fit into this
category, though restoration of private lands would certainly positively impact the
community as a whole.
Appendix One 59
Objective Nine Results from Sanjadi-ka-badia Interviews
Question: What would you like to see happen in the future?
Community Members (22 interviews, 23 interviewees)

Desired state Additional responses Number of Respondent
Respondents Codes
“women should form “more forums for 2/22 SCI2; SCI22
self-help groups” women”
“town account” 1/22 SCI22
“education” “education”; “school up 9/22 SCI1; SCI4;
to class 10”; “higher SCI5; SCI6;
grade level”; “higher SCI8; SCI12;
level in the school”; SCI13; SCI19;
“education”; “education SCI22
for all of her children”;
“education”; “higher
education”
“save money from 1/22 SCI2
work to add to
village’s boundaries”
“cement or brick “houses to be made of 6/22 SCI3; SCI13;
houses” concrete and brick”; SCI14; SCI15;
“better housing” “better SCI17; SCI19
housing”; “better
houses”
“proper “proper 9/22 SCI3; SCI4;
infrastructure” infrastructure”;” SCI6; SCI8;
railway”; “proper SCI12; SCI14;
infrastructure”; “better SCI15; SCI17;
roads”; “better road SCI20
infrastructure”; “better
roads”; “better roads”;
“roads”
“medical facilities” “medical facility”; 4/22 SCI3; SCI4;
“health care” SCI6; SCI19
“more wells for “better water facilities”; 7/22 SCI3; SCI4;
irrigation” “water storage SCI8; SCI9;
facilities”; “water SCI11; SCI20;
infrastructure”; “more SCI21
ditches and pumps for
water”; “water
infrastructure”;
“Nabhad watershed
project”
Appendix One 60
Desired state Additional responses Number of Respondent
Respondents Codes
“sarpanch in the 1/22 SCI5
village”
“access to “railway to Bhilwara”; 3/22 SCI6; SCI7;
transportation”; “access to SCI12
transportation”
Question: Has the community developed a shared vision for the future?
FES Staff and Community Leaders (6 interviews, 6 interviewees)

Yes
Project Respondent Codes
“dairy” SLI2; SLI6
“well at river” ; SLI2; SLI6; SLI4
“more water
infrastructure”;
“shared vision is
the well”
No
SLI1
Question: Does the community have an action plan?
For the well (SLI2)

For the Nabhad Project (SLI1;SLI6)
Appendix One 61
Rapid Resource Assessment Results- Sanjadi-ka-badia
Rapid Resource Assessment; Sanjadi ka Badiya;29th August, 2008
The exercise was conducted at work site of NREGA, where a group was present and
organized for a meeting after completion of the work.
Step 1:
We started with discussions on ongoing NREGA activities in Sanjadi ka Badiya and
other neighboring village. Some of the community members asked about Lindsay,
where she is right now.
List of the things they like best in their community:
• Unity among the villagers
• Village forum
• Participation of women
• Plot developed with help of FES
• Animal Husbandry
Step 2:
When asked about sustainability broadly the response that came up are as follows:
• Economic security
• Protection of standing resources
• Water both drinking and agriculture
• Better health
• Unity of village
Step 3:
Economic Security: The basic occupation as source of livelihood of the villagers is
agriculture, which continues to be largely dependent on the monsoons. Animal
husbandry, migration and the ongoing works of government and other departments are
other sources of income.
Protection of standing resources: Since 1998 the joint efforts of the community and the
project has led to regeneration and development of two plots, which they are using, on
rotational basis. The community has very well imbibed the traditional mechanism to
ensure sustainability of resource. These aspects are being visible in their traditional
protection system (ora), rotational grazing practices.
Appendix One 62
Water both drinking and agriculture: As stated above agriculture is largely dependent
on the monsoons, which affects the crops during low rainfall years. The only source of
drinking water is from hand pumps, which are sometimes non-functional and women
have to travel a large distance for fetching water. Maintenance and construction of new
water storage structure will help in minimizing the drinking water problem of livestock
and will help in recharging the groundwater.
Better health: The nearest hospital is in Bhilwara and in critical situations they have to
travel further.
Unity of village: A aam sabha 1 is called of all constituent hamlets on the day of
ammawasya 2 at the common meeting place of the village called hathai. All the processes
of planning review, payments and decision are taken in front of the village community
to maintain transparency in terms of decision making and other village development
issues and problems are discussed during the meeting.
1 General Meeting
2
No moon day
Appendix One 63
Protecting the existing resources and putting in efforts for
developing newer ones.
Source of Income
Main dependence is on agriculture, which in
further dependent on monsoon. Erratic
monsoon is leading the community to other
options of livelihood in which migration is
prominent.
Financial support
For infrastructure development,
roads, hospital, school, roof on
hatai, shade in graveyards etc.
Water
Villagers have constructed water trough for
livestock. Need is felt to construct anicuts
and undergo SWC activities Information
Better agriculture practices, better
animal husbandry practices and
breed improvement.

Institutions formed have adopted rules
reached by common consensus of the
community for sustainable management
practices.
Appendix One 64
Source of Income
Financial support
Water
Information
Appendix One 65
Observations of Sanjadi-ka-badia
1. Sanitation- no access to improved sanitation. Hygiene- livestock shit in the areas

where people live. People using the bathroom anywhere.
2. want to have better housing- but making bricks depletes the fertility of the soil, how
can they build better houses with local materials that are more sustainable than brick
or concrete
3. Indoor cook stoves that use fuel wood- many women and children have nasty coughs.
4. NREGA program- how is this sustainable if they don’t earn enough to get ahead and
if it is a short term program. No other employment opportunities in the village, if they
have to earn money then they are forced into the unskilled labor force and have to
migrate in most cases.
5. how will digging a well result in other problems? Depletion of groundwater- has FES
done an analysis of this for the Nabard project? What other options exist for water
conservation on the surface.
6. rain catchment in barrels or some other medium?
7. families going into debt to pay dowries
8. girls and boys are betrothed at a very young age.
9. from interview with Kesibai- Extra question- How she came to be sarpanch of the
hamlet- there was an election in the community and she represents the Congress
Party, opposed by the BJP(Bharatia Janta Part-y Indian People’s Party) and she won
it. When she was sarpanch she participated in all community activities. She formed a
women’s group and she acted as leader of the group. She approached SS Singh of
FES and he motivated her to bring FES to help the community.
10. Notes on how FES works as an organization: trying to establish land tenure rights and
figuring out how the project will provide for livelihood in long term. In order to do
this need to get the panchayats to accept responsibility. Form groups to work on
common lands; formation of groups depends on what they want to restore or what
type of common lands they have (e.g., revenue wastelands, common grazing lands,
forest, etc.). many of these lands are not important to the government but are crucial
to the rural poor for livelihoods. FES formed in 2001 with the National Dairy
Development Board. FES has 10 teams in 6 states.
11. In Bhilwara District- check dams have been major type of work. Developing Tree
Growers Cooperatives (TGC). Strengthening local institutions. Leasing government
land to TGC to restore local communities’ source of livelihood and ecological health.
Working on revitalizing the connections between man and nature. Reducing
migration to other areas for money, fodder, etc.
12. FES pays villagers to do work.
13. Conversation with Suprat- in Bhilwara issues are mostly related to lack of water and
fodder during the dry season. It is difficult to work there without full approval of the
communities because they are very socially bonded. They are rural agrarian societies
dependent on surrounding natural resources. If the families depend solely on wages
for food they get into trouble; they need land to cultivate for sale and subsistence.
This is especially true when they are forced to sell subsistence crops to pay off debts.
In these villages maintaining institutions is what can help sustainability. Institutions
Appendix One 66
have been degraded in the colonial and post-colonial eras, which has lead to natural
resource degradation. The panchayat’s role was nominal because expectations were
not clearly defined even though they were codified in national and state law.
14. reasons for land degradation in Rajasthan- mining, overgrazing, over-cultivation,
deforestation, pollution/industrial waste. The foothills of the Aravalli Range are a
priority because they have high biodiversity and are highly degraded.
15. In Rajasthan FES has three team offices and 1 regional office. They are currently
working on 9 projects encompassing about 31,567 hectares. It is a patriarchal society
so they work with women separately.
16. Steps in FES’ work: 1. bring people together; 2. articulate together; 3. decide and act
together; 4. build confidence in the process; 5. have a say in what matters; 6.
institution building.
17. Common lands are the space for the poor and are therefore dependent on the
government because it manages and owns those lands. Commons can then become a
platform for collective action towards landscape level conservation. They must take
into account all of the factors in the landscape that affect sustainable livelihoods.
Ecological restoration efforts- soil conservation, mineral cycles, hydrological
regimes, biodiversity, biomass, water conservation. Ways to accomplish this-
institution development.
18. Communities in Bhilwara are dependent on rain-fed agriculture.
19. In Bhilwara- brick making has had a significant impact on natural resources because
they are taking away needed nutrients for agriculture. The government has stopped
the industry but it still continues in some parts and many areas had already been
degraded prior to cessation of the industry.
20. Butea monosperma was the climax tree species but is almost non-existent now
because it was used for gum and fuelwood. Acacia nilotica is a commonly used
fuelwood tree species. There are about 4 other Acacia species used for fodder and
fuelwood.
21. In SKB- began work in 1999 with a PRA and Needs analysis. Finished in 2003 (?).
Water main issue based upon needs articulated in 1999.
22. Panchayat system: all elected. Three levels: Zilla parishad (district level); Panchayat
samiti (block level) and Gram panchayat (village level. We are working with the
Gram panchayat. 5 elected leaders (called a paunch), out of those a leader
(sarpaunch) is elected.
23. Very involved in the project from the beginning; key person, very supportive of
project and women and FES work. Working on a well at the river to provide drinking
water for the village- 2 lakhs from the village, 5 lakhs from the government.
24. The well at the river is funded by a branch of the federal government Rajya Sabha
and they have a contact with Sabash Bagardia at the agency.
Appendix One 67
APPENDIX TWO: RESULTS FROM NYUMBANI VILLAGE
Outline
I. Interviews from Nyumbani Village

a. Interviews with Grandparents Living in Nyumbani Village
b. Interviews with Outside Community Workers
c. Interviews with NV Staff and Outside Leaders
II. Results Categorized by Objective
III. Rapid Resource Assessment Results
a. RRA with Grandparents
b. RRA with Organic Outgrowers Group
c. RRA with COGRI Staff
IV. Observations of Nyumbani Village
Interviews from Nyumbani Village
Interviews with Grandparents Living in Nyumbani Village
Interviewee: NVI1
Interviewers: Lindsey; Alice
Date: 22 July, 2008
Questions asked: community member needs
1. What were your circumstances before you came to Nyumbani Village?

She was initially living well with her daughter but then her daughter passed and she had to look
after the five children. She had to find casual work to provide for them but this was impossible
because sometimes she couldn’t find work. A sister from a nearby church was helping with
clothing and food, but not all the time so she still had to find work. She moved to another place
where her children bought her some land near NV and she was able to come here after she
presented her case.
2. How has the development of NV helped to address issues in you faced prior to coming to
Nyumbani Village (Circumstances/Perspective)? Please describe successes or failures of
the efforts to address these issues (Opinion). What are the ecological benefits? What are
the social benefits? What are the economic benefits?
NV has been a big help. The kids’ basic needs are being met and other things they had to go
without before like soap or lotion they now have. Before she didn’t have hope that they would
have a good future but now she does. She is not struggling like before, kids are getting education
and looking towards the future.
Challenges are less- she can get help in the office and people listen to her; she receives help in
bringing up her children; with the kids there are more good things than bad ones. She has no real
challenges to speak of since she came to NV.
Social- she is in a place where people have similar circumstances and backgrounds so they can
support one another to deal with problems. NV provides an atmosphere to express their feelings
and emotions as they live together in a community.
Economic- selling baskets they are able to make and sell them. They can then get things that help
them support themselves. The perimeter shambas also help them get extra food.
Ecological- access to firewood and water- she doesn’t have to travel a long distance to get either.
Appendix Two 1
3. What are the current issues of your family that are problematic?
Teenagers- there are behavioral issues and they often don’t complete their chores.
4. What is happening to help you address these issues?
She has to keep after them to get them to do their work.
5. What are the needs of your children for the future?
Land issues- the orphans are getting an education but they have no land and therefore nowhere
to settle after they leave the village. The boys especially will have a hard time because of this.
They need to know how to compete in the job market because even with education it is very
difficult. Being here at NV will not solve all of their problems because she knows kids from her
village who have gotten an education but still cannot find a job; as orphans they don’t have
anyone to help them after.
6. What is happening to help you address these needs of your children?
She doesn’t know unless NV can help.
7. What are the issues of the Nyumbani Village community as a whole?
Food shortage because the supplies have been reduced. They used to get 4kgs of rice now they
get 2kgs and it isn’t enough.
8. What has been done to address the issues of the village?
They are discussing the issue in meetings and need to figure out what to do.
It’s a difficult question; she would like to see more perimeter shambas so they can provide more
food for their families and help solve the food shortage and so they do not have to go to the
stores. They need a better way of being sustainable and being given more shambas would help a
lot.
Interviewee: NVI2
Interviewers: Lindsey; Alice; Mercy
Date: 23 July 2008

He had to take care of his grandchildren after his wife and daughter died and someone told them
about Nyumbani. He used to sell eggs to earn some income but the children’s basic needs were
not being met.
Here is able to meet the basic needs of his grandchildren; they have access to water, education,
food, clothing. He likes farming and is glad that he has been able to use land there to plant.
Challenges- doesn’t feel that there have been any thus far.
Social- living together, people have been able to integrate well because everyone came there for
a common goal to raise the children and give them an education.
Economic- he makes carved wood products to sell (e.g. spoons, handles for jimbes).
Ecological- does not have to travel far for water and now he has a shamba where he can plant.
3. What are the current issues of your family?
Things getting lost.
He keeps it to himself and doesn’t do anything about it.
Appendix Two 2
Further education but he doesn’t know how this will be possible- if he has to pay or the office
does.
The office should provide for as far as they can go; he is not sure if they will help the kids find a
job because it has only promised to give them an education. the office should provide people for
as far as they can go.
Bigger farms to enable them to plant enough food for their families.
They should be given bigger farms because the home gardens are too small and they cannot plant
enough to feed themselves.
Bee hives for the families in the village.
Interviewee: NVI3
Date: 22 July 2008

He was living a normal life with his wife but his daughter died and his other children were not
providing for his two grandchildren so he took them in and it was very hard to make them
comfortable. Their needs were not being met.
he continues to do carvings as he did prior to coming to NV; he also had a small shamba. Now
the kids are getting an education and their basic needs are being met. He now sees a difference
and a bright future for the children. He wants to go back to his own shamba when the kids are
finished so he can be independent again. NV has been a privilege for him and they have done
great things that he did not expect which has helped him move forward in life.
Social- the environment is good for the children because they can adapt together- they speak the
same language and come from the same culture. They also have similar stories so they can get a
lot of support from each other.
Challenges- shortage of food; there is not as much as before
Economic/Ecological- he is able to get trees for carving; he is getting a source of income from
the environment that he did not before.
The blending issue is very difficult; they have to share and live together as a family but it is very
hard because they kids come from different home backgrounds.
As time has passed he keeps talking to them and it is working better.
Major need is education and to settle down after they have been educated so they can live back
in their communities and hopefully be able to solve their own problems.
NV needs to make future plans to help them because the grandparents cannot help them in the
way that NV can.
Appendix Two 3
Greatest challenge for all of them is the teenage crisis and even though they can go to the staff it
is a daily struggle.
But at least they can talk about it together and help each other through the issues.
A registered group to address issues would help. Also for NV to help kids after they leave here to
choose colleges etc.
Interviewee: NVI4
Date: 22 July, 2008

When the parents of her grandchildren died she had to take care of the children and had to do
casual labor to provide for them but she was not always able to get work and actually meeting
their basic needs was very difficult.
A very big burden has been lifted. The children are able to get a good education and she can now
meet the needs that she was trying so hard before to meet but could not. They now have food,
clothing, and can now bathe with soap.
Challenges- even with all of the help she has received the biggest challenge is the blending. Each
child is older so they know that they are not blood relatives so they don’t always listen to her. It
has taken a long time to establish themselves as a family.
Also- with the grandparents, even though they are all in the Kamba tradition they come from
different areas so there is some division among them and they aren’t always learning from each
other as they could.
Social- even with the division they come together to help with family problems by giving advice.
Last year she had a marriage in the village and everyone contributed in the event, so it shows
that even though they are divided they are still helping each other. They can often rely upon each
other to solve problems without having to go to the office.
Economic-the basket making gives her money to go home and provide some things for her family
there. She can also get money from the office for transportation beyond Kwa Vonza.
Ecological- it is easier to get water and firewood so they don’t have to go long distances to fetch
either of these. The home gardens and perimeter shambas provide them with some extra food.
The girls are growing and have special needs. They are not provided with enough underwear or
congas, which they need because there are boys they are not related to in the home. She has to
make kiondo money go further because of this.
She sells baskets; she goes to the office to communicate these issues, especially when she doesn’t
sell a kiondo.
The children need to go to secondary school and will need supplies for this.
The office needs to prepare now for this.
Appendix Two 4
Food shortage- she was away and came back to not enough food and she asked her neighbors but
they didn’t have food either.
They used to get more food and there would be extra, so they are trying to figure out what is the
right amount (the new nutritionist is trying to see how much each family needs to sustain
themselves).
For her own family she would like to have her own farm to provide food for her family.
She wants to see all of the grandparents doing something more than just the baskets so they can
earn more income and not have to rely on the office as much as they do now. More social
integration to mobilize themselves and make improvements in the village.
Interviewee: NVI5
Date: 23 July 2008

After her husband passed away it was very difficult. She had to raise the children and it was hard
and she could not meet their needs- she was only able to grow and sell vegetables. Her own
children didn’t want her to stay on her husband’s land so she came here.
NV has instilled a lot of hope. Before the kids were not going to school or getting enough food.
Now she can sleep because they have food and education but it will still be a challenge because
they will need a place after they finish school here.
She has not faced any real challenges since she came here, there have been so many benefits.
Social- the grandparents can share their experiences and give each other advice.
Economic- the small gardens and basket making allow them to earn some income.
Ecological- does not have to struggle to get water and they can use the shambas to plant
vegetables for consumption.
Food shortage.
They share between themselves. She encourages her children to talk about their problems so they
can solve them together.
Education and resources to receive a higher education
School is currently helping them prepare.
The children are not getting exposed to what they will face when they have to leave the village.
For example here they are just given water and firewood, but outside they will have to travel long
distances in search of both; the same with farming.
The grandparents have a lot of knowledge and are trying to prepare their children for what life
will be like after NV. They are trying to bring the kids closer to the grandkids; to make them
study; give them responsibility; address issues as they arise.
Appendix Two 5
Education- for all of the orphans to receive it. A secondary school.
Interviewee: NVI6
Date: 22 July 2008

When her children died the children were living alone for a while but they could not manage so
she took them in. she didn’t have enough to provide for their basic needs; she could only provide
shelter. Sometimes they could not attend school because she didn’t have the money to pay school
fees. They often did not have enough food.
NV has lifted a huge burden. The kids are getting a better education and have food, they have
enough school supplies. Their basic needs are being met.
Challenges -the food shortage
Social- the grandparents get along very well so the living arrangement is a good one.
Economic- by making baskets they can earn money to buy clothing, for example she can buy
clothing for herself and her family at home.
Ecological- they have been able to raise some vegetables in the perimeter shamba even though
there hasn’t been any rain.
No major issues except the normal ones associated with raising children.
She has to speak with them.
Especially the girls- they will need more clothes, underwear and other special care because of
their feminine needs.
The office needs to prepare for these issues before they happen.
Food shortage. The grandparents don’t have a formal group in which they can address issues,
earn more income. They need to come together as a group more.
The grandparents depend a lot on the office an will continue to do so unless they form a group; in
time the grandparents may be neglected by the office because it will only provide for the children
unless they work to help themselves.
She would like to see higher education for the kids. More harmony between the staff,
grandparents, and children so they can work together for this goal.
Appendix Two 6
Interviewee: NVI7
Date: 16 July 2008
Used to live with her husband who is still in her village. She took care of her grandchildren by
farming and digging trenches to earn money. She received some help from a church in the form of
clothing and school supplies. She was not able to send kids to secondary school because she
couldn’t pay the school fees. She came looking for NV to get help.
Now she is able to educate grandkids. She can meet their basic needs without requiring too much
outside help. She is also able to go to her home and check on her other children.
Challenges- she came with 4 of her own grandchildren but has added 5 more. Initially it was very
difficult to blend the two families. It is a slow process but it is getting better.
Social benefits- has been able to receive emotional/social/psychological help from the other
grandmothers. Sometimes they even share food. She only arrived in March but she was given help
from the other grandmothers to buy supplies to make baskets.
Economic- baskets.
Ecological-ability to cultivate farms. Eco-toilets, she had never used one before but had seen
them and knows they are helpful to keep a sanitary environment.
Children getting sick
She takes them to the clinic.
Further education after primary school and provision of books and fees.
NV should take care of that for them.
Food supply is often lacking. Transportation.
Food- goes to NV but they tell them to make use of what they have been given.
Would like to see the children prospering and using their education to make a better life for
themselves. This is also up to the children to make the effort in school.
Interviewee: NVI8
Date: 16 July 2008

She and her husband were living a normal life because her husband was working they were
meeting their basic needs. When her daughter passed away they took over care of her
grandchildren but her husband got very sick and lost his sight. They sold their property to pay for
his medical bills and could no longer meet their needs or give the children an education. They
were very desperate.
Appendix Two 7
There has been a big change from how it was before because now her grandchildren can go to
school and their basic needs are being met.
Challenges- when she first came it was very challenging to get the new kids to adjust to her ways
and rules. She came in with one kid and got 9 more. But they have been able to adjust. She is
comfortable here.
Social- other grandmothers have helped her when she needed it- for example she went home and
didn’t sell any baskets so when she came back the others let her borrow supplies to make baskets.
She feels like a part of a group because they help each other. In the community they have a forum
to discuss issues and come up with solutions. There is a lot of support. Being able to have a
garden also helps here sustain her family. There is a lot of peace in the village.
Economic- baskets
Ecological/Environmental- n/a
Lack of supplies, eg. Not enough basins or dishes.
They talk to the NV staff to get help with these issues.
For the girls, they need congas to follow the Kamba traditions
They need to have supplies of congas before the girls are of age so they can just get them from the
office when it is time.
Raising the children.
They have to talk with the children and they share ideas amongst the grandmothers to do so.
Would like to see a secondary school so they can cut costs that they currently have to incur to
send them away to secondary school. Then they could provide more in the homes. Want to see
kids prospering and getting a higher education.
Interviewee: NVI9
Date: 16 July 2008

Used to live with her children and each family took care of themselves even though they lived in a
homestead type of setting. when her children died, she had to care for the grandkids but she
wasn’t really able to do it.
NV has helped her meet the basic needs of her children and provide clothing for them. Before
they struggled to meet their basic needs- especially providing enough food and education.
Challenges- there haven’t been many challenges even with the blending issue.
Appendix Two 8
Social- place to meet with the other grandmothers and a sense of community
Economic- baskets
Ecological- N/A
Supplies are often low- especially for food, soap and clothing.
When supplies are low they go and talk to the staff to help them resolve their issues.
The children are of varying ages and they cannot share clothing or shoes. They will need new
clothes in the future because they will grow at different rates. Need a different approach to
raising each child. Donations often do not fit.
Need to buy clothing and shoes in preparation for the kids’ growth.
What are the issues of the Nyumbani Village community as a whole?
Food supply, often she doesn’t have enough rice and will go to her neighbor- she often finds that
they don’t have enough either.
When there is a shortage they approach the relevant people and are told that they have to make
what they are given last.
Wants a bigger farm to feed kids so that they can manage themselves.
Interviewee: NVI10
Date:16 July 2008

She used to live with her children. she was in charge of taking care of the grandchildren’s
education. Her daughter separated from her husband and moved to Nairobi to get work but died.
She sold her land to provide education for her grandkids and she was the only one left to care for
them. The government came to tell them about NV and then they came here.
NV has done a lot for them. She used to have a very hard time buying supplies for school and
looking for food. She had to work all of the time. But this burden has been lifted because their
basic needs are now met and the kids can go to school. The provision of basic needs and
education has helped a lot. The children also have soap and toothpaste- they never had these
before. Challenges- the blending issue is a big one because they don’t know the kids’
backgrounds and the kids often have a deep separation. Getting them to live together in one
house is difficult. Basic needs are being met.
Social- each grandparent can meet the basic needs of their families and they respect each other’s
space (the grandparents) so they have a good community relationship. She can see a bright future
for her kids. Even though she is aging she can see that they are getting an education that will help
them get a career; before they didn’t have a lot of direction but now they do.
Economic- the sale of baskets has helped her buy clothing and others things that are not
provided. She is also able to visit her other children and give them support if they need it.
Ecological- N/A
Appendix Two 9
Getting all of them to live together well. Disciplining the children is very hard.
The grandmothers work together to solve problems and discuss their issues. She manages the
supplies they get so that they are distributed equally so kids do not fight over them. When the kids
are in charge of cooking she only gives them a certain amount.
Many kids are preteen, they will need special attention in the near future.
She is trying to talk with them to address issues they will face in adolescence.

N/A
N/A
Grainery to mill corn. For kids to prosper and live well once they leave.
Interviews with Outside Community Members Working with Nyumbani Village
Interviewee: NVO1
Interviewers: Lindsey; Nancy
Date: 29 July 2008
1. For Shamba villagers- What were the largest issues in the community prior to initiation of
the project by Nyumbani Village? (Circumstances/Perspective).
The lack of water caused a lot of problems related to farming- they were not able to farm or raise
tree seedlings. The orphans were also a big problem and were not being cared for. There were
not any SHGs or CBOs (community based organizations) so they were very unorganized. Lack of
roads and transportation; lack of employment.
2. How has the development of NV helped to address issues in your community
(Circumstances/Perspective)? Please describe successes or failures of the efforts to
address these issues (Opinion). What are the ecological benefits? What are the social
benefits? What are the economic benefits?
His community per se has not been helped, but they have acquired skills to help themselves. The
skills he has learned in making wells have been used to dig wells in his own community, which
have helped them with issues of farming related to water. With the wells they are able to grow
vegetables to sell and consume. Another organization CCF has helped with his community more.
NV has provided employment and he has gained skills to teach others.
Challenges- when NV came it brought good and bad things. Sometimes, even though they can
build wells, there is a scarcity of materials. There is also a poor procurement system for
materials he needs- they are ordered but do not come for a long time Some people have stolen
from the children. Often their payment is delayed, sometimes up to 2/3 months, which has made
people steal from the village because they don’t have any food or money. The people in charge
don’t send documents on time and he isn’t given a copy of the work documentation so he has no
way to account for his time.
Appendix Two 10
Ecological- the area was a desert but now more water is available because of the sand dams and
access they have gained through wells. Vegetables & trees- many community members are now
growing them at home because NV has taught them how to do so.
Social- in relation to the orphans a big burden has been lifted. People have learned how to
construct homes and how to make bricks. They have gained skills in composting and organic
farming, which is good for poor people who cannot afford to buy chemicals but still need to
provide food. NV has built a church, which is promoting moral values.
Economic- vegetables can be sold, as well as trees. He has earned money to provide for his
children.
3. What are the current issues of your family?
Sickness; land scarcity; lack of markets.
Sickness-they have to travel to Kitui
Land- they use intercropping techniques to maximize the outputs
Markets- can only sell a few and the rest of the produce goes to waste.
Education- they need to go beyond secondary; land on which to settle; good parent to instill
responsibility etc. they need to learn business skills
He is sending his kids to school, teaching them business as well. He only has 2.5 acres, which
wont be enough for his kids; he gives them education and skills so they can help themselves.
7. What are the needs of the community as a whole?
Poor leadership- corruption and no accountability to stop the corruption. Electricity- they have
to generate 35,000Ks to bring it but they don’t have the money. Water- masinga water only goes
to the schools and they don’t have the money to pay for infrastructure; there is also sickness
associated with poor water quality. Alcoholism in the region has also increased poverty. A lot of
theft.
8. What has been done to address the needs of the village?
Poor leadership- they can’t do anything about it because they would be banished from the
community. They get relief food through the village leaders, but they often don’t get what they are
supposed to but if they complain then they get even less the next time.
Electricity- nothing
Water- they have to buy pure water.
Health- lacking in the community.
Alcohol- until the sale of it is illegal they cannot do anything.
Need more training in farming so they can be self-sufficient. Better transportation system.
Education and capacity building in animal husbandry so they can earn money, which can help
them develop in other areas, e.g. planting fruit trees. Reduction in corruption.
Interviewee: NVO2
Date: 17 July 2008

The land that is now NV was heavily overgrazed and degraded from people felling trees for
charcoal; they would do this illegally because the land was not theirs and they did not have
permission to use it. They had many problems just meeting the basic needs of their families.
They didn’t have food, clothing, or enough money for school fees and uniforms.
Appendix Two 11
NV helped them by creating job opportunities and enabled them to help their families and
children.
Challenges- most of the families are not educated and they have a hard time understanding what
they are doing with NV, especially the sustainability part. It is hard to implement what the
concept is.
Ecological benefits- they have learned how to plant and manage trees; now there is more water
throughout the year which helps them grow crops in times when they could not before.
Social- learned how to live together as a community- there is change in the community and they
are learning from each other and outsiders.
Economic- employment and securing livelihoods; they have been educated in crop management
and can practice those techniques at home.
Often they are not able to finish schooling; shortage of jobs. Dryland habitat makes it difficult to
raise crops.
To some degree the government is helping his family; about ¼ of their problems are solved by the
government with school supplies and maintenance of the school. NV is also helping address those
issues.
Education, land will be subdivided and they will need jobs to provide for themselves.
For now he is working hard to keep two jobs and the government is helping send his kids to
(primary) school.
Same problems of food security, dry habitat farming, lack of employment.
Did not ask this question because he fused questions 3 and 7.
That the community will improve; already it is changing because of NV. In ten years they would
like to be able to sustain themselves.
Interviewee: NVO3
Date:28 July 2008
Lack of jobs; crops were often destroyed by animals that hid in the thick brush because the land
was uncleared; lack of water, especially in the riverbeds; food scarcity; lack of transport; lack of
knowledge about farming practices.
Appendix Two 12
NV has employed many people; sand dams have helped increase the amount of water available;
they have learned about new ways of irrigation and sometimes they can get transport in times of
emergencies.
Challenges- bad payment- low wages that do not provide enough for their families; the village is
very far to reach from their homes and there is not any transportation for them; in the farm
monkeys are stealing the crops. Snakes are a problem at night.
Social- more knowledge about farming, tree planting- there has been a reduction in charcoal
production and burning because less trees are being felled (?)(ecological). People are more able
to provide for their families the money they earn allows them to buy food.
Economic- wages; he has learned about castor and has planted on his farm to sell to NV for a
profit
Ecological- increased soil fertility because of use of manure and compost; no longer using
chemicals to fight off garden pests; the use of organic farming techniques.
Health, lack of health care; lack of a nearby church; food scarcity, getting clothing; availability
of water.
Food-they have to depend on rains and crop storage; for water quality they just have to boil it;
church- they don’t go. Clothing, can only buy from month to month, one thing for one family
member; medical- they go to Kwavonza or to the NV clinic.
enough food for the family, a place to pray; enough water and wells.
They have improved farming techniques and can sell plants as well as consume them. He is
planting vegetables and fruits to improve their nutrition.
7. What are the needs of the community as a whole?
Lack of a church; water scarcity; food scarcity
8. What has been done to address the needs of the village?
They have groups that dig wells at rivers. Food- they get help from the government (e/g in the
“Work for Food” program, the government pays you for the work you do on your own farm).
Church- some people just travel far to go.
Roads, health centers, churches, more greenery.
Interviewee: NVO4
Interviewers: Lindsey/ Nancy
Date: 25 July 2008

M- lack of employment; There was also scarcity of water. There was a lot of insecurity because
the brush on the land that is now NV was very thick and people could easily steal livestock and
hide them there; lack of transportation and roads.
M- NV has helped bring money to send his kids to school. He was able to buy land to settle here.
The sand dams have helped to conserve water, which can provide water for the livestock. More
security. The improved roads have helped, especially when people are sick. Before they didn’t
Appendix Two 13
know how to use compost but now they have learned and are using the methods at their farms at
home.
W- he is able to make money to help send his sister to school. They have earned skills in milking
and growing crops using organic methods.
Challenges- they don’t see any; they are comfortable
M- famine because they do not have enough rains or water to produce crops, water scarcity is a
big issue,
W- getting education for the children
M- they have to fetch water with donkeys from a long distance away
W- sometimes the government gives money for education; he grows vegetables at home to help
feed the family and has a perimeter shamba as well.
W- education, fodder for livestock,
M- land on which to settle, peace
W- he buys goats and cows
M- bought land for his children to have when he dies.
7. What are the issues of the community as a whole?
W- livestock; lack of education
M-water
M- they have dug a shallow well
W- education, the community has a Harambee, where they pool money to help pay for education;
the community also comes together to provide food.
W- more water; more vehicles for transport, shopping center, nearby hospital
M- hospital nearby, more schools.
Interviewee: NVO5
Interviewers: Lindsey
Date: 15 July 2008
Before they did not have a place to work. Before the road infrastructure was lacking and it was
difficult to get to Kwa Vonza. Many children did not have parents and they had to care for them.
There was no medical facility.
NV gave them a place to work. The development of NV brought more roads to the area. The clinic
makes it easier for them. There have been many benefits.
Ecological- Now they can plant vegetables to give to the children.
Social-They outside children may get a place to go to school and learn skills. They have
developed groups to work on sustainability and to work together.
Appendix Two 14
Economic- they can now earn wages and they have earned skills they can use in other areas, the
polytechnic also is helping to give kids the opportunity to learn skills.
Challenges- access to tools to finish their work. They don’t have appropriate gloves, and the ones
they do have wear out quickly. They don’t have uniforms and sometimes they are in places where
it is dangerous to work because of thorns. The eco-center (humanure) does not have a roof so it
can cause problems when it rains.
Lack of roads. No medical facilities close to where she lives (about a two hour walk away).
Education
N/A
Education, health and health care.
Difficult at this time, schools are very far away and they can’t send the young ones so far.
The medical facilities are also very far away.
7. What are the needs of the community as a whole? I asked her about her own community,
not NV.
They need more employment opportunities, without money it is hard to survive. Transportation is
lacking.
8. What has been done to address the needs of the village? N/A
IN her village she would like to see more road infrastructure, and a closer medical clinic.
Interviewee: NVO6
Date: 21 July 2008

In this area there was no work and no way to get money. There was no water and roads were
very bad.
NV has helped with the water and roads issues. They have been provided with employment, they
have learned new ways of crop management. .
Challenges- making people work hard to address problems in the area and in the jobs they do
receive.
Ecological- in the main farm they have learned new methods for food production for a longer
time; the new crops they have introduced are doing better in this area.
Social- perimeter shambas help them satisfy their basic needs; the community has gained more
knowledge about crops, animal husbandry, and composting. The ability to get medical care at the
clinic.
Economic- the ability to grow vegetables for consumption and sale. Their families are living
better because they have money to buy food, clothing.
Finding good drinking water and food security.
Appendix Two 15
Trying to reduce problems by using the perimeter shambas for consumption and sale. They need
more bore holes for water.
they need to improve so they can live easier lives than they are now.
New methods of agriculture and better education and teachers.
Roads are poor and there is no access to transportation. No nearby medical centers. And lack of
education opportunities.
Medical-perhaps a mobile clinic and a dispensary, but this has not happened so far.
Roads-nothing is being done, but the road from Kwa Vonza is slowly being repaired.
Education- the system of teaching has been changed so they get better teachers.
Need to reduce the lack of food by having more crop productivity. More employment
opportunities; better roads and access to transportation.
Interviewee: NVO7
Date: 21 July 2008

Life was very hard because they lacked money, brining up their children was very hard, the whole
community was only relying upon rain to raise their vegetables.
NV is helping people very much with wages, for example when the buildings were being
constructed. People have been very uplifted by this.
Challenges- delay of payment, they don’t break for tea only for lunch; he doesn’t have protective
gear or a place to wash and change clothes; people lack tools to do work that NV asks them to
do. He doesn’t know what they are going to do about the humanure and urea because he has
recently been told that they cannot use them to grow crops and have to use them for other plants.
Sometimes they come to work and there isn’t any work available for them.
Ecological benefits- waste management.
Social- people are happy because it is easier to raise their families. It is better to have something
than nothing.
Economic- employment, they are able to sustain their families with food and clothing and are
able to pay school fees.
3. What are the current problems of your family?
N/A
N/A
Food, clothing, soap, lotion
Preparing for the future- the children need to be educated so they can meet their needs in the
future.
Appendix Two 16
Water- they have to travel a long way to get it.
Many people don’t have enough food and the price of food is rising. There often isn’t enough
money to clothe their families. Prices of goods are also rising- there are not any shops that offer
cheaper prices- people who make a lot more pay the same price. The majority of people in the
community still do not have work in spite of NV being here.
Most people burn and sell charcoal to make money. People who are involved in NV are helped a
lot. People also sell firewood. Some people in nearby communities make ropes to earn money.
They don’t get any help from the government. Sometimes the children are forced to graze cattle
for other people in order to earn money, often they are very young like 10/11 years old.
For example, when the government does population censuses, they don’t ask who is working and
who is not and then the taxes are the same for MPs who earn so much more money. He would like
to see a more realistic view of the unemployment rate.
Interviews with NV Staff and Outside Community Leaders
Interviewee: NVS1
Date(s): 7 and 10 July and 3 August 2008
economic issues}). How were needs of community members identified? Everything has to be
done with the NV orphans and grandparents in mind.
A. Agro-processing Center (AC)- “heart of the village”. The idea behind this unit is to
develop economic activities, energy for village needs, market for local surrounding
villagers, for the benefit of both the NV villagers and the surrounding communities.
They are using the polytechnic to help the center develop value-added processes.
There isn’t a market in the area that is well developed, they are hoping to do so with
the AC so that locals have a market to bring their products. They will process dairy,
crops, seeds, honey, castor and other oil seeds. Energy is a huge issue- people don’t
have access so they have to create energy manually. Electricity is very expensive and
not an option for many people. Looking for renewables as the option- primarily
Jatropha and castor bean. GEM has been helpful with getting things started, bought
beehives, and John is working on creating markets to sell villagers’ honey and to
build capacity with villagers.
• Challenges:
• Successes: it is still trying to get going so it is difficult to say.
B. Polytechnic manages some trees around the building for use in the future. Helping
with the value-added products in the AC.
• Challenges: not as involved in this activity…asked for me to check with others.
• Successes:
C. Essential Oils Factory- Father Dag knew that the village would need another source
of income apart from the garden, so essential oils is a high-priced export. However,
Appendix Two 17
they had to halt production because of the post-election violence- an area where they
received their products was affected by the violence (find a local source, or produce
their own?). currently they have to use a diesel powered generator and would like to
convert to biofuels generated on the farm. This is Sister Mary’s project
• Challenges: not currently in use because they don’t have the raw materials (note-
all of the equipment is exposed to the weather and is uncared for at this time).
Expenses are higher than the income it generates- the transport of
materials/gas/labor is very expensive.
• Successes: they have done some production in the past prior to the violence in
the post-election period.
D. Capacity building of NV children- the school has developed clubs to help teach them
sustainability, farming techniques, water conservation. Grandparents- they give
workshops during the day while the children are at school for water conservation,
farming, cooking, fuel efficiency. This transfers to the children because they learn
daily activities they can do in their homes. Also have the grandparents work with
outside villagers, e.g. in the main farm, to transfer knowledge they have gained as
well.
• Challenges: the orientation at the beginning of their stays there was insufficient-
there is no packet of information or protocol about sustainability so they don’t
understand it. The expectations were too high for them to participate in
sustainability projects for themselves and they didn’t set out the expectations in
the beginning. For example, the kids were told that they were coming to NV to
get an education, and now they want them to farm but they kids don’t want to. He
doesn’t see a lot of activities that actually get the kids outside learning about
sustainability or changing their ways of thinking and acting. They need exposure
to other people in the area…they are isolated and only focused on school.
• Successes: N/A
E. Riparian Zone- have planted native riparian trees, as well as some neem,
maintaining the groundcover, which has also increased in the zone. Outside villages
have been involved because they provide seeds, they have gotten them to pick seeds
for planting, NV tests the viability, and then the villagers have access to the nursery
to cultivate the seeds, they are paid when the trees reach one foot. The villagers
perception of trees is generally related to charcoal, they are trying to build capacity
and change the mindset so they see trees in other ways as well. (Ecological, social,
and economic successes).
• Challenges: water quantity is still lacking- they need to either construct more
sand dams or raise the ones they currently have but they do not have the
resources to do so now.
• Successes: see above…feels good about the diversity- it is one of the only
tangible and visible things that the community outside has done and is a big
success.
F. Water conservation and infrastructure- sand dams created on the river to serve as
groundwater recharge and prevent sediment erosion. water is the biggest factor in
the village. Fodder is now available in the riparian zones because they can reach
groundwater resources. At each sand dam they have constructed a shallow well with
a solar pump that feeds the water to storage tanks which then use gravity to feed drip
irrigation system to the farm. There is also a bore hole which is pumped for
consumption by the village. Have to use a diesel pump, would like to switch to
biofuels.
Appendix Two 18
• Challenges: people waste a lot of water and are not committed to water
conservation (NVillagers specifically). The infrastructure is very poor, as is the
quality. Lack of trained people to fix and solve problems related to water.
• Successes: see above. There is a lot of availability and they are trying to build
capacity and are working on constructing a grey water system in all of the
clusters.
G. Plantations- selection of plants that are useful to the village. Neem, for example, has
medicinal qualities, also it’s leaves can be ground into a flour, which is crucial in
dry-lands where cereal production is difficult. The plant also has use as a
biopesticide. Croton megalocarpus- nitrogen fixing, seeds have high oil content.
Seeds are also good chicken feed. Eucalyptus- arboriculture. Melia volkinsii
• Challenges: watering the seedlings, pests such as termites and overgrazing by goats.
• Successes: tbd?
H. Seed Orchard- see riparian zone section above. Deforestation is a big issue on the
perimeter and all around the area. They need to establish trees here because they
may not exist in the future.
Challenges: They would like to involve the community in propagation at NV and
propagate outside as well, but now there is no money in the community on the
outside.
Successes- community involvement is good now but in the future could pose a
problem because the outside seed source is unreliable.
I. Perimeter shamba- the size of the village and farm make it hard to manage, so
instead of building a fence, which could have isolated the village, they decided to
incorporate the surrounding community to give them ownership and access to land
for crops and to serve as a boundary against encroachment. They engaged willing
community members, gave them seeds, land and water. They sign a one-year lease.
The number of shambas is growing. It has benefited the community members. He
does not see a lot of encroachment on the farm either. It is challenging to get the land
prepared in time. The farmers are asked to sell back excess vegetables to the village,
which can minimize food security risks. They now have about 65 active members and
provided a shallow well and allowed them to move so cultivation is easier.
Challenges- the people who have been leased plots do not plan well, primarily
because it is a lower priority for them in relation to their activities at home and their
own gardens. They often plant too late and cannot get a good crop to harvest
because of this- dependent on rain-fed agriculture. The people are not reliable
because they are living in poverty and their first priority is to make money for their
families.
J. Livestock- they have capacity for 20 cattle. They have been given free consultancy by
Land-o-Lakes. they started out with 5 cows that were pregnant and got 3 calves out
of them. They selected a Fresian-boran cross per recommendation by Land-o-Lakes.
fresians are better milk producers but boran is a locally adapted breed. They use AI
and are focusing on keeping the Fresian breeds more. Now have 9 cows and three
bulls- will sell bulls. A challenge is that they don’t have the right facilities. They have
decided to focus more on dairy goats because they take less fodder and their milk is
more nutritious. They are getting help from World-Wide Sires and Farm Africa for
advice on breeding stock and procedure. Ideally they would like to give does to the
families and only keep the bucks in the facility. Would like to have families consume
what they need and then sell excess to the agro-processing unit to make value-added
products to sell. It is difficult to maintain the organic status; fodder is an issue (they
currently get fodder from the riparian zone). Operating costs are quite high.
Appendix Two 19
Benefits- sho-shos are giving compost to livestock to eat. They are also beginning to
make the connection between milk production and nutrition for the livestock. Labor
and resources are also difficult to organize and do not exactly have the right
equipment. Use of ox cart is very helpful;. Limited by labor.
K. Composting Unit- humanure and livestock. Can’t use humanure on any edible crop.
Only use for tree planting. It is challenging to get people to separate waste (organic
versus non) and to take it to the right place. Waste management in the village is
lacking a lot and they don’t even have a policy on it. They are starting to get an idea
of how to compost but they have to change their culture to do so; much more could
be composted. They need to work on capacity building and composting.
L. Chickens- they want the families to have their own eggs. Many of the families came
with chickens so they didn’t even need to give them any. They ended up just giving
them eggs so the population would multiply, but the population has gotten a disease
and has gone down. Families are now consuming the eggs instead of letting them
hatch. Would like to just have an incubator and give chicks to people so they can
have their own eggs and maintain the population. They don’t’ want to supply
chickens or eggs.
M. Apiculture- GEM project- provide them with hives so they can sell back to the agro-
processing unit and create a market for their products.
Challenges- human resources, people do not have the skills right now to manage, even
the staff. He is having to handle this on his own with Phillip. There is a lot of potential
for this project but they just need the capacity to make it work. The demand is for the new
hives with pure honey but the culture there is to use logs and traditional methods, but this
type of honey does not sell.
One of the main priorities is to do more in the homes to instill responsibility. Want to teach them
skills to practice sustainability when they leave, especially the children. For example, with the
home gardens, they don’t know if they will fully accept it. It is behind but taking shape. Other
areas are also practicing sustainability, for example the polytechnic and the clinic.

Outside community- Engaging the outside community was very difficult in the beginning. The
outside community is very important to the village. The outside villagers perception of NV is
changing, they no longer see it as the rich neighbor. They can now see that NV can benefit them.
They are more self-motivated than before, he has seen an improvement in the responsibility the
villagers feel. Short-term thinking of the surrounding villagers, they want immediate results or
cash, don’t conserve trees at all. Need to change the mindset. Overgrazing is also a big issue.
Historically, external agencies have come to do projects, especially on government lands, but
with no local input and no incentive to manage sustainably when the funding leaves. People will
illegally extract fuelwood or wood for charcoal.
NV- Less difficult to engage them because they are living in the village. It is also difficult to
engage the villagers to some degree because of their age being school age children and
grandparents. Getting the NV villagers to be responsible is really challenging. Also getting them
to make the systems connection- i.e. they need to plant seed oil plants to provide energy to pump
water, have to maintain trees to restore groundwater, etc.

Very informal and not well developed. They do not have any evaluation tools. People are not
currently evaluating the village, they need an independent consultant to assess finances. GEM is
Appendix Two 20
really the only organization that has been helping with evaluation- John has done some exercises
with the staff but beyond that, nothing is being done.
Staff evaluation- thinks they have a wonderful staff. Because a lot of them are Kamba they have a
cultural advantage in the area. Every 3 months they look at the budget against the work plan.
Mostly they have met their goals in the sustainability department, but not for the whole village. In
his department everyone does a 3 month performance evaluation. In the village the departments
function independently.
Engaging outside communities and NV villagers, getting them to be responsible. Cultural forces
that do not include conservation measures. Essential oil extraction plant supply. Dependence on
diesel for water pumps. There is a big problem because people/staff are not involved at all in the
decision-making process of the village- it is all top-down management.
5. What are the successes of these efforts (ecological, social, economic)? See above
in the future?
Overgrazing and deforestation in the adjacent areas. How to get the kids trained in other life
skills. All of the efforts currently are geared towards formal education. They are not receiving
training in farming, livestock management. NV is really losing the connections with the outside
community- this is a huge issue and NV needs to go back to the chiefs. They need to assess their
resources and work accordingly- there is a lot of donor pressure to add villagers and housing,
but they cannot handle it at this point with the resources they now have.
developed?
They are trying to make sure that the villagers have a sustainable life and to instill the kids with
skills to continue to do so when they leave the village. They are encouraging them to work on the
land they own, they need to help create options for them when they leave and develop skills for
life. There is a lot of opportunity for the families to earn money off of their land, the 29
grandparents own a lot of land where they could plant castor or develop in other ways. People
need to think beyond their life there.
Specific plan- had one but had to change and are currently developing a new one. They were
supposed to be sustainable by 2011 but want to add 5 years and need to create a more detailed
plan of action to do so.
They are not actively involved, they need to be. The future is compromised because they are not
involved. The outside community is looking ahead in small groups but the inside villagers are just
living from day to day.
Interviewee: NVS2
Date: 1 August 2008
economic issues}). How were needs of community members identified?
Perimeter shambas- the grandparents are preparing them with the children. They prepared the
land in April and planted even though rainfall was low. They are able to grow some vegetables
for themselves, which contributes to the sustainability of the village. They are also doing this in
the home gardens- all families have been planting skuma, spinach and other vegetables to help
Appendix Two 21
meet nutrition requirements and to supplement what they buy. The baskets- they do not have a
sufficient market and want to sell more to generate money for the household. They would also like
to give each family a goat for them to milk and get manure for compost. The grandparents are
also trying to work with the development of a gray water system to water their home gardens.
Needs identified- in the village they visit the homes to see where there are gaps, for example- food
supply, cleanliness, chores. They use observation to see what is needed. They also do informal
interviews with the villagers, often in a group setting. the reports the grandparents give to the
staff helps them identify and solve problems.
With the outside community they have barazas, for which the chief notifies them. They go to listen
to the community members to see where problems are. With the orphans a committee brings
needy cases to them and they start the process of bringing them to NV- they often meet with the
District Children’s officers, other NGOs, churches to identify needy cases.
Sho-shos- average involvement, often because they are resistant to change- it takes a lot to
engage them and train them. For example the blending issue is very difficult and they often do not
want to discipline the kids. Many are just not able to manage because of their age or other
disabilities.
Kids- more involved, for example in the wood lots and fuel wood collecting. Their participation in
the village activities is good- they are learning about farming in the home gardens and how to
plant trees. They are getting them interested in sustainability. They are ambitious and energetic.
Outside- average= they are offered labor and the chance to participate in village activities. They
provide a lot of support for the village and they are exchanging knowledge.
Monthly reports used to assess work completed, where they need to go back, move forward. They
share with the other departments in staff meetings.
4. What are the challenges or difficulties encountered with these efforts (e.g. has one
solution led to another problem, etc.)?
So many challenges especially with communication. The concept of sustainability is not fully
understood and there is a lot of argument between all of the players, also a lot of disorganization
which affects performance. There are many gaps between the staff and the villagers and things
are often left uncompleted. There are also confusing policies that are developed elsewhere and
not completely understood even though they are to be implemented. They also don’t know what to
do when the kids exit the village this isn’t being addressed.
Kids are performing well in school and work well with the teachers; attendance is high. Use of
locally available resources for example water, fuelwood, vegetation- these have helped generate
income (reduce poverty). Many people are beginning to see NV as their home and want to see it
flourish- especially with the villagers there is a sense of belonging. They staff and villagers are
learning from each other.
6. What are other issues that exist which are currently unaddressed, but may become a
concern in the future?
Working in the local community- no professionalism or SOP to work with them. They need
protocols for how the staff is to act and stick to these. At the end of the day they achieve very little
because they have unclear objectives- they have the objectives (ie getting the kids an education)
but no clear path to meet them. There is not a lot of follow- up on the cases of the villagers. The
kids are always in school so they cannot come to counseling. Transportation- they can’t get out to
visit families in the surrounding community. If each department could have a vehicle it would be
easier. There is a lack in staff, they don’t have enough people to meet their goals and they are
often very overwhelmed. The grandparents don’t understand the concept of sustainability and
think that it means that they will have to do everything and they came here because they were told
that they would have their basic needs met and the children’s education provided. They are
Appendix Two 22
scared that they will have to sustain the village themselves. The outside villagers think that if the
village is sustainable then they wont be able to work there anymore.
7. What are future plans for your work in this community? Is there a specific plan that has
been developed?
Work plan- just work from week to week- they don’t have a long term strategic plan.
No there is a lot of disconnection as to where the village should go- the disconnect is between the
villagers, the staff and the outside community.
Interviewee: NVS3
Date: 9 July 2008
The clinic is currently donor funded. They have to rely on the government for supply of essential
drugs. Staff, grandmothers, children currently do not pay for services; outside villagers do a cost
sharing program, they pay only for drugs not services. They have been open for 1.5 years and
want to earn money in the long-term. There are no other clinics in the area. The nearest hospital
is in Kitui- but there is no transportation. Comprehensive HIV care is difficult without a lab. They
could charge if they had a lab. Would like to start maternity services and vaccinations (which are
provided by the government). Would like ambulance services to the nearest hospital.
they have received outside help from other medical facilities. They also engage local leaders, for
example in the churches to create awareness about the clinic.
they are trying to cut costs by teaching preventative care.
the approach is community participation. They have a group of grandmothers they teach hygiene
so they can teach others in return and disseminate information on HIV prevention. The cost share
program makes health care more available to the outside community
use medical records, increasing numbers can show efforts are successful
questionnaire for patients, also visitors make comparisons between the clinic and others. if they
are meeting their budget
inventory reports are also indicators and serve as policing of drugs.
Level of awareness, community members don’t know that they want to be self-sustaining, they
don’t’ understand that they are currently donor funded and wont be funded forever. Clients think
it’s for free.
the population’s lack of education which reduces their level of understanding how NV works.
For example, the need to use deworming drugs or eco-toilets. The grandmothers are very old and
slow in taking in information, they cannot understand why they need to adhere to drug schedules
or why they shouldn’t overcook food. Poverty in the surrounding area. No secure means of
transportation. Communication-medicine is a field that is always changing and they are very
isolated; they don’t always have access to new information and techniques. The environment is
semi-arid. Electricity- there is no way to preserve medicines in a refrigerator. The children have
also been traumatized and it takes time to address their needs. The grandmothers need more
physical activity to maintain their health.
Appendix Two 23
Environmental- easier access to the facility for disabled people, beautification of the area around
the clinic so it’s a nicer place to visit. They have an incinerator to deal with waste. Encouraging
clients to plant trees. Trying to get people not to kill snakes so the mouse population will be
controlled. Also teaching the importance of cleanliness in the home to reduce pests; prevent
communicable diseases; and practice good hygiene. They do follow-ups to the homes to see if
people are following the advice.
Social- positive change in the community, especially in relation to perceptions of HIV/AIDS.
People have equal access to the clinic regardless of their education levels.
kids are seeing that they can live together. Providing access to medical care. They offer
individual and group counseling for villagers as well as the staff. Having many sports helps the
children get their energy out.
Economic- haven’t had time to really see the economic benefits; the best they can do is to
maintain accountability. They are seeing growth in the number of clients and would like to be
self-sustaining in the future.
Electricity is a big problem for them. They have space for a lab but no other components. There
are a lot of things that need to be addressed.
They can get drugs from the government but need to prove they have the capacity to manage
them.
been developed?
Vision- have the clinic be self-sustaining so it can contribute to the village’s welfare- more
patients, more services, more involvement from the government. Have a medicinal garden. Lab.
Maternity and infant care. More outreach services for HIV/AIDS prevention. Ambulance services.
A fridge to store vaccines, which are free from the government.
N/A
Interviewee:NVS4
9 July 2008
The village was built on the concept of sustainability. Home care works with the sustainability
department, for example, with the home gardens so the families can produce their own food. They
have given them demonstrations on how to maintain the gardens and every family has been given
a garden. The lack of rain is a challenge. Some families also have chickens for egg consumption.
Self-sustenance is a goal after they have been provided with basic needs (shelter, water). The
sho-shos have been invited to work in the main garden so they can take part in activities.
Before they came to NV, the grandmothers and orphans were destitute, orphaned and many
lacked shelter, had to drop out of school and other families had to provide for them, many of
them had psychological trauma. Food scarcity.
NV was also conceived to work jointly with outside community in order to give them ownership
over the village. All buildings have been constructed with the outside community providing labor.
Appendix Two 24
They have had to mobilize the community to work with NV, they have also taken children from the
surrounding areas.
Needs were prioritized by first meeting their most basic needs. Have meetings with grandmothers
to see what they want to do. They decided on an income generating activity, basket-weaving, the
staff has helped them to market their products, many of which have been purchased by volunteers
who come here. The home gardens were also conceived by the grandmothers expressing a need.
They also have meetings about the perimeter shambas. The same with the outside villagers.
Grandmothers come up with solutions to meet their needs. The outgrowers group has articulated
what their needs are.
Grandmothers- high level of involvement, especially because all of the ideas are channeled
through them. They allow them to be proactive.
Outside community- high level, very involved, perhaps even more when the village is managed by
a council of village elders, which was the initial plan.
For each project they have evaluations. Involve grandmothers in meetings to stay on track with
their needs. Come up with measurable objectives and discuss as a staff.
Some of the grandmothers don’t want to have their own gardens. They are given food from the
main farm so they don’t see the need. It is contradictory because the staff is telling them they
need to produce their own food but then they receive a food basket twice a week. They need more
knowledge of what to give them and what they should produce on their own.
Capacity of the grandparents to understand issues of organic farming, Some cannot work
because they are old and can’t manage the gardens, they need to encourage the children to
participate.
Age- the grandparents are traditionally lenient with grandkids and now they have to be the
authority.
Ecological- organic methods of farming. The community members are also learning the
techniques; also learning the benefits of afforestation. There is a transfer of knowledge from the
village to the outside community. Being an eco-village helps introduce the concept of
sustainability.
Social- Now they have access to more love and shelter. Living in the community reduces the
stigmas associated with HIV/AIDS. Now can go to school. They can also provide food, many
families would only eat once a day, maybe twice. The polytechnic also helps provide opportunity
to the surrounding communities. Unity within the sho-shos- before they were mainly on their own
but now they have a community to help them. The outside community is also building a
relationship with NV. Have alerted the staff when things were stolen. They have been able to
transfer knowledge and do capacity building exercises and been able to have ownership over the
village.
Economic- providing jobs to outside community. Helping livelihoods.
Power supply, solar is expensive.
Sho-sho involvement in the home gardens. The concept of sustainability is still being understood,
and especially since things have been provided to them.
been developed?
Appendix Two 25
Spend less on food because families can provide for themselves. For the sho-shos to be more
dependent, want a balance between what they give them and what the sho-shos provide. They
have individual work plans for each staff. They do reports every two weeks.
NV has it’s own vision of working towards sustainability. They work on future planning with the
sho-shos when they meet with them.
Interviewee: NVS5
Date: 11 July 2008
Helping the children to solve their own problems so they can handle them on their own in order
to move forward. They give support with psychological issues.
Not a lot of help- the community has no idea about counseling. They must work closely with the
grandmothers to identify problems.
Progress reports, you can see progress in the client after a few sessions.
The blended family is an issue because most of the kids are past the formative stages and they
know they are not blood related. Teenagers are a big challenge. The grandmothers spend a lot of
time with them but do not always alert them to problems until they have gone too far. The amount
of children (200+) is difficult to deal with. There are only two of them in the staff to deal with
them.
Being able to provide emotional support to the kids.
Some children outside of the village need help but they do not have access to counseling.
been developed?
Part of the plan to have a voluntary counseling and testing center and to help the outside
community as well. Would like for the counseling services to expand because she is the only one
at this point. Home care does not have a specific work plan.
Yes the grandmothers play a big role, they have a lot of knowledge. She doesn’t know about the
outside community.
Appendix Two 26
Interviewee: NVS6
Date: 14 July 2008
History of the school- public school. Started in May 2007 with 47 students and 5 teachers at
Standard 1-4. now they have 10 teachers and 224 students.
They have environmental clubs that plant trees. (had a very basic idea of sustainability-only
related it to environmental surroundings). Some of the classes are geared towards sustainability
especially science and hygiene, which teaches them to care for their surroundings.
They are involved with the outside community in sports and other activities, the Sho-shos play the
role of parents so they have to interact with them a lot as well. They identify and try to solve
problems together.
Education department requires 4 exams per subject per term (three terms). They compare the
school to neighboring schools and have a common exam for 43 schools in the region. Teachers
are evaluated using continual assessment tests.
Many, some children come from a difficult background and a poor education so they have to go
back in school even though they are older. Sexual problems. Language barriers, some kids have
a difficult time adjusting to their new environments. There have been some drop-outs.
Ecological- they have planted trees.
Social-children’s attitudes have changed and they are learning new morals and better social
behaviors.
Economic-activities and skills will eventually bring money to the area. For example, they hope to
offer computer courses that would bring money into the school. Trees planted may bring money
from fuel and timber sales.
What are other issues that exist which are currently unaddressed, but may become a concern in
the future?
Need to expand to accommodate more children and teachers. Need a well equipped computer
room.
been developed?
Have a strategic 2 year plan. Would like to involve outside community children more as well.
All activities are geared toward the children; need to integrate with the outside community more
to involve them.
Appendix Two 27
Interviewee: NVS7
Interviewer: Lindsey
Date: 11 July 2008
Came to help NV get started with woodlots using appropriate techniques in dryland habitats.
Father Dag had visited one of their other sites where permaculture and agroforestry were
being used and he like the idea and wanted them to come to NV. Their first role was to
restore the riparian zone. It now has many natives and some exotics. Used spot-farming
techniques by having the wage laborers plant vegetables around the trees so they could be
watered at the same time. They then established other woodlots. They wanted the outside
villagers to be incorporated into the village so they established the perimeter shamba system;
the shambas would also provide food for the village if the farmers had excess they could sell
it to NV, and to provide protection to the village as well but to keep the boundary permeable.
“friendly security”; they would also have access to water their livestock. They did a lot of
capacity building with these projects.
establish markets for NV and outside villagers and run an internship program for Kenyan
students (Jomo Kenyatta University; KIOF; Kenyatta University; and Egerton University and
students from Ukumbani) to give them first hand experience and use applied knowledge and
outreach. This also helps establish relationships between NV and universities. The interns are
placed in various areas at NV and if they work out, it can serve as an employment
opportunity. The Organic Outgrowers Group is working to build capacity in agroforestry
techniques; they have registered with the government as an organization. Trying to expand
from gardens to honey production, chickens, and to help in “mother tree mapping”, in which
they identify a tree with good seed production and they collect the seeds to raise in the
nursery and then sell to the village.
the sho-shos were not around at that point. The outside community members were consulted on
projects and asked to participate. They were hired to plant the trees in the riparian restoration
project- they had some input but really the species selection was done by some outside
professionals. They did train them on water conservation and environmental awareness during
the planting. The sand dams were built by the outside community, mainly women, used all local
materials and labor. Interns are supposed to do outreach and interact with the community. The
outgrowers hold workshops to build capacity and develop projects. The sho-shos have been
involved in decision-making; they do workshops with the kids. Outsiders also articulate what they
need (e.g. with the shallow well that is currently under construction for them to have easier
access to water for perimeter shamba gardens).
performance evaluation of the seedlings’ survival rates; biodiversity surveys; outside
consultants. Evaluation component was small- had to rely mainly upon the staff’s assessment and
expert opinions. They had no model to go off of.
not structured. Use John and Victor’s input. Quarterly reports to higher ups and hold meetings to
discuss progress. Use in-house evaluation in this way. Discussion with participants.
the wage labor was very expensive and the unions formed were difficult to work with, they ended
up changing the system to pay laborers based on the work completed. Using organic methods is
Appendix Two 28
very challenging. Lack of understanding of what to do when outside villagers provided labor-
they had to micromanage them to get the work finished. Trying to get them to use more
environmentally appropriate techniques was difficult.
lack of staff to help in these activities. A lot of challenges. Not enough water infrastructure for
the activities. They have 3 bore holes, 22 shallow wells, 7 sand dams. Don’t have a cost effective
way of pumping water that is also renewable. Pests- use of biopesticides for organic farming.
Remote location-they are disconnected from markets and transportation is a problem. The
program is new and there are a lot of institutional issues, for example the collaboration between
departments is an issue and there are a lot of conflicting opinions- often project’s initiation can
be delayed. Poverty around the village- for example they are promoting organic farming but the
villagers have no way to pay for seeds and are dependent on NV for them and land, people can
only invest in their own labor. Dryland habitat- massive crop failures are often an issue, the
perimeter shambas rely upon rain fed agriculture, which is difficult. Interns don’t always work
out.
Ecological- restoration of riparian zone, before it was very overgrazed. A trench was dug along
one side of the river to check erosion. Health has been restored to the riparian zone. Also allowed
natural regeneration to take place by minimizing grazing. Reducing deforestation and
overgrazing of the 1000 acres. Developing an understanding in the outside community of
environmental awareness. Social- gave people a new level of exposure to the outside world also
allowed them to exchange ideas. The community used to be very isolated and closed, this has
helped open them. Development of common goals and community groups. Church/social hall.
Economic- wage labor for outsiders. Agroproduction; the have learned new skills in silviculture,
farming, conservation that they can take with them. ecological benefits- GEM is promoting
sustainable techniques and organic farming; water conservation measures, rotational cropping
methods. Trying to change the way they harvest honey because the log methods kill all of the bees
and don’t produce quality honey. Promoting of afforestation to villagers and planting. Would like
for the woodlots to be seed banks because the only place to get seeds in Kenya is Nairobi and you
have to buy by the kilo and it is far away. Trying to use biofuels in an integrated approach to
reduce their carbon footprint. Also for fuelwood, using coppicing methods for leucaena glauca is
efficient.
concern in the future? N/A
been developed?
Make sure the village is self-sustaining in food and energy production and is able to gain extra
income for other needs such as medical. Give people the skills to use sustainable methods when
they leave the village so they can continue the practice in their own homes. To make NV a true
example of an eco-village. For the GEM program- to establish markets. More interns. Further
development of commercial woodlots.
They are not fully involved in developing a shared vision because the planning of activities is very
disconnected for example between departments. The board of directors makes decision but they
don’t always apply to what is happening in the field.
Appendix Two 29
Interviewee: NVS8
Date: 9 July 2008
The polytechnic is new- it began on 17 March, 2008 and classes started on 6 May. The
polytechnic contributes to sustainability by producing products that can be used for income
generation to benefit the orphans. For example the beehives were made there and sold to
villagers, they had a net profit of 10,000 shillings (about US$166). One of the major problems
before the polytechnic began was that children had no place to get a higher education after
primary school. The polytechnic gives them an opportunity to learn skills. There are currently 14
students. 11 are from surrounding villages and 3 are from NV. The ages are 16-25. the school
keeps them busy and out of trouble. The students are required to complete 1980 hours of work for
the first session. The trades are garment making and fashion design; appropriate carpentry and
jointery; and building and construction technology.
Materials for projects have been included in the budget and some materials and tools have been
donated. For carpentry they have used low-cost leftover materials from lumber yards. For the
long term they have planted trees that they themselves maintain so they can use these trees in the
future. They are teaching them afforestation techniques and the ecological and economic benefits
of it.
People from both within the village and outside seem grateful. The school is close to where they
live and parents can monitor their children’s progress. Training is better here than in other areas
so there is a demand to come to the school. As far as who makes decisions on how it runs, they
saw what would be appropriate given the context of the region and the education levels of the
people here. Kitui is a handicraft area so they knew it would be in line with the culture. They also
had to consider their current resources. For example, they don’t have a steady source of
electricity.
They are only in their 1st quarter so there isn’t a lot of evaluation at this point. However the
enthusiasm, participation, attitudes, of the students is evident. They are developing a stronger
sense of self-worth because they are learning skills.
Material supply-especially timber. Deforestation is an issue in the country, but local suppliers
are not often stocked. Government regulations also limit felling and wood is expensive.
Lack of electricity- need to run generator to warm it up or use it for only one machine, so it’s
very inefficient. They need an alternative source of power, but it requires a lot of money and
technical assistance.
Ecological- establishment of the woodlot is important for the rain cycle. It helps balance the
carrying capacity.
Social- providing children with opportunities. The presence of the polytechnic is bringing the
outside villages and NV closer. The trainees also get more social interaction and learn how to
work together. They are also involved in sports and the church.
Appendix Two 30
Economic- money generated by the beehives, keeps money in the region instead of going to
outside places. The trainees are given skills to use in the future for income generation. It is
helping contribute to Kenya’s 2030 goal of being a MDC.
Have to depend on families, but they can’t afford to give them anything. For example they don’t
have any uniforms. The financial contribution would help, they are provided with lunch but they
don’t pay any school fees. They may be in the red this budget.
been developed?
The government has pledged support, possibly to build a boarding house so they can have more
students. Have a plan to introduce new trades in 2009-handicrafts, welding, and hairdressing.
Need to provide more opportunities for women. Would like to have more trades in the future and
possibly make it into a technical college.
Outside community- need to involve them more to become more engaged in NV. Perhaps form a
group of 13 elected people to create a shared vision.
NV- the Board develops the vision, need more collaboration to further develop.
Interviewee: NVS9
Date: 11 August 2008
Goal of the sustainability program that was envisioned by Father Dag was to complete two major
goals- to provide revenue to run the humanitarian activities and to work with the regional
community to promote livelihoods. These goals were to be accomplished by creating
infrastructure to support various agroproduction activities- for food, fuel, fodder and some other
commodities, also some of which would be used for the villager’s consumption and activities.
This infrastructure included rain water harvesting structures, sand dams, shallow wells, non-
petrol based pumping systems using solar panels, drip irrigation, storage tanks- all of these
activities are to support the permaculture program. In the permaculture program, which is
organic, they are using polyculture, intercropping and a deliberate planning system. The past
three years have been geared towards setting all of this up, working on capacity building,
identification of appropriate crops for the habitat and for both the rain-fed and drip fed
plantings. A lot of this was figuring out what not to grow e.g. tomatoes and now they are growing
what they can. They are trying to engage the outside community with the production of castor oil-
they need to do cost estimates for large scale production, this could be a reliable market for the
outsiders. The livestock unit infrastructure has been developed- the current situation however is
difficult because they don’t have enough nutritious fodder but hopefully the agroproduction can
help solve this problem.
The first idea was for it to be an eco-village- to work with local materials and generate income
(e.g. beekeeping is a very important but has not reached that critical scale where it is sustainable
and can create income- they have involved the OOG and are enriching the practice by using the
Langstroth hives; they are expensive and you need to bring the colony, but, bee-keeping is a great
way to supply pure organic honey and provide the pollinators the village needs in the farm).
Appendix Two 31
Melia volkinsii- this is a very promising prospect for income generation, especially if they want to
break free from donors and to give them more self-reliance.
Sustainability means business. But the management of the sustainability program has not been in
tandem with business management. COGRI is a humanitarian organization and does not operate
as a business so there is a disconnect between its goals and inability to generate income. It is not
working like a business, it’s working like a charitable organization- the fusion of a traditional
money guzzler versus a money generator are at odds.
They need better management. They have now trained staff but paying them is an issue. Often
development programs become dependent on donor funding because they have not created
entrepreneurial-ship. It is a big worry. They could be using the premise they wanted as a normal
village if they could create/cultivate children who can provide for their families and help their
villages as well. Instead, they hire someone for 500Ks to pick their food for them. They see the
children as special and just want them to get an education, but they are more detrimental to
sustainability because they are not gaining any skills otherwise or contributing. There is no work
to help the kids build lives after they leave the village. They need to contribute to the development
of the children. It does not have to be monetary but they could do more. There is a lack of energy
to implement such efforts.
Regional commodity trade is an easy way to develop a market for the outside community.
If they want to generate economic productivity they need to create a position based upon
entrepreneurial that earns money on commission. Their personnel costs are too high and things
don’t get done. It needs to be a results-based management system. They have the infrastructure,
they have a good relationship with the outside community, staff has gained skills so something
tangible has been created, but they need to cut costs, and be business focused and do evaluations
based upon results. The program does have potential to make a lot of money.
They can grow food in the dryland but need to do it without diesel because they will never make
money if they have to pay for petrol. They need to manage water and the water storage capacity.
You cannot just farm in the traditional African way, which is to plant and wait for the rains. They
need to store water in the times of rain. Using high-tech and making it accessible to poor people,
they need to use technology to help people. This is a challenge for the sustainability program.
They need to build more capacity in the community so they are not dependent on the staff and can
use their labor and knowledge. They need to create a system of mutual benefits- for example they
use a non-resident cultivator system where the villagers use the land, water, seeds, and are
obliged to sell to the village. If they could work on water storage to allow them to farm in the dry
season this would be better.
They need to solve the labor problem; they need to reevaluate the vision of the village. They have
had a deficit every year and for various reasons- probably cannot rely upon rain fed agriculture
but they can use it for some seasonal hearty crops eg millet, sunflowers, hay. The polytechnic will
grow with time and they need to create a Market for the products.
Sho-shos- high especially with the home gardens and gray water, the kids are not integrated but
should be especially with the agroproduction. Outside-growing they are producing crops with the
use of the water infrastructure. They produce, NV buys (labor, crops, etc).
No formal process either internally or externally. Needs to be done to support new proposals.
They need an end of the year external evaluation. They are really lacking. They really need a
method of evaluation. They have failed to make money. They need now to just break even. If they
could create opportunities for self-employment not just employment they could help this issue. If
people are self-employed that will provide motivation. They need to revamp the employment
scheme- give them all of the materials, the capacity, allow them the access a market for their
products. That is sustainability- interdependence. Currently the community does not have
Appendix Two 32
materials or market or knowledge- NV can provide both. Perhaps they can do a cost-share
program for tools.
There is an issue of culturally appropriate practices and fusing different perspectives. They need
to work with the regional economy.
The sustainability program is an asset to the village and the outside community. But it needs to be
sustainable economic development. There is a lack of inventiveness in the community, brain drain
from the area. What is the cause of poverty? Ignorance, lack of know how and understanding the
consequences of actions taken. They need exposure and know how to live sustainably, how to
process development of human capacity to live well. Need to develop the knowledge they already
have. The concept of sustainability is not understood they need to know how to plan for making
money, saving it and not wasting the resources they do have. They need to shed the donor driven
mentality.
been developed?
Future plans- melia plot, continuing the income generating activities such as the regional
commodity trade, horticultural production for an organic market, upgrading the livestock; bees;
long term- castor, melia. Strategic plan for sustainability has been developed (Woodlands Trust
2005).
Not a formal procedure or an interactive process where they deliberately get together for that
purpose.
Interviewee: NVS10
Date: 8 July 2008
Worked with the community with the perimeter shamba to show them that farming is a business
and teaching them how to do it in the drylands. People were against farming because they
thought it was too much work. In the beginning some people liked the ideas but others did not.
But when the practices began to work others began to catch on.
Now she is employed by the village to work in the main farm. She is very happy because they
(outside villagers) are using methods they’ve been taught at NV on their own farms.
Livestock- they’ve done workshops on livestock management, especially for fodder conservation
during the dry season. The people used to sell their livestock in the dry season because they
didn’t have food for them, but then they had to pay double the price during the wet season to buy
the livestock back. They have also given them information on better breeds that are accustomed
to the drylands.
The village has also helped the perimeter shamba people in other ways. They have provided a
means of transport if needed, there is a clinic they have access to if they need medical care.
Ecological issues prior to the project- no sand dams, this has helped them improve their
livelihoods because the riparian area provides fodder and also has more water, before there was
Appendix Two 33
not any water for livestock. They can also use the grasses for thatched roves. Economic issues
before the project- there was not any employment before. For example, John’s project is helping
create a honey production system. They can also sell crops to Nairobi and maybe sell to the NV
as well.
Selection of project- they have planted species that have the potential to bring income. More
vegetables that did not exist before- now there is more demand for these vegetables. Sometimes
they meet with local/tribal leaders to see what the indigenous knowledge is. with the sho-shos
they ask them which vegetables they like but also tries to build capacity to teach them how to use
new vegetables that are nutritious.
Sho-shos- not very involved- at least not as much as is expected of them. In the beginning they did
not outline exactly what they wanted them to do and now it is difficult to change. They are not
very informed in environmental conservation- some of their income generating actvities are not
sustainable (e.g. grandfathers are felling trees without paying for them or replanting to replace.
Also felling trees for fuelwood.
Orphans- they have improved a lot. You can tell a difference between the ones that have been
here for a short time and those who’ve been here for longer, they are usually happier. She thinks
they have the will but not the time because they are very engaged in school, and when they are
out of school they still have to wash their uniforms, do homework.
Perimeter shamba workers- have been very cooperative. They like learning and even though it
has been difficult they have stuck with it. They are limited in the amount of seeds available- they
don’t know the right type of seeds for the area. Explaining the right seeds for the area is difficult.
She thinks they are willing to change though.
With gardens you can see results very tangibly. In the perimeter shambas- they can see how the
plants are performing as well. They do informal interviews to see how people feel about the
projects. They also conduct group meetings.
Organic farming in dryland conditions. Plants recommended for biopesticides are often very
expensive and require more water than the farm can accommodate.
Pests. All of the land around the farm is very degraded so the pests all come to the farm, they are
forced to have guards at night to protect the produce.
Water salinity. Stunts crops, can change the taste. Drip lines get blocked very easily.
Lack of awareness. Sho-shos and some of the staff don’t have a good understanding of what
sustainability is. They also have a difficulty with long-term thinking.
Eco-toilets. Don’t understand how or why to use them. They don’t always use disinfectants either,
and the importance of maintaining hygiene.
Use of new plants. Some of the species that are appropriate to grow here and more nutritious are
not commonly used so it is difficult to get them to change their ways.
Lack of information. They don’t have books, reliable internet to gain information on new
management techniques.
Ecological- in the riparian area, some species that were thought to be extirpated have come back.
Social- improved relations with the outlying community. They know they have something in
common now. The organic outgrowers are an official group and can now get loans. They are
working more as a group now than they were before. The perimeter shamba lands have provided
a boundary for the village and given access to land for community members. The church also
provides a social atmosphere.
Economic- provision of casual labor.
Appendix Two 34
Payments for services, sometimes they are late and this frustrates the workers.
Communication between NV and the community. For example, they used to give them rides to
Kwa Vonza, but this is a liability and they stopped without telling the community why. They don’t
really understand that NV isn’t a rich neighbor, that it is a NGO.
been developed?
They want to have families producing most of their own crops so the main farm can be used for
commercial sales.
Work plan- continue working with the outgrowers group so they can have enough to sell and
consume.
Not a specific time-line.
A stable water source for the future, especially in the perimeter shambas to reduce poverty.
NV- not sure.
Interviewee: NVS11
Date: 16 July 2008
At NV they perceive sustainability from a multi-dimensional view. They want the villagers to look
at all aspects, for example food production, health, nutritional requirements. In the school they
are teaching the children to be well rounded and environmentally aware. They try to do the same
with the polytechnic students by teaching them multiple skills. They want to teach the kids to have
dreams and try to do big things (they polytechnic also aims to provide products for the
community).
NGOs have a long history of receiving external aid; they want to be self-sustaining so that the
program can run without funding from external donors. They have only been running for a year
and a half, so it is still forming. Often groups receive funding without realizing the impact it will
have, they wanted to create a place for orphans that would be similar to their culture and
situations before they came to NV. In orphanages kids are often institutionalized- they didn’t
want to recreate that here. They offer the basic needs to children and people who were destitute.
They want the outside village to benefit as well to gain skills for sustainable development. It is
difficult because people need to see results before they can really understand and pick up skills-
right now sustainability is the dream they are trying to achieve so they can’t be a model yet.
Trying to teach the children skills to be sustainable when they leave. Finding a balance with the
children is difficult because they are still forming and have experienced a trauma.
They are trying to teach organic farming to teach those values.
At NV these are the three priorities they are attempting to merge: help destitute orphans, create
individuals that can sustain themselves; promote organic farming.
Needs were identified- they learned from the Lea Toto program and a catholic based NGO based
in Kitui called Home Based Care. They had intended to do a baseline survey to identify needs but
it didn’t happen. They are trying to preserve cultural values- much more so than in the COGRI
Lea Toto program. They attempt to channel this through the grandmothers.
Appendix Two 35
In the outside community- about 80% of the surrounding families were informed of NV but less
than that were actually engaged in the work here. They do not have a lot of involvement in the
childcare department. The theft was really disappointing, but they also saw a lot of support from
the community after it happened. Ownership in caring for the children is growing. They need to
create more understanding of NV’s goals.
Sho-shos- not a lot of involvement, but it gradually increasing. They are supposed to have 100%
responsibility for the children but they are still working on creating discipline. Home care really
has to monitor the sho-shos, there have been some cases of negligence. The grandparents are
still figuring out what is expected of them. Staff can direct them but the involvement really needs
to grow.
Have not developed and it is not very official. For staff- do appraisals will probably use Lea Toto
as an example.
For the children and the grandparents- they have used a database to monitor who is here. But
they have not developed a proper system and are relying upon progress reports, it is a major set-
back. They need databases to manage each department.
New project. There is no database, no blueprint to guide them and don’t know where to for
advice. For example in the school they are all orphans; the blended family concept is new as
well.
Sustainability. No policy framework and they are developing as they go.
Behavior challenges. The children all come from different backgrounds and the ranges of
discipline vary significantly; there are children that have been abused; many of them have a very
negative self-esteem and are projecting this here. Prostitution for some of the girls was an issue
before and now there have been cases of teenage pregnancy but they have not yet developed a
policy for this.
The blending process. It is not unusual for grandparents to care for children, but they are trying
to merge different value systems.
Resources and infrastructure, lack of internet and electricity- they are expected to deliver but
often lack the resources to do so and a lot of time is wasted. Lack of transportation.
Communicating the concept of sustainability and the ideas under which NV operates.
Funding. People on the outside think NV has a lot of money and they don’t think they need help
from them. For example in the school- it is private because they need to address the children’s
needs so they cannot get money from the government because they would then require outsiders
to come as well.
Security. It has not been too much of a problem but since the theft they need more awareness in
the outside community.
Dryland habitat- producing enough food for the villagers.
Ecological successes- difficult at the moment to tell. The riparian areas have improved because
there is more greenery and more water in the wells from the tree planting and sand dams. They
are treating NR with respect- for example they don’t clear any unnecessary areas when they
construct buildings. This will take time to reveal itself.
Social- 260 kids are now given a home, education and basic needs are being met. Education- for
outside villagers they are learning farming techniques. The outside villagers are also getting
exposure, before it was very closed and now it is opening up to a degree and they are receiving
training that changes their perspectives. The clinic- the next closest is 15kms but now they can
receive better health care. They have been able to expand water infrastructure for the benefit of
the outsiders as well. They are also trying to get electricity and help improve roads. They cannot
claim full responsibility for these actions, but they are an indirect result of NV being here.
Appendix Two 36
Economic- employment for the outside villagers. Trying to create a commodity trade as well to
sustain livelihoods.
Currently they need to develop community ownership of the project. For now the main goal has
just been to set the village up and now they need to do thorough community mobilization, this is
very important for the sustainability of the village.
May need to start an outreach program for the children in the community who cannot be at NV.
They don’t want to stray too much from the vision of the community but they need to develop a
system of governance. Originally they wanted a council of elders from the community to manage
it, but this may not be realistic. Perhaps they need to form a sub-board. And develop a system to
engage the grandmothers.
Need to review what has happened so far- a lot has happened without surveys and planning; they
need to move slower to see what is working here. They need a more practical approach, for
example the sustainability program has not even been able to feed the families they have so far,
what will happen when there are more children?
been developed?
Move forward towards sustainability and develop a source of income for the village. More
community involvement to help secure livelihoods. Create productive citizens from orphans, more
outreach services.
They have a 10 year strategic plan within COGRI but the NV part is still being developed. Each
department has a plan but they need to make a comprehensive plan.
Thinks that a shared vision can be developed. Education is the future and the children are
performing well. They have the will but need to develop it.
The external community is divided. The concept of sharing knowledge is growing but didn’t exist
from the beginning and they still need a lot of education to ensure that expectations are known
and understood.
Interviewee: NVS12
Date: 11 August 2008
The first initiative was to clear the land for cultivation; they planted maize, cow peas, and beans
but the lack of rains caused the harvest to be minimal. They got a glimpse of the dryness of the
area at this point. in December 2005 they got a better harvest and were able to sell some of the
maize and store the rest to have for the villagers when they arrived.
In 2006 the sustainability program began. Maxwell came to be the sustainability consultant.
When he came they diversified the crops and found which worked and which did not. They got
into carbon farming and wanted to be a center for carbon farming in the area and to engage the
outside community. They were not able to get the outgrowers group on board and are now just
planting the wood lots.
In 2005 with biofuels- planted jatropha, which did not take. Cuttings from local plants seem to be
more effective. Castor- is thriving and they can hopefully exploit it as a long term income
generator.
Appendix Two 37
Villagers- some interest in farming from the grandparents but mostly they cannot be involved
because of their age. Children are focused on education but they are also trying to engage them
in agricultural activities so they can gain skills.
Outsiders- the perimeter shamba system has not worked out as they had planned or hoped. Water
is the major issue for the ps system. They had to haul it a very long way. The sand dams and
shallow wells have helped the riparian area, but still it is a challenge to haul water from there to
the farms, even with the ox. They are relying on rain-fed agriculture; they have been given access
to drip lines and a shallow well. Their participation is low to medium. They are not involved in
decision making. The area is very underdeveloped; people were and are living a traditional
African lifestyle- they are dependent on the knowledge that NV can bring to them. They were slow
in learning about appropriate crops for the dryland habitat.
Maxwell prepares a report every three months as an assessment and for recommendations. The
accountants check to see if money is in order and if they are moving towards self-reliance, but it
is slow right now. They have had to learn a lot.
Developing a workable systeml; finding the right crops and figuring out the planting schedule.
On the business side- which is the largest challenge- developing this dimension to create a profit;
management is a challenge in regards to the business.
Permaculture is challenging and labor intensive.
Reforestation. Sand dams helping to recharge groundwater which enables pumping. Castor-
promises income. The livestock program.
Permaculture needs further research in order to develop a more effective system. They are
currently only getting greens and need to get a system in place to feed the children.
been developed?
Long term vision- considerable income from M. volkinsii to provide an income. Jatropha could be
a part of this as well. Castor will be further developed. They will keep the permaculture if the
other projects can work but it may be only used to feed the village not as an income generator.
They have a ten year strategic plan for NV- hope to have 1000 kids by 2012. the school,
polytechnic are functioning. The clinic hopes to have a lab. The resource center and the social
hall exist.
Grandparents-very much in dialogue with the management in child care and they are helping
provide an education. They have come from a very disadvantaged background (poverty, AIDS).
Right now they are just trying to get them to view life with hope and to feel secure, to have their
basic needs met and help them through the training and build self-esteem. The rehabilitation must
happen first.
Outside community- they are trying to respect their traditions. There have been a lot of
challenges for them in adapting (eg learning how to farm organically). They are involved with the
polytechnic. They have not opened the school to the outside community. NV is a village not an
institution but currently cannot provide the independent services. The sustainability project is an
independent project to some extent but they lack expertise in dryland approaches so it is difficult.
No (the answer) the outsiders can help in molding the village but they are not as engaged. The
council of elders vision is not yet in place.
Appendix Two 38
Interviewee: NVL1
Interviewers: Lindsey, Nancy
Date: 2 August 2008
Questions asked: actions (modified)
1. What were the circumstances in the area prior to NV being here?

lack of employment; high rate of orphans, which affected everyone in the area; lack of fresh
water; high rates of charcoal burning; food shortage- serious faminefor about 5 years; diseases
associated with water quality; malaria; tb; lack of electricity; lack of check dams which affected
crop productivity.
2. How has NV helped address these issues?
Lack of employment- a lot of people in the area have been employed and have been able to use
the money to fix their homes and provide for their families.
Orphans- many have been taken to NV; the community is also being educated about HIV/AIDS-
NV staff has come to barazas to educate during the meetings.
Water- they have not helped the community- all of the work has gone into the village
Charcoal-there is less felling of trees because they are getting employment and not using
charcoal as a source of income generation.
They have received training in farming techniques but they can’t always use the skills because
there is a lack of water.
Diseases- have helped with awareness and have also introduced some medicinal plants.
Lack of electricity-n/a
Check dams- they have gained skills in building them.
3. What are other benefits of NV being here?
Polytechinic- education opportunity and skills building.
Brick-making- capacity building
They have learned how to compost using manure and organic waste to grow vegetables.
4. Challenges or problems?
Low pay rate, delay of payment. Tribalism the staff are often from just one area.
5. What is the level of community involvement in these efforts at NV?
His office/he have been called to help and he goes there to help them solve problems. They have
been involved.
6. Are there future plans to work with NV?
To make NV a village and have a village elder to report to him so he knows more about what is
happening there just like all of the other villages in his region. It should be one of the
grandparents.
7. Is the community actively involved in shaping the vision or future of NV?
They are involved in some activities with the village, but not in shaping its future.
8. What are the current problems in the community?
Lack of food, water, poor roads, poor housing, diseases, lack of education; high fertility rates.
9. Does your community come together to discuss and develop future plans?
They first have a meeting with the leaders and the Locational Development Committee and then
they call a baraza with the community.
Additional information- what can be done to improve NV? For example with the polytechnic it
could become a boarding school in which the fees would help generate income for the village.
They need to have more income generating activities at the village. Water- they need a more
consistent supply to grow crops. A good relationship with SHGs or CBOs to assist the village
would also help.
They want a good relationship with the village. Perhaps NV could help them dig a bore hole that
the community can use to help create unity and less division; or sand dams or helping to build
road infrastructure.
Appendix Two 39
Interviewee:NVL2
Interviewers: Lindsey, Nancy
Date: 28 July 2008
1. What were the circumstances in the area prior to NV being here?

lack of water, food scarcity; many orphans, lack of employment and poor education; lack of
health facilities
orphans, lack of employment, transportation, lack of higher education or technical schools
2. How has NV helped address these issues?
water, they have benefited from the sand dams and bore holes; education- primary school has
been provided for the orphans which is good because they were idle before, local teachers have
also gotten employment.
the workers are able to send their children to school. The polytechnic helps some kids build skills
that will help them get jobs or be self-employed. Transport- can take people who are sick to the
hospital. Roads have been improved.
health- some people have been able to use the clinic instead of having to travel long distances.
3. What are other benefits of NV being here?
it has helped to eradicate poverty, for example before some people couldn’t even meet the basic
needs of their families but the wages they have earned are helping them do so now. People have
also learned better farming techniques and better methods of animal husbandry. Organic farming
methods, use of non-toxic pesticides.
capacity in construction; use of local materials for building
brick-making
4. Challenges or problems?
teenage pregnancy, if they get pregnant they are sent away, back home from NV and this causes
a lot of problems. Because they are paid low wages they steal from the village.
workers complain that they are underpaid; delayed payment of wages; many of the people
working at NV are from far away and local people are not considered for positions.
workers are not given transport and have to travel far. Family issues have occurred (e.g. some
break-ups). Some orphans have complained that they do not have enough clothing or shoes.
5. How are these problems addressed?
Teenage pregnancy-they are not involved in the problem solving of this issue
Low wages/delayed payment- NV does not consult them, they hear about problems from the
workers
lack of transportation, people just have to walk, bike or go by boda boda, which is expensive.
separation of couples they try to discuss with the pair; they also hold barazas, community
meetings, to discuss issues. As far as the orphans’ needs sometimes they can purchase for them.
6. What is the level of community involvement in these efforts at NV?
education, they have common exams and sports. There is no consultation with them and NV-
there used to be but now there isn’t any at all. They would like to be more involved. Now they
have no idea what is going on at NV, they don’t hold barazas with them any more and don’t have
any communication.
7. Are there future plans to work with NV?
NV has isolated themselves, they would like to collaborate.
8. Is the community actively involved in shaping the vision or future of NV?
No, see number 7
9. What are the current problems in the community?
because they have to travel to get there a lot of the community workers spend their wages on
eating while working
Appendix Two 40
the cost of treatment in the clinic is high; poor administration (e.g. with the orphans). Their
office is not involved but would like to be so they can help. The village does not take time to talk
to community members and often do not even know what is happening in the village. Security is
also loose because there is not a fence.
10. Does your community come together to discuss and develop future plans?
The decision making process- they hold barazas with leaders, stakeholders, village elders to
discuss issues and inform them of government policies and schemes. Development in the
community.
At the end of the interview they had some questions and were interested in working with the
village in these ways:
1. buying bricks from NV
2. storage of pigeon peas on nv to store in times of drought and then the people can buy at a
fair price
3. trainings on how to use organic pesticides
4. it would be great for the community to receive more training on farming, animal
husbandry, etc.
Appendix Two 41
Results Categorized by Objective
Objective 2: Identify the needs of each community prior to initiation of the project.
Propositions
Community Member Interviews with Outside Community Workers (7 interviews, 8

interviewees)
Need or Issue Additional statements Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“lack of “the whole community was relying 2/7 NVO1; NVO7
water…problems on rain to raise their vegetables”
related to farming”
“scarcity of water” “lack of water”; “there was no 3/7 NVO3;
water”; NVO4;
NVO6;
“orphans…not being “many children did not have parents 2/7 NVO1; NVO5
cared for” and they had to care for them”
“(no) SHGs or CBOs N/A 1/7 NVO1
so they were very
unorganized”
“lack of roads and “lack of transport”; “lack of 5/7 NVO1;
transportation” transportation and roads”; “road NVO3;
infrastructure was lacking”; “roads NVO4;
were very bad” NVO5; NVO6
“lack of employment” “lack of jobs”; “did not have a place 5/7 NVO1;
(2) to work”; no work and no way to NVO3;
get money” NVO4;
NVO5; NVO6
“the area was a desert” “land that is now NV was heavily 2/7 NVO1; NVO2
overgrazed and degraded from
people felling trees for charcoal”
“many problems just N/A 1/7 NVO2
meeting basic needs”
“didn’t have food” “food scarcity” 2/7 NVO2; NVO3
“didn’t N/A 1/7 NVO2
have…clothing”
“didn’t have…enough N/A 1/7 NVO2;
money for school fees”
“bringing up their N/A 1/7 NVO7
children was very hard”
“lack of knowledge N/A 1/7 NVO3
about farming
practices”
Appendix Two 42
Need or Issue Additional statements Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“crops were often N/A 1/7 NVO3
destroyed by animals
that hid in the thick
brush because the land
was uncleared”
“lot of insecurity N/A 1/7 NVO4
because the brush on
the land that is now NV
was very think…people
could easily steal
livestock and hide them
there”
“no medical facility” N/A 1/7 NVO5
Community Member Interviews with Grandparents Living in NV (10 interviews, 10

interviewees)
Need or Issue Additional Statements Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“did causal “tried to sell eggs to earn some 4/10 NVI1; NVI2;
labor…sometimes… income”; “had to do casual labor…not NVI4; NVI5
couldn’t find work” always able to get work”; “was only
able to grow and sell vegetables”
“clothing” “received help for clothing” 2/10 NVI1; NVI7
“food” “before the kids…were not…getting 5/10 NVI1; NVI5;
enough food”; “often did not have NVI6; NVI9;
enough food”; “struggled…providing NVI10
enough food”; “used to have a very
hard time…looking for food”
“they had to go “can now bathe with soap”; 3/10 NVI1; NVI4;
without…soap” “soap…they never had (this) before” NVI10
“children’s basic “needs not being met”; “meeting basic 7/10 NVI2; NVI3;
needs not being met” needs very difficult”; “could not meet NVI4; NVI5;
their needs”; “didn’t have enough to NVI6; NVI8;
provide for their basic needs”; “could NVI9
no longer meet needs”; “care for the
grandkids…wasn’t really able to do it”
“travel far for water” “to fetch…water …have to go long 2/10 NVI2; NVI4;
distances” ;“struggle to get water” NVI5
“to fetch…fuelwood N/A 1/10 NVI4
…have to go long
distances”
Appendix Two 43
Responses Codes
“kids not going to “sometimes they could not attend 6/10 NVI5; NVI6;
school” school because she didn’t have the NVI7; NVI8;
money to pay school fees”; “not able to NVI9; NVI10
send kids to secondary school because
she couldn’t not pay fees”; “could no
longer…give the children an
education”; “struggled
to…provide…education”; “in charge of
education…sold her land to provide”
Interviews with NV Staff and Outside Community Leaders (14 Interviews/ 17

interviewees)
Responses Codes
“grandmothers and orphans “people…were destitute”: “they 3/14 NVS4;
destitute” have come from a very NVS11;
disadvantaged background” NVS12
“many lacked shelter” N/A 1/14 NVS4
“(orphans) had to drop out N/A 1/14 NVS4
of school”
“many had…psychological N/A 1/14 NVS4
trauma”
“food scarcity” “food shortage-serious famine”; 3/14 NVS4;
“food scarcity” NVL1;
NVL2
“no place to get higher “lack of higher education” 2/14 NVS8;
education” NVL2
“not any water for “lack of fresh water”; “lack of 3/14 NVS10;
livestock” water” NVL1;
NVL2
“not any employment “lack of employment”; lack of 3/14 NVS10;
before” employment” NVL1;
NVL2
“high rate of “many orphans” 2/14 NVL1;
orphans…which affected NVL2
everyone in the area”
“high rates of charcoal N/A 1/14 NVL1
burning”
“diseases associated with N/A 1/14 NVL1
water quality”
“no check dams which N/A 1/14 NVL1
affected crop productivity”
“lack of electricity” N/A 1/14 NVL1
“poor education” N/A 1/14 NVL2
“lack of health facilities” N/A 1/14 NVL2
Appendix Two 44
Categorization of Objective Two Results
1.Data from grandparents living in NV
• Basic needs not being met

o “to fetch…fuelwood …have to go long distances”
o “travel far for water”
“to fetch…water …have to go long distances” ;“struggle to get
water”
o “children’s basic needs not being met”
“needs not being met”; “meeting basic needs very difficult”;
“could not meet their needs”; “didn’t have enough to provide
for their basic needs”; “could no longer meet needs”; “care for
the grandkids…wasn’t really able to do it”
o “they had to go without…soap”
“can now bathe with soap”; “soap…they never had (this)
before”
o “food”
“before the kids…were not…getting enough food”; “often did
not have enough food”; “struggled…providing enough food”;
“used to have a very hard time…looking for food”
o “clothing”
“received help for clothing”
• Education
o “kids not going to school”
“sometimes they could not attend school because she didn’t
have the money to pay school fees”; “not able to send kids to
secondary school because she couldn’t not pay fees”; “could no
longer…give the children an education”; “struggled
to…provide…education”; “in charge of education…sold her
land to provide”
• No employment
o “did causal labor…sometimes…couldn’t find work”
“tried to sell eggs to earn some income”; “had to do casual
labor…not always able to get work”; “was only able to grow
and sell vegetables”
The situation of the grandparents and children prior to their coming to live in NV
was a dire one. Most respondents mentioned factors related to the unavailability of
employment. They did not have money to send children to school or to buy food,
clothing or soap. Essentially, they were destitute and their basic needs were not being
met. Additionally, several of them were forced to travel long distances in search of water
and fuelwood.
2.Data from community members working with NV
• Social
Appendix Two 45
o “no medical facility”
o “lack of knowledge about farming practices”
o “(no) SHGs or CBOs so they were very unorganized”
o “orphans…not being cared for”
“many children did not have parents and they had to care for
them”
o “lack of roads and transportation”
“lack of transport”; “lack of transportation and roads”; “road
infrastructure was lacking”; “roads were very bad”
• Ecological
o “scarcity of water”
o “the area was a desert”
“land that is now NV was heavily overgrazed and degraded
from people felling trees for charcoal”
• Economic
o “didn’t have…enough money for school fees”
o “bringing up their children was very hard”
o “many problems just meeting basic needs”
“didn’t have…clothing”
“didn’t have food”
• “food scarcity”
o “lack of water…problems related to farming”
“the whole community was relying on rain to raise their
vegetables”
o “lot of insecurity because the brush on the land that is now NV was
very think…people could easily steal livestock and hide them there”
o “crops were often destroyed by animals that hid in the thick brush
because the land was uncleared”
o “lack of employment”
“lack of jobs”; “did not have a place to work”; no work and no
way to get money”
People living in the communities directly outside of NV’s boundaries faced a similar
situation to that of the grandparents that now live in the village. Respondents mentioned
factors related to social, economic and environmental states.
1. Social. The area had limited infrastructure, particularly in terms of roads. The
nearest medical facility was very far. There were many orphans whose parents
succumbed to HIV/AIDS. Farming techniques that were appropriate to the
dryland setting were also largely unknown.
2. Economic. The lack of employment opportunities had impacts throughout the
area. It was difficult for them to meet their daily basic needs, such as food, soap
or clothing, and did not even have money to send their children to school.
3. Environmental. Water scarcity was an issue, especially for farming. The open
land that became NV was also an issue because it was degraded, served as a
source of insecurity (because people could hide in it) and because animals found
there would destroy crops of surrounding farmlands.
Appendix Two 46
3.Data from NV staff and community leaders
• Economic
o “food scarcity”
“food shortage-serious famine”; “food scarcity”
o “grandmothers and orphans destitute”
“people…were destitute”: “they have come from a very disadvantaged
background”
o “lack of employment”
o “many lacked shelter”
o “no check dams which affected crop productivity”
o “not any water for livestock”
• Social
o “no place to get higher education”
o “(orphans) had to drop out of school”
o “high rate of orphans…which affected everyone in the area”
“many had…psychological trauma”
o “diseases associated with water quality”
o “lack of electricity”
o “poor education”
o “lack of health facilities”
• Ecological
o “high rates of charcoal burning”
Staff working at NV and community leaders were able to provide additional

information as to the state of the people living in the area where NV was built. The
information gathered in the data was categorized into the social, economic and
environmental conditions that impacted the community.
1. Social. There were no medical facilities located in the immediate area. The
HIV/AIDS pandemic left many orphans who had psychological trauma from the
death of their parents. Many of the orphans did not have any shelter. Overall the
education of the community was poor and there was not access to higher education.
Infrastructure for water conservation (e.g. check dams) was lacking, which impacted
crop production. There was no electricity.
2. Economic. The lack of employment opportunities resulted in parents’ inability to pay
school fees. People were forced to create charcoal to sell because of they had no
other choices to earn a livelihood, which resulted in deforestation. Many of the
people were destitute.
3. Environmental. Water and food scarcity were issues directly related to the
surrounding environment. Water quality was also an issue that resulted in water-born
disease. Charcoal production was an anthropogenic source of environmental
degradation.
Appendix Two 47
Conclusions about needs prior to the NV project
Overall, data from the interviews indicate that the condition of the community
before NV was one of very low development. The lack of employment opportunities
resulted people’s inability to meet basic needs, especially the grandparents and orphans,
who are indirect victims of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Infrastructure for transportation
and water was minimal. Education was lacking not only because higher levels of schools
simply did not exist but also because people did not have money to pay school fees.
Water and food scarcity were also significant barriers for the community.
Direct observations of the area provide a deeper sense of what the community was
facing. The area is isolated from major roads and markets, which limits people’s ability
to sell goods they could produce (e.g. crops). Most people are involved in agriculture for
subsistence and some extra money. Others sell charcoal in nearby Kwa Vonza village.
The environmental conditions are particularly harsh, especially because they rely upon
surrounding natural resources for livelihood and subsistence. The climate is semi-arid
and prone to severe drought every couple of years. This makes rain-fed agriculture
difficult most of the time and nearly impossible some of the time. Anthropogenic
environmental degradation, especially deforestation for fuelwood, was a compounding
factor limiting ecosystem services. Although not mentioned in the interviews, it is
apparent that environmental conditions had a lot to do with the community’s destitute
state.
Objective 3: Identify what needs were prioritized by each community.
Propositions

interviewees)
Prioritized Need Additional Statements Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“everything has to be done N/A 1/12 NVS1
with the NV orphans and
grandparents in mind”
“provide with basic needs” “offer basic needs”; “have their 3/12 NVS4;
basic needs met” NVS11;
NVS12
“sustainability “potential to bring income” 2/12 NVS9;
program…provide revenue NVS10
for humanitarian activities”
“education…for the future” “children focused on education” 2/12 NVS11;
NVS12
“work with regional “want outside community to 2/12 NVS9;
community to promote benefit as well as gain skills for NVS11
livelihoods” sustainable development”
Appendix Two 48
Discussion of Results
The interview results show that main priorities were meeting the basic needs of
the grandparents and children and providing the children with an education. One of the
other priorities was to promote sustainable livelihoods in the outside community. The
means to meeting these three needs are generating of income to support the village using
sustainable practices.
The project did not involve an active, community-based process to identify needs,
as the interview results show. COGRI set out with a distinct mission, which was to help
one of the regions of the country most affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, which is
evident on their website (Nyumbani,2008) and in various documents (e.g., COGRI
Strategic Plan). COGRI decided to start a place where the “lost generation” would be
able to meet their basic needs and get a formal education. This was to be done in an
ecologically and economically sustainable manner so that the village would not be reliant
upon donors or grants for all of its expenses. Another priority that was mentioned in the
interviews was to work with the communities in the surrounding region to promote
sustainable livelihoods.
Objective 4: Describe what planning and work initiatives have been implemented to meet
the prioritized needs by each community.
Propositions

interviewees)
Action Additional Statements Number of Interview
Responses Codes
“skills in making N/A 1/8 NVO1
wells”
“NV has “NV…creating job opportunities” ; “NV has 7/8 NVO1;
provided employed many people “money”; “gave NVO2;
employment” them a place to work” “have been provided NVO3;
with employment”; “wages”; NVO3;
NVO5;
NVO6; NVO7
“sand dams” “sand dams”; “sand dams” 3/8 NVO1;
NVO3; NVO4
“built a church” N/A 1/8 NVO1
“organic “growing crops using organic methods”; 3/8 NVO1;
farming” “use of organic farming techniques” NVO3; NVO4
“composting” “compost”; “composting” 3/8 NVO1;
NVO3; NVO6
“intercropping N/A 1/8 NVO1
techniques”
“skills “have been educated in crop management”; 4/8 NVO1;NVO2;
in…farming” “more knowledge about farming”; “have NVO3; NVO6
learned new methods for food production”
Appendix Two 49
Responses Codes
“learned how to “knowledge…about tree planting” 2/8 NVO2; NVO3
plant and manage
trees”
“learned new 1/8 NVO3
ways of
irrigation”
“improved roads” “development of NV brought more roads” 2/8 NVO4; NVO5
“skills in 1/8 NVO5
milking”
“buildings 1/8 NVO7
constructed”
“humanure” 1/8 NVO7
“learned…how to 1/8 NVO1
make bricks”
“learned how to 1/8 NVO1
construct homes”

interviewees)
Responses Codes
“kids are getting “access to education”; “getting 8/10 NVI1;
education” education”; “children NVI2;NVI3;
get…education”; “have…education”; NVI4; NVI5;
“education”; “educate grandkids”; NVI6; NVI7;
“grandchildren go to school” NVI8
“perimeter shambas” “perimeter shamba”; “shamba”; 4/10 NVI1; NVI2;
“perimeter shambas” NVI4; NVI5
“(home) shambas” “ability to cultivate farms” 2/10 NVI5; NVI7

interviewees)
Responses Codes
“visit the homes to see where are N/A 1/14 NVS2
gaps”
“informal interviews with “have meetings with 2/14 NVS2;
villagers” (to assess needs) grandmothers” NVS4
“with outside community… “meetings…with outside 2/14 NVS2;
barazas” (to assess needs) villagers”; “barazas” NVS4;
NVL1
“meet with elders to see what N/A 1/14 NVS10
indigenous knowledge is”
“learned from (other COGRI N/A 1/14 NVS11
programs)”
“agroprocessing center” (AC) N/A 1/14 NVS1
Appendix Two 50
Responses Codes
“develop economic activities” “various agroproduction 2/14 NVS1;
(in AC) activities” NVS9
“market for local surrounding “castor…could be a reliable 2/14 NVS1;
communities” (AC) market for outsiders” NVS9
“develop value-added processes” N/A 1/14 NVS1
(in AC)
(energy production with) “castor oil…solar panels” 2/14 NVS1;
“renewables” NVS9
“create a place…similar to their N/A 1/14 NVS11
culture”
“polytechnic” (P) “higher education”: 3/14 NVS1;
“teaching..multiple skills” NVS8:
NVS11
“manages trees for…use in “material supply” 2/14 NVS1;
future” (P) NVS8
“income generation” (for NV) N/A 1/14 NVS8
(P)
“essential oils factory” (EO) N/A 1/14 NVS1
“source of income” (EO) N/A 1/14 NVS1
“capacity building of NV “workshops with the kids”; 4/14 NVS1;
children” “teach…organic farming”; NVS7;
“trying to engage them in NVS11;
agricultural activities so they NVS12
can gain skills”
“clubs to…teach sustainability” “environmental clubs that 3/14 NVS1;
plant trees”; “teach children NVS6;
skills to be sustainable” NVS11
“capacity building…of “given them demonstrations”; 4/14 NVS1;
grandparents” “sho-shos involved in NVS4;
decision-making”; “some NVS7;
interest in farming” NVS12
“riparian zone”(RZ) “restore RZ” 2/14 NVS1;
NVS7
“planted…trees” (RZ) “natives and exotics” 2/14 NVS1;
NVS7
“outside villagers…involved” “hired to plant trees” 1/14 NVS1;
(RZ) NVS7
“build capacity and change “capacity building” 2/14 NVS1;
mindsets" (RZ) NVS7
“spot farming techniques” (RZ) “permaculture” 2/14 NVS7;
NVS9
Appendix Two 51
Responses Codes
“water conservation” (WC) “trained (outside community) 8/14 NVS1;
on water conservation”; “rain- NVS7;
water harvesting, sand dams, NVS9
storage tanks”; “sand dams”; NVS10;
“riparian area…more water in NVS11;
wells”; “sand dams and NVS12;
shallow wells in riparian NVL1;
area…drip lines”; “water…to NVL2
the village”; “sand dams and
bore holes”
“sand dams” (WC) “sand dams were built by 5/14 NVS1;
outside community”; “water NVS7;
harvesting structures…sand NVS9;
dams”; “sand dams” NVS10;
NVL2
“at each sand dam…shallow “shallow wells…pumping 2/14 NVS1;
wells”(WC) systems” NVS9
“solar pumps (at shallow “pumping systems using solar 2/14 NVS1;
wells)…for drip irrigation in panels” NVS9
farm” (WC)
“bore hole” (WC) 1/14 NVS1
“plantations” “established other 3/14 NVS1;
woodlots…luecena”; “woodlot NVS7;
important for rain cycle”; NVS8
“Melia volkinsii”
“seed orchard” “woodlots to be seed banks” 2/14 NVS1;
NVS7
“perimeter shambas” (PS) “food for village and…excess 4/14 NVS1;
to sell”; “perimeter shamba” NVS7;
NVS10;
NVS12
“boundary against “friendly security” 2/14 NVS1;
encroachment” (PS) NVS7
“grandparents preparing them N/A 1/14 NVS2
with children” (PS)
“engage outside community” “wanted outside villagers to be 3/14 NVS7;
(PS) incorporated…so they NVS10;
established the (PS) system”; NVS12
“teaching them how to do
(farming) in the drylands”:
“livestock” (L) “livestock unit infrastructure 3/14 NVS1;
built”; “livestock NVS9;
management…information on NVS10
breeds”
“fodder conservation” (capacity N/A 1/14 NVS10
building) (L)
“composting unit…humanure N/A 1/14 NVS1
and livestock”
Appendix Two 52
Responses Codes
“chickens” “establish markets…chickens” 2/14 NVS1;
NVS7
“apiculture” (AC) “establish markets…honey 3/14 NVS1;
production”; NVS7;
“beekeeping…great way to NVS9
supply pure organic honey
and…pollinators”
“home gardens” “every family has been given a 2/14 NVS2;
garden” NVS4
“income generating N/A 1/14 NVS4
activity…baskets”
(grandparents)
“gray water system to water “grandparents…high 2/14 NVS2;
home gardens” involvement” NVS9
“clinic” (CL) N/A 1/14 NVS3
“(villagers) do not pay (CL) N/A 1/14 NVS3
“cost sharing (for outside N/A 1/14 NVS3
villagers)” (CL)
“teaching preventative care” N/A 1/14 NVS3
(CL)
“given food from main farm” N/A 1/14 NVS4
“work…with outside “incorporated outside villagers 4/14 NVS4;
community” into the village”; “develop NVS7;
market”; “area NVS9;
underdeveloped…dependent NVS12
on NV”
“buildings built with…outside N/A 1/14 NVS4
labor”
“counseling” (for children) N/A 1/14 NVS5;
“school” “primary school has been 2/14 NVS6;
provided” NVL2
“capacity”(building with the “workshops on livestock 4/14 NVS7;
outside community) management”; “teaching them NVS9;
how to do (farming) in the NVS10;
drylands”; “dependent on NVS12
knowledge NV can bring
them”; “train them in water
conservation and
environmental awareness”
“fuelwood…coppicing leucena” N/A 1/14 NVS7
“church” N/A 2/14 NVS7;
NVS8
“selection of plants that are “planted species that have the 4/14 NVS1;
useful…neem… Croton potential to bring income” NVS10;
megalocarpus” (plantations)
“Bio-fuels” “biofeuls…jatropha…castor” 2/14 NVS7;
NVS12
Appendix Two 53
Responses Codes
“selection of plants that are “identification of appropriate 2/14 NVS9;
useful…” (farm) crops”; “diversified the crops” NVS12
“sell excess (milk)” N/A 1/14 NVS1
(agroprocessing center) N/A 1/14 NVSI
“energy…looking for
renewables”
“internship program for Kenyan N/A 1/14 NVS7
students (e.g., from Jomo
Kenyatta University, KIOF,
Kenyatta University, Egerton
University and students from
Ukumbani)
1.Work activities in NV
• Assessing needs
o “informal interviews with villagers”
o “visit the homes to see where are gaps”
“have meetings with grandmothers”
o “learned from (other COGRI programs)”
o “with outside community… barazas”
“meetings…with outside villagers”; “barazas”
• Capacity building
o “capacity (with the outside community)”
“workshops on livestock management”; “teaching them how to do
(farming) in the drylands”; “dependent on knowledge NV can bring
them”; “train them in water conservation and environmental
awareness”
“skills in making wells”
“skills in…farming”
• “have been educated in crop management”; “more knowledge
about farming”; “have learned new methods for food
production”
“learned how to plant and manage trees”
• “knowledge…about tree planting”
“learned new ways of irrigation”
“learned how to construct homes”
“skills in milking”
“learned…how to make bricks”
o “capacity building of NV children”
“workshops with the kids”; “teach…organic farming”; “trying to
engage them in agricultural activities so they can gain skills”
“clubs to…teach sustainability”
Appendix Two 54
• “environmental clubs that plant trees”; “teach children skills to
be sustainable”
o “capacity building…of grandparents”
“given them demonstrations”; “sho-shos involved in decision-
making”; “some interest in farming”
• Formal education for children
o “polytechnic”
“higher education”: “teaching…multiple skills”
o “school”
“primary school has been provided”
o “kids are getting education”
• “Polytechnic”
o “manages trees for…use in future”
o “higher education”: “teaching…multiple skills”
o “income generation”
• Farming
o “given food from main farm”
o “solar pumps (at shallow wells)…for drip irrigation in (main) farm”
o “selection of plants that are useful…”
“identification of appropriate crops”; “diversified the crops”
o “perimeter shambas”
“food for village and…excess to sell”
“boundary against encroachment”
“friendly security”
“grandparents preparing them with children”
“engage outside community”
“wanted outside villagers to be incorporated…so they established the
(PS) system”; “teaching them how to do (farming) in the drylands”
o “(home) shambas”
“ability to cultivate farms”
“every family has been given a garden”
“gray water system to water home gardens”
• “grandparents…high involvement”
o “intercropping techniques”
o “composting”
o “organic farming”
“growing crops using organic methods”; “use of organic farming
techniques”
• “livestock”
o “livestock unit infrastructure built”; “livestock management…information on
breeds; ”
o “fodder conservation”
o “composting unit…humanure and livestock”
o “sell excess (milk)”
o “chickens”
“establish markets…chickens”
Appendix Two 55
• Waste management
o “composting unit…humanure and livestock”
o “humanure”
• Construction
o “buildings built with…outside labor”
o “buildings constructed”
• Plantations
o “established other woodlots…luecena”; “woodlot important for rain cycle”;
“Melia volkinsii”
o “selection of plants that are useful…neem… Croton megalocarpus”
“planted species that have the potential to bring income”;
o “fuelwood…coppicing leucena”
o “seed orchard”
“woodlots to be seed banks”
• “income generating activity…baskets” (grandparents)
• Water conservation & infrastructure
o “trained (outside community) on water conservation”; “rainwater harvesting,
sand dams, storage tanks”; “sand dams”; “riparian area…more water in
wells”; “sand dams and shallow wells in riparian area…drip lines”;
“water…to the village”; “sand dams and bore holes”
o “bore hole”
o “sand dams”
“sand dams were built by outside community”; “water harvesting
structures…sand dams”
“at each sand dam…shallow wells”
o “solar pumps (at shallow wells)…for drip irrigation in farm”
• Riparian zone restoration
o “restore riparian zone”
o “spot farming techniques”
“Permaculture”
o “build capacity and change mindsets"
“capacity building”
o “outside villagers…involved”
“hired to plant trees”
o “planted…trees”
“natives and exotics”
• Road improvements
o “improved roads”
“development of NV brought more roads”
• “agroprocessing center”
o “develop economic activities”
o “energy…looking for renewables”
“various agroproduction activities”
“market for local surrounding communities”
• “castor…could be a reliable market for outsiders”
o “develop value-added processes”
Appendix Two 56
o “apiculture”
“establish markets…honey production”;
beekeeping…great way to supply pure organic
honey and…pollinators”
• Energy production with renewables
o “renewables”
“castor oil…solar panels”
o “bio-fuels”
“biofeuls…jatropha…castor”
(agroprocessing center) “energy…looking for renewables”
• “Clinic”
o “counseling for children”
o “villagers do not pay”
o “cost-share for outside communities”
o “teaching preventative care”
• “church”
o “built a church”
• “create a place…similar to their culture”
• Building relationships with universities
o “internship program for Kenyan students (e.g., from Jomo Kenyatta
University, KIOF, Kenyatta University, Egerton University and students from
Ukumbani)
• “essential oils factory”
o “source of income”
• “work…with outside community”
o “incorporated outside villagers into the village”; “develop market”; “area
underdeveloped…dependent on NV”
o “meet with elders to see what indigenous knowledge is”
o “NV has provided employment”
“NV…creating job opportunities” ; “NV has employed many people
“money”; “gave them a place to work” “have been provided with
employment”
2.Providing for the grandparents and children
The primary goal of the village is to provide the “lost generation” with basic
needs and give the children the opportunity to gain a formal education. As one
respondent commented, “everything has to be done with the NV orphans and
grandparents in mind” (NVS1 Interview).
Food comes from various sources, the main garden, perimeter shambas, home gardens,
eggs from chickens, milk from the livestock and rations provided by the village.
Ideally, most of the food consumed in the village would come from the land on
which it was built.
Appendix Two 57
The main farm is managed by the NV staff and outside laborers perform most of
the work planting, watering and harvesting the vegetables 1 . The farm is organic and
drip irrigated using a solar panel to run a pump from wells created at the ephemeral
river that runs through the property. The main farm supplies maize, cow peas, collards,
chard, carrots, cilantro, maringa (used as a spice and for tea) and okra. The
grandparents pick up a basket with vegetables from the main farm on Tuesdays and
Fridays.
The families also have areas, either at their home site or in the perimeter
shambas to grow their own vegetables. The home gardens was a new initiative that
began in summer 2008 so that the families would grow more of their own food and
produce from the main farm would be sold to earn income for the village. Grandparents
also have access to the perimeter shambas, which are located on the periphery of the
1000 acre village property and are rain-fed agriculture systems.
Other provisions for the families include eggs, milk, additional vegetables and
water. Families that have HIV positive children are given eggs for extra protein. The
village has chickens which are kept by the staff, some families came with their own
chickens as well. Milk is given to the grandparents from the livestock unit on site. The
livestock unit consists of cows and goats. Rice and some other vegetables, such as
tomatoes and potatoes, are purchased and distributed to the grandparents by the NV
staff. Water is supplied for household consumption in spigots from wells or bore holes.
Fuelwood is also generated in the village. For example, coppicing techniques for
Luecena luecophylla, a commonly used fuelwood species, provide a consistent source of
fuelwood for cooking.
A primary school was built in the village for the kids to attend. The school is a
Hot-Courses private school and is funded by a donor from The United Kingdom.
Children who are of age are sent to a secondary school outside the village. Capacity
building exercises in organic farming and tree management have also been given to the
grandparents and children to help them build skills for when they leave the village and
have their own farms.
In order for the grandparents to earn some extra income, the staff worked with
them to develop a scheme for earning money. The grandmothers decided to make
baskets, a Kamba tradition, and the two grandfathers opted to make wooden spoons or
handles for tools. The products are then sold to volunteers who come to the village or
taken to Nairobi for sale.
A medical clinic was built to provide the families with health care, especially for
those that are HIV positive, and to teach preventative care. The clinic also provides
counseling for children or grandparents who are suffering from the psychological trauma
of losing their parents or other issues dealing with adolescence.
The staff works with the grandparents to assess their needs. They hold meetings
once a week, hold informal interviews and visit the homes to make sure they speak with
all of the grandparents.
3.Providing the outside community with opportunities
1
Italicized text that is not in quotations is the researcher’s observational data from the village.
Appendix Two 58
One of the goals for the village was to involve the outside community to help
them secure livelihood. The village has offered daily wage labor for various activities
including construction of all the buildings, which were built with local materials; the
main farm; plantation programs; constructing the sand dams; digging wells; the livestock
unit; and the composting unit.
The agroprocessing center (AC) is one of the primary activities in which the
outside village is involved and is to serve as an income base for them. In the AC produce
is cleaned and, in some cases, value-added processes occur to generate a product. A new
project, for example, is the establishment of a local market for honey, in which the
outside community will provide raw honey and bought by the village, which then puts it
in jars for sale in Nairobi or elsewhere. Through this project, the village is trying to
create a local market for outside villagers to sell their goods or produce. Another project
in which they are trying to create a local market is for tree seedlings. The outside
community raises the seedlings, which are purchased when they reach a foot in height.
Through employment and other activities the village has provided a venue for
capacity-building for the outside community. Those involved in the main farm have
gained skills in dryland organic farming, including composting, use of biopesticides and
drip irrigation; animal husbandry, especially fodder production and animal care; how to
plant and care for trees; how to dig wells and construct sand dams; and new apiculture
techniques. They learned how to make bricks and construct homes through labor
contributed in making the buildings in the village.
NV has also provided access to other services for the outside villagers. All are
welcome to worship at the church and can attend the health clinic, where they receive
free consultations and have access to a cost-share program if medicine is needed.
Children from outside villages have also been able to attend the polytechnic school
created by the village, which provides them with vocational training in woodworking and
textiles. Barazas, or community meetings, are held with village elders and political
leaders to maintain connection between the village and the outside community.
4.Generating income for the village
Most of the activities in the village are geared towards providing for the villagers
or generating income for the village itself to continue operations. Water infrastructure is
a basis for all of the income-generating activities from use in the farm to household
consumption and includes shallow wells, sand dams, bore holes and pipe access to
Masinga (potable water) from the Kitui District. The main farm will ideally sell produce
to niche markets in Nairobi or within the Kitui District. The agroprocessing center will
provide much of the income through sale of produce and value added products generated
on the main farm or purchased from the outside community. It is also a goal for the
agroprocessing center to generate energy through biofuels processed on site. The
essential oils factory, which is not currently in operation, is also meant to generate
income through the sale of high quality essential oils. The polytechnic may produce
wooden items, such as furniture, or dresses that can be sold for income. The livestock
unit may also generate income from meat sales. The village recently planted a plantation
of Melia volkinsii, a timber species that is known for high profitability, though harvesting
will occur after no less than ten years of growing time. Other trees will provide the
Appendix Two 59
village with what it needs, such as fuelwood (L. luecophylla; eucalyptus), biopesticides
(neem) or biofuels (castor and jatropha). The livestock unit has flourished, especially
with access to fodder in the riparian zone, which means the animals are healthier and can
bring more money if sold.
5.Efforts towards ecological sustainability
It is in the village’s main goal to provide for the villagers in an eco-village setting,
so there are many aspects of the project geared towards this goal. The farms and
livestock units are organic, using biopesticides such as neem (Azdirachta indica) and
Permaculture farming techniques such as rotational cropping, intercropping, and
composting. All of the houses and most of the buildings use composting toilets that are
emptied in the humanure site, left to compost and used as fertilizers for tree plantations.
The village has attempted to do capacity building exercises with the grandparents and
children as well as the outside villagers to explain the concept of sustainability and to
change mindsets about the environment. Most of the construction materials, such as the
bricks, were made from local materials with local labor. The restoration of the riparian
zone around the ephemeral river was one of the first activities, which included planting
vegetation that would help restore hydrological cycles and also be useful for the village in
various ways (e.g., neem can also be used as a antibiotic, is used as a toothbrush and can
be ground into flour). The village is working towards using only renewable sources of
energy. There are currently solar panels on some buildings and irrigation pumps. The
village is exploring the use of castor and jatropha as biofuels.
Objective 5: Determine if and how the initiatives taken by each community meet the
Propositions
The results from Objective Three show that the primary goals, or issues to be
addressed by the NV project: meeting the basic needs of the villagers: providing the
children with an education, and helping the outside community sustain livelihoods.
Although generating an income and conducting activities in an eco-village type setting
are goals, these are really a means to an end rather than a need to be addressed.

interviewees)
Helping the outside Additional Statements Number of Interview
community sustain Responses Code
livelihoods
“acquired skills to “learned…using the methods at 3/8 NVO1;
help themselves” their farms at home”; “have earned NVO4;
skills they can use in other areas” NVO5
Appendix Two 60
Helping the outside Additional Statements Number of Interview
community sustain Responses Code
livelihoods
“earned money” “created job opportunities”; “NV 6/8 NVO1;
has employed many people”; “NV NVO2;
gave them a place to work”; “they NVO3;
have been provided with NVO5;
employment”; “employment” NVO6;
NVO7
“now more water is “more water…helps them grow 4/8 NVO1;
available” crops”; “sand dams…increased NVO2;
water available”; “sand dams have NVO3;
helped to conserve water”; “NV NVO4;
has helped with water” NVO6
“ able to grow “ability to grow vegetables for 2/8 NVO1;
vegetables to sell and consumption and sale”; NVO4
consume”
“learned how to 1/8 NVO1
construct homes”
“learned how…to 1/8 NVO1
make bricks”
“gained skills in “educated in crop management”; 5/8 NVO1;
composting and “new ways of irrigation…organic NVO2;
organic farming” farming techniques”; “learned how NVO3;
to use compost”; “gained more NVO4;
knowledge about NVO6
crops…composting”
“earning money to “enabled them to help their 5/8 NVO1;
provide for (his) families”; “people are more able to NVO2;
children” provide for their families”; “money NVO3;
to send his kids to school”; “easier NVO4;
to raise their families” NVO7
“intercropping to 1/8 NVO1
maximize outputs”
“wells…have helped 1/8 NVO1
them with issues
related to farming”
“increased soil fertility 1/8 NVO3
because of manure &
compost”
“perimeter shambas 1/8 NVO6
help them satisfy their
basic needs”
“children may get a “able to pay school fees” 2/8 NVO5;
place to go to school” NVO7
“gained more 1/8 NVO6
knowledge about…
animal husbandry”
Appendix Two 61
interviewees)
Basic needs for Additional Number of Interview
villagers and responses Responses Code
education for children
“basic needs being “able to meet basic needs”; “basic 10/10 NVI1;
met” needs are being met”; “now can NVI2;
meet the needs”; “now have food”; NVI3;
“basic needs being met”; “can NVI4;
meet their basic needs”; “basic NVI5;
needs being met”; “meet basic NVI6;
needs”; “basic needs now met” NVI7;
NVI8;
NVI9;
NVI10
“kids are getting “education”; “kids getting 9/10 NVI1;
education” education”; “kids able to get good NVI2;
education”; “have…education”: NVI3;
“getting a better education”; can NVI4;
go to school”; NVI5;
“providing…education”; NVI6;
“provision of…education” NVI8;
NVI9;
NVI10
“selling baskets” (and “carved wood products to sell”; 8/10 NVI1;
wood carvings) “wood carvings…source of NVI2;
income”; “basket-making NVI3;
gives…money”; “basket making NVI4;
allow(s) them to earn income”; NVI5;
“baskets”; “baskets”; “sale of NVI6;
baskets” NVI7;
NVI10
“perimeter shambas “perimeter shambas provide them 2/10 NVI1;
help them get extra with extra food” NVI4
food”
“access to firewood and “does not have to travel far for 3/10 NVI1;
water…(don’t) have to water”; “easier to get water and NVI2;
travel a long distance” firewood”; “does not have to NVI4;
struggle to get water” NVI5
“access to… clothing” “provide clothing” 2/10 NVI2;
NVI9
“able to use land…to “”home gardens and perimeter 6/10 NVI2;
plant” shambas”; “can use shambas”; NVI4;
“able to raise some vegetables”; NVI5;
“ability to cultivate farms”; “being NVI6;
able to have a garden” NVI7;
NVI8
Appendix Two 62
interviewees)
Prioritized Need Need/Issue Addressed Number of Interview
Responses Per Code 2
Issue
Basic needs of “milk” (for families) 1/14 NVS1
families
Basic needs of “families consuming eggs” 2/14 NVS1; NVS4
families
Help the outside “apiculture…establish 3/14 NVS1; NVS7;
community sustain markets” NVS9
livelihoods
Help the outside “capacity building” 7/14 NVS4; NVS7;
community sustain NVS8;
livelihoods NVS10;
NVS12;
NVL1; NVL2
Help the outside NVS4- “outside community 8/14 NVL1;
community sustain providing labor” NVL2;
livelihoods NVS1; NVS4;
NVS2; NVS7;
NVS10;
NVS11;
Meeting basic “get fodder from riparian 1/14 NVS1
needs of villagers zone” (for livestock/milk)
Meeting basic “water” (access for farm, 8/14 NVS1; NVS7;
needs of villagers consumption, etc.) NVS9;
NVS10;
NVS11;
NVS12;
NVL1; NVL2
Basic needs of “bore hole…for village 2/14 NVS1; NVS2
villagers consumption”
Meeting basic “selection of plants that are 2/14 NVS1;
needs of villagers useful…neem… Croton NVS10
megalocarpus” (plantations)
Help outside “market for local 3/14 NVS1; NVS7;
community sustain surrounding villagers” NVS10
livelihoods
Help outside “PS…has benefitted the 4/14 NVS1; NVS7;
community sustain community members” NVS10;
livelihoods NVS11
Basic needs of “able to grow vegetables for 2/14 NVS2; NVS4
villagers themselves”
Basic needs of “access to medical care” 4/14 NVS2; NVS4;
villagers NVS10;
NVS11;
NVS12
2
Additional quotes referenced in Objective Four Community Leader and NV staff interview table.
Appendix Two 63
Prioritized Need Need/Issue Addressed Number of Interview
Responses Per Code 2
Issue
Basic needs of “income generating 1/14 NVS4
villagers activity…baskets”
Education for “education” 4/14 NVS4; NVS8;
children NVS11;
NVL2
Basic needs of “produce food” 2/14 NVS4; NVS7
villagers
Basic needs of “provide emotional support 1/14 NVS5; NVS3
villagers for the kids”
Basic needs of “basic needs being met” 2/14 NVS11;
villagers NVL2
Help outside “gained skills in building 1/14 NVL1
community sustain (check dams)”
livelihoods
Help outside “polytechnic…provides 4/14 NVS4; NVS8;
community sustain opportunities” NVL1; NVL2
livelihoods
Basic needs of “teaching the importance of 1/14 NVS3
villagers cleanliness (hygiene)”
Help outside “received training in farming 2/14 NVL1; NVL2
community sustain techniques”
livelihoods
1.Basic needs of villagers

• “basic needs being met”
o “produce food”
“able to grow vegetables for themselves”
• “able to use land…to plant”
• “perimeter shambas help them get extra food”
“milk”
• “get fodder from riparian zone” (for livestock/milk)
“families consuming eggs”
o “access to medical care”
“teaching the importance of cleanliness (hygiene)”
“provide emotional support for the kids”
o “water”
“bore hole…for village consumption”
o “selection of plants that are useful…neem… Croton megalocarpus”
(plantations)
o “access to firewood and water…(don’t) have to travel a long distance”
o “access to… clothing”
• “income generating activity…baskets”
o “selling baskets”
Appendix Two 64
The basic needs of the villagers are being met, as indicated in the interviews of all but
one of the grandparents. They have access to food from their home gardens, perimeter
shambas and the main farm and milk, eggs and other items are provided for them by the
village. The have access to health services, including psychological support and more
knowledge about the importance of hygiene. They are able to get water from the spigots
located near their homes. They have also been provided with shelter and clothing. The
baskets and wood carvings provides a little extra income for the grandparents so they can
provide for their own needs, travel to their homes or buy extra things for the children.
Information from Objective Eight provides for a deeper analysis of whether basic
needs are actually being met. Nearly all of the grandparents mentioned that there was a
food shortage and that they needed more land on which to farm. This was confirmed in
the RRA, where the grandparents prioritized farming and water. The underlying factor of
this situation is that the village is having a difficult time feeding all of the villagers, yet
they are adding more because of donor pressure to accommodate 1000 orphans and
grandparents. Grandparents also articulated that there is often a lack of supplies, such as
clothing, especially for girls who have special needs such as congas and sanitary napkins.
This evidence shows that although the villagers’ basic needs are being met, there are
deficiencies in some significant areas.
2.Education for the children

• “kids are getting education”
The children are receiving formal education in the school. Data from Objective
Eight, however, shows concern that the children are not gaining life skills needed to live
in the harsh conditions they will face when they must leave the village. The children are
also not learning about sustainability, which could help them build skills to deal with
problems the future will certainly hold.
3.Helping the outside community sustain livelihoods

• Economic
• “market for local surrounding villagers”
o “apiculture…establish markets”
• “outside community providing labor”
• “earned money”
• “now more water is available”
• “earning money to provide for (his) children”
• Farming
o “ able to grow vegetables to sell and consume”
o “intercropping to maximize outputs”
o “wells…have helped them with issues related to farming”
o “increased soil fertility because of manure & compost”
o “PS…has benefitted the community members”
“perimeter shambas help them satisfy their basic needs”
• “capacity building”
o “gained more knowledge about… animal husbandry”
o “acquired skills to help themselves”
Appendix Two 65
o “learned how to construct homes”
o “learned how…to make bricks”
o “gained skills in building (check dams)”
o “received training in farming techniques”
“gained skills in composting and organic farming”
o “polytechnic…provides opportunities”
“children may get a place to go to school”
The NV project is helping the outside community sustain livelihoods in various

ways. The project has provided them with direct employment which has allowed them to
provide for their children and pay school fees to get an education. The project has also
helped them develop capacity and acquire “skills to help themselves” (NVO1). The skills
they have learned in farming are helping them grow more vegetables for sale and
consumption. Farming has been improved because they learned new techniques such as
intercropping and composting. Water is more available for farming because of
vegetation restoration and infrastructure created for water conservation (sand dams, bore
holes and wells). Skills gained in making check dams may also serve to help conserve
water for farming and household use if they are constructed in other areas. The perimeter
shamba system has also made more land available on which to grow crops. The outside
community has also gained skills in construction of homes and other buildings out of
bricks, which may be used to construct new buildings in the future. The polytechnic is
also providing youth in the area with vocational skills they can use to earn a living.
NV presents a great opportunity for the outside villages to earn livelihoods and
provide for their families. That being true, the outside villagers still have many needs
and face issues associated with the overall lack of development in the area. They are
coming from a situation of abject poverty, so, even with the options NV gives them, they
face a tough situation. This was confirmed in the RRA with the organic outgrowers
group, where participants focused on education and livelihood security as major elements
of their community life that need to be addressed.
Objective 6a- Identify the achievements and challenges of implementing the initiatives to
meet the needs of community members.
Propositions

interviewees)
Responses Code
“learned to live together as a 1/8 NVO2
community”
“learning from each other and 1/8 NVO2
outsiders”
“there is change in the community” 1/8 NVO2
“reduction in charcoal burning because 1/8 NVO3
less trees are being felled”
Appendix Two 66
Responses Code
“no longer using chemicals to fight off 1/8 NVO3
garden pests”
“orphans…big burden lifted” 1/8 NVO1
“church” 1/8 NVO1
“can get transport in times of 1/8 NVO3
emergencies”
“development of NV has brought more 1/8 NVO5
roads to the area”
“clinic makes it easier” “ability to get medical 2/8 NVO5;
care in the clinic” NVO6

interviewees)
Responses Code
“support each other “integrate well”; “lot of support from each 10/10 All
to deal with other”; “rely on each other to solve
problems” problems”; “share experience”;
“grandparents get along very well”;
“receive emotional/social/psychological
help from other grandmothers”; “other
grandmothers have helped her when she
needed it”; “place to meet with other
grandmothers”; “respect each other’s
space”
“hope…now (have “bright future”: “NV has instilled a lot of 3/10 NVI1;
it)” hope”; “can see bright future for her kids” NVI3;
NVI5;
NVI10
“live together in a “living together”; “adapt together”; “in 6/10 NVI1;
community” the community have a forum to discuss NVI2;
issues and come up with solutions”; NVI3;
“sense of community”’ “good community NVI8;
relationship” NVI9;
NVI10

interviewees)
Responses Code
“diversity (in riparian “it now has many natives and some 3/14 NVS1;
zone)” exotics”; “some species that were NVS7;
thought to be extirpated have come NVS10
back”
“orphans- many have been “primary school has been provided 2/14 NVL1;
taken to NV” for the orphans” NVL2
Appendix Two 67
Responses Code
“community being 1/14 NVL1
education about
HIV/AIDS”
“diseases… awareness” 1/14 NVL1
“less felling of trees 1/14 NVL1
because they are getting
employment and not using
charcoal as a source of
income”
“restore the riparian zone” “sand dams helping to recharge 3/14 NVS7;
groundwater”; “riparian areas NVS12;
improved” NVS11
“engaging the outside “provide a lot of support for the 9/14 NVS1;
community” village”; NVS2;
NVS4;
NVS7;
NVS8;
NVS9;
NVS10;
NVS11;
NVS12
“(grandparents) giving 1/14 NVS1
compost to livestock to eat”
“(grandparents) making 1/14 NVS1
connection between milk
production and nutrition”
“outside community is 1/14 NVS1
looking ahead”
“Kamba (staff)…have 1/14 NVS1
cultural advantage”
“the school has developed 1/14 NVS1
clubs to help teach them
sustainability”
“kids are performing well 3/14 NVS2;
in school” NVS4;
NVS11
“use of locally available 2/14 NVS2;
resources” NVL2
“people beginning to see 3/14 NVS2;
NV as their home” NVS4;
NVS11
“staff and villagers learning 4/14 NVS2;
from each other” NVS4;
NVS7;
NVS8
“positive change in the 2/14 NVS3;
community” NVS6
Appendix Two 68
Responses Code
“change in…perceptions of 2/14 NVS3;
HIV/AIDS” NVS4
“organic methods of “organic farming…practices began 5/14 NVS4;
farming” to work”; “organic waste to grow NVS10;
vegetables”; “organic farming NVL1;
methods…use of non-toxic NVL2
pesticides”
“being an eco-village helps “promoting sustainable techniques” 2/14 NVS4;
introduce the concept of NVS7
sustainability”
“unity within the sho- 1/14 NVS4
shos…community”
“activities and skills that “money generated” 2/14 NVS6;
will eventually bring NVS8
money to the area”
“internship program for 1/14 NVS7
Kenyan students”
“(grandparents) involved in 1/14 NVS7
decision-making”
“reducing deforestation and 1/14 NVS7
overgrazing of the 1000
acres”
“development of… “organic outgrowers group” 2/14 NVS7;
community groups” NVS10
“the presence of the “improved relations with the 2/14 NVS8;
polytechnic is bringing the outlying community” NVS10
outside villages and NV
closer”
“perimeter shamba lands “not a lot of encroachment” 2/14 NVS10;
have provided a boundary NVS1
for the village”
“roads have been “improved roads” 2/14 NVL2;
improved” NVS11
Economic
• “activities and skills that will eventually bring money to the area”
o “money generated”
• “roads have been improved”
o “development of NV has brought more roads to the area”
Social
• Knowledge exchange
o “internship program for Kenyan students”
o “staff and villagers learning from each other”
o “Kamba (staff)…have cultural advantage”
o “learning from each other and outsiders”
Appendix Two 69
o “community being education about HIV/AIDS”
“diseases… awareness”
“change in…perceptions of HIV/AIDS”
• Participation
o “(grandparents) involved in decision-making”
o “development of… community groups”
o “engaging the outside community”
• Sense of community
o “the presence of the polytechnic is bringing the outside villages and NV
closer”
“improved relations with the outlying community”
o “unity within the sho-shos…community”
o “people beginning to see NV as their home”
o “live together in a community” (grandparents)
o “support each other to deal with problems” (grandparents)
o “learned to live together as a community” (outside)
• Other benefits for the outside community
o Clinic (outside)
o “can get transport in times of emergencies”
o “church”
o “positive change in the community”
“there is change in the community”
• “hope…now (have it)”
o “kids are performing well in school”
o “orphans- many have been taken to NV”
“orphans…big burden lifted”
o “outside community is looking ahead”
Ecological
• “perimeter shamba lands have provided a boundary for the village”
o “not a lot of encroachment”
• Restoration
o “reducing deforestation and overgrazing of the 1000 acres”
o “restore the riparian zone”
“diversity (in riparian zone)”
• “being an eco-village helps introduce the concept of sustainability”
o “the school has developed clubs to help teach them sustainability”
o “promoting sustainable techniques”
“(grandparents) making connection between milk production and
nutrition”
“(grandparents) giving compost to livestock to eat”
o “organic methods of farming”
“no longer using chemicals to fight off garden pests”
o “use of locally available resources”
• “less felling of trees because they are getting employment and not using charcoal
as a source of income”
Appendix Two 70
o “reduction in charcoal burning because less trees are being felled”
Discussion of Objective Six-A Results

The NV project is showing added benefits in economic, social and ecological
realms. Economic benefits are the improvement of roads, which allows for access to
markets and transportation in an area that was formerly quite isolated. The village’s
mere presence is helping to bring money to the area surrounding its boundary, even for
those not directly involved with the village (e.g., volunteers buy produce and goods at
local markets, buy baskets from women, pay for rides on motorcycles for transport to and
from the village, etc.).
Ecological benefits are also evident. Restoration has been a key factor, especially
in the riparian areas, which now have increased diversity. The concept of sustainability,
which is new to the area, has been introduced by the village and its staff. The village is
run using organic farming techniques, which have been extended to the villagers and the
outside community. Some evidence that using sustainability principles is gaining ground
is the comment that the grandparents are giving compost to the livestock and making a
connection between healthy animals and nutrition. The use of locally generated materials
is also a success, because they were able to construct most of the buildings with minimal
materials made in another area and requiring transport. An additional benefit outside of
the community is that fewer trees are being felled to make charcoal because people have
more access to employment.
Respondents have noted many social benefits to the NV project. NV’s presence
has allowed for knowledge exchange between the villagers, the outside community, the
staff, as well as expert knowledge from universities. Knowledge of health issues has also
expanded as a result of the village because health clinic workers have been able to teach
overall awareness about diseases and dispel myths and stigmas about HIV/AIDS, which
they believe is helping to change attitudes towards victims. Participation in the village
has also been a success, primarily that of the grandparents, but also the children’s
involvement and that of the outside community in helping it run. Participation reflects a
sense of community that has developed, even in its nascent years, especially among the
grandparents. They now have a venue to discuss issues they all face. The outside
community has also gained access to new services, such as the clinic, church and,
sometimes, transport, that it did not previously have. Outside community members noted
that things are “beginning to change” for them. This leads to a significant achievement
and that is “hope for the future”. The grandparents articulated that they now see a good
future for the children and they did not before. The children are doing well in school and
are in the top schools for the district in terms of achievement tests. Likewise, the outside
community is looking ahead towards the future.
Appendix Two 71
Objective 6b- Identify the achievements and challenges of implementing the initiatives to
meet the needs of community members.
Propositions

interviewees)
Challenge Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Code
“scarcity of materials” “access to tools to finish 3/8 NVO1;
their work”; “doesn’t have NVO5;
protective gear” NVO7
“poor procurement system for 1/8 NVO1
materials”
“often payment is delayed” “delay of payment” 2/8 NVO1;
NVO7
“not given a copy of the work 1/8 NVO1
documentation”
“hard time understanding what 1/8 NVO2
they are doing with NV,
especially the sustainability
part…hard to implement what
the concept is”
“dry habitat farming” 1/8 NVO2
“low wages” 1/8 NVO3
“not any transportation for 1/8 NVO3
them”
“monkeys are stealing crops” 1/8 NVO3
“making people work hard” 1/8 NVO6
“sometimes they come to work 1/8 NVO7
and there isn’t any work
available for them”

interviewees)
Challenge Additional Response Number of Interview
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“ teenagers… behavioral “teenage crisis” 2/10 NVI1;
issues” NVI3;
“blending issue” “biggest challenge is the blending”; 5/10 NVI3;
“initially it was very difficult to blend NVI4;
the two families”; “challenging to get NVI7;
the new kids to adjust to (her) ways”; NVI8;
“blending issue is a big one” NVI10
Appendix Two 72
Challenge Additional Response Number of Interview
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“division among 1/10 NVI4
(grandparents)”
“shortage of food” “food shortage”; “food shortage”; 4/10 NVI3;
“food supply often lacking” NVI5;
NVI6;
NVI7
“transportation” 1/10 NVI7

interviewees)
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“(essential oils [EO]) 1/14 NVS1
don’t have the raw
materials”
“(EO)-gas…expensive” 1/14 NVS1
“expenses are higher than 1/14 NVS1
the income it generates”
(EO)
“Sister Mary’s project” 1/14 NVS1
(EO)
“the concept of “level of awareness-community 5/14 NVS2; NVS3;
sustainability is not fully members don’t know that they NVS4;
understood” want to be self-sustaining”; NVS10;
“concept of sustainability is still NVS11
being understood”; “don’t have a
good understanding of what
sustainability is”; communicating
the concept of sustainability”
“didn’t set out the “grandparents (don’t understand 5/14 NVS1; NVS2;
expectations in the role in sustainability)”; NVS4;
beginning” (for villagers) “contradictory”; “sho-shos not NVS10;
very involved, at least not what is NVS11
expected of them”; “grandparents
still figuring out what is expected
of them”
“Kids…doesn’t see a lot “need to encourage the children to 2/14 NVS1; NVS4;
of activities…learning participate”;
about sustainability”
“water is the biggest “semi-arid”; “dryland habitat”; 6/14 NVS1; NVS3;
factor in the village” “water”; “organic farming in NVS7;NVS9;
dryland conditions”; “dryland NVS10;
habitat-producing enough food”; NVS11;
Appendix Two 73
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“infrastructure for water “not enough water infrastructure”; 4/14 NVS1; NVS7;
is poor” “need to manage water and the NVS9; NVS12
water storage capacity”;
“challenge to haul water”
“lack of trained people to “lack expertise in dryland 2/14 NVS1 ;NVS12
fix and solve problems approaches”
related to water”
“have to use a diesel “don’t have a cost effective way 3/14 NVS1; NVS7;
pump (for water)” of pumping water”; “need to do it NVS9
without diesel”;
“(villagers) waste a lot of 1/14 NVS1
water”
“(poor water) quality” 1/14 NVS1;
“water salinity” 1/14 NVS10
“watering seedlings (in 1/14 NVS1
plantations)”
“overgrazing by goats” 1/14 NVS1
“pests- use of “pests” 3/14 NVS7; NVS10
biopescticides for organic
farming”
“(unreliable seed 1/14 NVS1
sources)”
“the people who have 1/14 NVS1
been leased (perimeter
shamba) plots do not plan
well”
“people not reliable “poverty in the surrounding area”; 4/14 NVS1; NVS3;
because they are living in “poverty around the village”; NVS7; NVS8
poverty” “have to depend on families, but
they can’t afford to give them
anything”
“maintaining organic “plants recommended for 3/14 NVS1
status…operating costs biopesticides are often very NVS10;
high” (livestock unit) expensive”; “permaculture” NVS12
“(in livestock unit) labor 1/14 NVS1
and resources difficult to
organize”
“don’t even have a 1/14 NVS1
policy (on waste
management)’
“have to change culture 1/14 NVS1
(to compost)”
“Chickens…disease” 1/14 NVS1
“families are now 1/14 NVS1
consuming eggs instead
of letting them hatch”
Appendix Two 74
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“they don’t want to 1/14 NVS1
supply chickens or eggs”
“people don’t have skills “”need to build more capacity in 2/14 NVS1; NVS9
right now to manage” (for the village so they are not
apiculture) dependent on staff”
“difficult to engage the “grandparents…their age”; 5/14 NVS1; NVS2;
villagers to some degree “grandmothers are very old and NVS3; NVS4;
because of their age” slow in taking in information”; NVS12
“some cannot work because of
their age”; “mostly cannot be
involved because of their age”
“(villagers don’t get) 1/14 NVS1
systems connections”
“getting the NV villagers 1/14 NVS1
to be responsible”
“engaging the outside “participation low to medium” 2/14 NVS1; NVS12
community was very
difficult in the beginning”
“short-term thinking” “(e.g.,) livestock management” 2/14 NVS1; NVS10
(outside)
“need to change the “thinks they are willing to change 2/14 NVS1; NVS10
mindset” (outside) though”
“nothing is being done (to 1/14 NVS1
evaluate actions)”
“cultural forces that do 1/14 NVS1;
not include conservation”
(villagers)
“people/staff not involved “policies that are developed 4/14 NVS1; NVS2;
at all in decision- elsewhere and not completely NVS7; NVS8
making…all top-down understood”; “the planning of
management” activities is very disconnected for
example between
departments…the board of
directors makes decisions but
they don’t always apply to what is
happening in the field”; “the
Board develops the vision, need
more collaboration”
“how to get kids trained “they are more detrimental to 2/14 NVS1; NVS9
in other life skills” sustainability because they are not
gaining any skills otherwise or
contributing”
Appendix Two 75
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“NV is really losing “disconnect between the villagers, 4/14 NVS1; NVS2;
connections with the staff and the outside community”; NVS8; NVS6
outside community” “need to integrate with the
outside community more to
involve them”; “need to involve
them more”
“lot of donor pressure to 1/14 NVS1
add villagers and
housing, but they cannot
handle it at this point”
“(vision for future) not “not fully involved in developing 3/14 NVS1; NVS7;
actively involved” a shared vision”; “they have the NVS11
will but need to develop it”
“argument between all of “a lot of conflicting opinions” 2/14 NVS2; NVS7
the players”
“what to do when kids 1/14 NVS2
exit village”
“no…standard operating 1/14 NVS2
procedures to work with
(outside villagers)
“unclear objectives” 1/14 NVS2
“kids always in school 1/14 NVS2
and can’t come for
counseling”
“no transportation (for “no secure means of 4/14 NVS2; NVS3;
staff to do work)” transportation”; “transportation is NVS7NVS11
a problem”; “lack of
transportation”
“lack of staff” “only two of them in the staff to 2/14 NVS2; NVS5;
deal”;
“comprehensive HIV care 1/14 NVS3
is difficult without a lab”
“population’s lack of “poor education” 2/14 NVS3; NVS6
education”
“community has no idea 1/14 NVS5;
about counseling”
“isolated…don’t always “remote location…disconnected 4/14 NVS3; NVS7;
have access to new from markets”; “lack of NVS10;
information and information…don’t have books, NVS11
techniques” reliable internet”; “lack of
internet”
“no way to preserve 1/14 NVS3
medicines”
“power supply” “lack of electricity”; “lack of 3/14 NVS4;NVS8;
…electricity”; NVS11
“teenagers” 1/14 NVL2
Appendix Two 76
Responses Code
per
Need/Issue
“grandparents don’t 1/14 NVS5
always know about
problems”
“lack of understanding of “need to solve the labor problem” 2/14 NVS7; NVS9
what to do when outside
villagers provided labor”
“material supply” 1/14 NVS8
“sustainability means “developing this dimension to 2/14 NVS9;NVS12
business…has not been in create profit”
tandem with business
management”
“cannot just farm in the “figuring out planting” 2/14 NVS9; NVS12
traditional African way,
which is to plant and wait
for the rains”
“choosing appropriate 1/14 NVS12
crops”
“no blueprint to guide 1/14 NVS11
them”
“sustainability…no 1/14 NVS11
policy framework”
“funding” 1/14 NVS11
“security” “security is loose” 2/14 NVS11;
NVL2
“delay of payment” (for “delayed payment of wages” 1/14 NVL1; NVL2
outside villager wages)
“low pay rate” (for “workers…underpaid” 2/14 NVL1; NVL2
outside villagers)
“tribalism…staff all from “many of the people working at 2/14 NVL1; NVL2
one area” NV are from far away and local
people are not considered for
positions”
“workers not given 1/14 NVL2
transport”
‘orphans…don’t have 1/14 NVL2
enough clothing”
“no consultation with 1/14 NVL2
them and NV”
(government)
Categorization of Objective Six-B Results
1.Internal Issues
Institutional Issues
• “unclear objectives”
Appendix Two 77
o “no…standard operating procedures to work with (outside villagers)
o poor planning in perimeter shamba
o “don’t even have a policy (on waste management)’
o “nothing is being done (to evaluate actions)”
o “sustainability…no policy framework”
o “(vision for future) not actively involved”
• Newness of the project
o “cannot just farm in the traditional African way, which is to plant and wait for the
rains”
o “no blueprint to guide them”
o “comprehensive HIV care is difficult without a lab”
o “no transportation (for staff to do work)”
o “(in livestock unit) labor and resources difficult to organize”
• centralized decision-making
o “people/staff not involved at all in decision-making…all top-down management”
o “lot of donor pressure to add villagers and housing, but they cannot handle it at this
point”
• personnel
o “lack of staff”
o “argument between all of the players”
o “lack of trained people to fix and solve problems related to water”
• sustainability
o “sustainability means business…has not been in tandem with business management”
“funding”
“lack of understanding of what to do when outside villagers provided labor”
o “choosing appropriate crops”
o “maintaining organic status…operating costs high” (livestock unit)
“permaculture”
“Chickens…disease”
“pests- use of biopescticides for organic farming”
o “shortage of food”
o “overgrazing by goats”
o role of children and grandparents in village sustainability
“cultural forces that do not include conservation” (villagers)
“how to get kids trained in other life skills”
“didn’t set out the expectations in the beginning” (for villagers)
“Kids…doesn’t see a lot of activities…learning about sustainability”
“have to change culture (to compost)”
“families are now consuming eggs instead of letting them hatch”
• “they don’t want to supply chickens or eggs”
“difficult to engage the villagers to some degree because of their age”
“(villagers don’t get) systems connections”
“getting the NV villagers to be responsible”
“(villagers) waste a lot of water”
“the concept of sustainability is not fully understood”
o essential oils factory
“(essential oils [EO]) don’t have the raw materials”
“(EO)-gas…expensive”
“expenses are higher than the income it generates” (EO)
Appendix Two 78
“Sister Mary’s project”
• social and domestic issues among villagers
o “blending issue”
o “division among (grandparents)”
o “teenagers”
“ teenagers… behavioral issues”
o “grandparents don’t always know about problems”
o ‘orphans…don’t have enough clothing”
o “community has no idea about counseling”
o “kids always in school and can’t come for counseling”
• “security”
• “what to do when kids exit village”
Environmental
• “water is the biggest factor in the village”
o “dryland habitat”
• “cannot just farm in the traditional African way, which is to plant and wait for the
rains”
• “(poor water) quality”
• “water salinity”
• Pests in farm
o monkeys steal crops
2.Infrastructure
• “infrastructure for water is poor”
o “watering seedlings (in plantations)”
• “power supply”
o “have to use a diesel pump (for water)”
o “no way to preserve medicines”
3.Isolation limits access to outside resources and materials
• “material supply”
• “isolated…don’t always have access to new information and techniques”
• “poor procurement system for materials”
• “(unreliable seed sources)”
• “lack of transportation”
4.Issues with outside community
• “no consultation with them and NV” (government)
• “population’s lack of education”
• “short-term thinking” (outside)
• “people not reliable because they are living in poverty”
• “people don’t have skills right now to manage” (for apiculture)
• “the people who have been leased (perimeter shamba) plots do not plan well”
• “engaging the outside community was very difficult in the beginning”
• “need to change the mindset” (outside)
• “NV is really losing connections with the outside community”
• “lack of understanding of what to do when outside villagers provided labor”
• “delay of payment” (for outside villager wages)
• “low pay rate” (for outside villagers)
Appendix Two 79
• “tribalism…staff all from one area”
• “workers not given transport”
• “scarcity of materials”
• “not given a copy of the work documentation”
• “hard time understanding what they are doing with NV, especially the sustainability
part…hard to implement what the concept is”
• “making people work hard”
• “sometimes they come to work and there isn’t any work available for them”
Discussion of Objective Six-B Results

The challenges NV is currently facing fall into five large themes: environmental
factors, lack of infrastructure, isolation, internal issues and issues in working with the
outside community. The latter is also an internal issue, but information from the outside
villagers working with NV and local community leaders provide a perspective that
enriches the relationship between NV and the outside community and the challenges each
is facing.
1.Environmental factors
The dryland habitat in which the village is located makes farming especially
difficult because rainfall is unreliable. They cannot rely upon rain-fed agriculture to
supply the village with food or for income generating crop production. Choosing crops
and tree species appropriate to the habitat has been challenging because some desirable
and traditional crops, tomatoes for example, simply will not grow there. Salinity in the
groundwater poses an even greater problem because it can kill crops and corrodes drip
irrigation hardware. NV is an island of resources for native animals and insects because
most of the surrounding lands are degraded. The village has been forced to hire a guard
at night to chase away monkeys that steal crops. Dealing with pests while maintaining
organic status is an added complication.
2.Infrastructure
Infrastructure within the village and what is available in the region poses a
significant challenge to the village. Water infrastructure has been constructed on the
village property, but there is still need for more wells and bore holes and pumps to bring
it to the surface, especially if they are going to use drip-fed irrigation for crop and tree
production. The lack of electricity makes pumping water difficult, and although some
existing pumps use solar power, others are still using diesel, which is expensive and
counter to the goal of sustainability. Lack of electricity makes the efficacy of the clinic
minimal because they cannot preserve medicines and thus cannot provide comprehensive
care, especially for people with HIV/AIDS. Roads are also an issue because they are
poorly maintained and subject to erosion, especially during the rainy season.
3.Isolation
The village is located 14 kilometers from the nearest paved road, which would not
seem like such an issue if the roads surrounding the village were not so poor.
Transportation to the village is minimal and boda-bodas, motorcycles for hire from Kwa
Vonza, are expensive. The village only has a few trucks and motorcycles for staff to use
if they need to go outside the village. Isolation also impedes the staff’s access to new
information about farming or medical techniques and the lack of electricity and internet
Appendix Two 80
service means even less access to information networks. Another issue is that materials
and resources are often needed (e.g., seeds) but it is challenging to procure them.
4.Internal Issues
Most of the challenges NV is now dealing with are related to institutional factors
and the “growing pains” associated with conducting a new type of project in a new
setting with people who are living in abject poverty. A lack of planning and clear
objectives that tie the whole project together are serious limitations. Though each
department is responsible for making and meeting objectives, there is often disconnect
between them. Some home care staff, for example, could not describe what the
sustainability department does. There are no set standard operating procedures, so the
staff often has to act on the fly and deal with the consequences at a later time. Some
projects like the perimeter shamba system have not been well-planned and are suffering
because of it. Some staff mentioned that decision-making is all top-down and that these
decisions are often made without knowledge of what is happening on the ground in the
village. Adding new orphans, for example, because of donor pressure, is a huge issue
because currently the village is not able to even fully support the ones who are there. The
staff lack funding and knowledge to deal with many issues, which puts more pressure on
them to deliver. There has been a high rate of staff turn-over, which may reflect the
institutional culture and the village’s geographical isolation.
Reaching the goal of sustainability has been an ongoing challenge for the village.
Maintaining organic status is difficult. An example of this is a disease contracted by the
chickens, which could not be treated organically, so they had to receive permission to use
anti-biotics or face losing all of the birds. The operating costs are high and some projects
have not be successful. The essential oils factory, for example, is currently unused
because they were relying upon diesel fuel to run it and the raw material supply (based in
western Kenya) was cut-off during the violence of early 2008. The viability of this
project is subject to concern anyway because it is not sustainable to use raw materials that
require shipping in gas-powered vehicles from far away. Now the factory’s machinery is
sitting in an unenclosed structure subject to rust and wear. This is an example of how the
village is not running like a business and is losing money because of it.
An aspect of sustainability that is an issue for the village is the fact that the
villagers do not understand and are not using sustainable practices. The staff did not
clearly explain the concept to the villagers or set out clear expectations of what living
there would entail. Now the staff wishes for the villagers to be more engaged, but the
grandparents are used to their own ways of doing things and the children are always in
school. During the RRA with the grandparents, most of whom have been living in the
village for over a year at that point, it was clear that they did not understand sustainability
at all. They said that they do not see how sustainability applies to them because they are
old and the children are going to leave the village after they finish secondary school, so
why should they be concerned with long-term issues? This reflects the villager’s
disconnect to one of the main goals of NV: being an ecovillage. Although there is
evidence that some grandparents are composting garden waste and using the ecotoilets, it
seems as though the whole of them do not even have an understanding of why
sustainability applies to them.
There are also social problems among the villagers. The blending of families is a
challenge because grandparents are to raise children to whom they are not related, so
Appendix Two 81
authority is challenged and, in some cases, unaccepted. Teenagers pose a problem and
there have been cases of pregnancy. There are also factions among the grandparents
because they come from different areas of the Kamba region and have different
viewpoints. The children’s busy schedules at school limit their ability to get counseling
and some of them need it and the grandparents are not always aware of the problems the
children are facing. Finally, what happens to the children when they exit the village is a
major concern because life is difficult in Kenya even for those who do have an education.
5. Issues with the outside community

The vision of NV was to create a home for the lost generation of the HIV/AIDS
pandemic in an ecovillage setting. The buy-in and support of the outside village is a
critical aspect of this vision. HIV/AIDS are symptoms of larger issues, such as the
cyclical poverty and social inequity of the country and the Kamba region in particular.
Dealing with the AIDS crisis also means dealing with the source, so NV has the
opportunity to help the outside community do this. However, there have been many
challenges in the relationship between the “inside and outside” (the distinction between
the two perhaps being a major factor). The poverty of the outside region means that the
laborers often only have physical labor to offer and have little education to understand
some of the village’s activities. The outside villagers often have short-term thinking
patterns because they are forced to live on a hand to mouth basis, so changing this culture
to integrate long-term sustainability is a challenge. Like with the grandparents and
children, there is a lack of understanding in the outside villages about what NV’s goal of
sustainability is.
The outside community also has frustrations in working with NV. Wages are low
and work is not always a guarantee even if they travel from far away to offer their labor.
Delay of payment is a major concern because these people do not have savings on which
to rely, and not receiving money from NV means their families may not be able to eat. In
one interview respondents felt that the theft of solar panels and other expensive materials
was a result of the outside villagers not receiving pay and feeling desperate. There is also
a lack of tools and protective gear for them to do their work because NV does not always
have supplies for them to use and they cannot afford their own.
Objective 7: Identify what assessment techniques have been undertaken in each

community by either external or internal actors related to actions taken towards
sustainability.
Propositions
NV Staff (12 interviews, 13 interviewees)

Assessment Techniques Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Code
“very informal and not well “evaluation component was small”; 4/12 NVS1;
developed” “no formal process”; “informal NVS7;
interviews”; “have not developed” NVS9;
NVS10;
NVS11
Appendix Two 82
Assessment Techniques Additional Responses Number of Interview
Responses Code
“in the village departments “share with other departments in staff 10/12 NVS1;
function independently” meetings”; “if they are meeting their NVS2;
budget”; “involve grandmothers in NVS3;
meetings”; “progress reports (kids’ NVS4;NV
counseling)”; “education department S5;NVS6;
requires…”; in-house”; NVS7;
“(polytechnic) only in first quarter”; NVS8;
“gardens...tangible results”; “relying NVS11;
on progress reports”; “Maxwell NVS12
prepares a report (for sus.
Department)”
“not currently evaluating 1/12 NVS1
the village”
“for each project” 1/12 NVS4
“come up with measurable 1/12 NVS4
objectives”
“(ecological issues)outside “Maxwell prepares a report” 2/12 NVS7;
consultants” NVS12
“group meetings” “meetings” 2/12 NVS10;
NVS4
Present
“very informal and not well developed”
“group meetings”
Intra-departmental evaluations
• “in the village departments function independently”
• “for each project”
o “(ecological issues)outside consultants”
• “come up with measurable objectives”
Absent
• “not currently evaluating the village”
Discussion of Results
The interview results show that use of evaluation techniques in the village is
inconsistent. Some respondents said that they do not have evaluation tools. The
inconsistency seems to lie in evaluation of the village as a whole versus intra-
departmental evaluations, which are present. However, each department seems to use
different techniques, for example, the clinic evaluates based upon whether they are
meeting their budget, whereas the home care department comes up with measureable
objectives. Respondents mentioned that evaluation is often on a project basis. For
example, the sustainability department communicated with outside consultants for
evaluation ecological restoration in the riparian areas.
It is clear from the data that there exists no formal form of evaluation as an
institutional guideline, or if there is then there appears to be a lack of knowledge about it
in the staff.
Appendix Two 83
Objective 8: Identify what are the current needs of community members.
Propositions

interviewees)
Current Needs Additional Responses Number of Interview Code
Responses
“sickness” “health” 2/7 NVO1; NVO3
“land scarcity” 1/7 NVO1
“lack of markets” 1/7 NVO1
“poor leadership (in 1/7 NVO1
government)”
“corruption” 1/7 NVO1
“no accountability” 1/7 NVO1
“water infrastructure” “enough…wells”; “more 4/7 NVO1; NVO3;
bore holes for water”; NVO6;
“alcoholism” 1/7 NVO1
“theft” 1/7 NVO1
“shortage of jobs” “(money) can only buy 5/7 NVO2; NVO3;
clothing month to month”; NVO5; NVO6;
“need more employment NVO7
opportunities”; “more
employment opportunities;
“majority of people…still
do not have work”
“often not able to finish “getting education for the 2/7 NVO2; NVO4
schooling” children”
“dryland habitat makes it “don’t have enough rains to 1/7 NVO2; NVO4
difficult to raise crops” grow crops”
“food security” “food scarcity”; “famine”; 5/7 NVO2; NVO3;
“food security”; “many NVO4; NVO6;
people don’t have enough NVO7
food”
“church” 1/7 NVO3
“availability of water” “water”; “finding good 4/7 NVO3; NVO4;
drinking water”; “water” NVO6; NVO7
“education” “education”; “education”; 4/7 NVO2;NVO4;
“lack of education NVO5; NVO6
opportunities”
“lack of roads” “roads are poor” 2/7 NVO5; NVO6
“no medical facilities” “no nearby medical 3/7 NVO5; NVO6;
centers”; “health centers”; NVO3
1.Outside villagers working with NV
Appendix Two 84
• Isolation
“lack of markets”
Access to social services
o “no medical facilities”
o “sickness”
“education”
“church”
o Infrastructure
“lack of roads”
“water infrastructure”
• Issues related to environmental factors
“availability of water”
“food security”
• “dryland habitat makes it difficult to raise crops”
• Poor economic condition
“lack of markets”
“often not able to finish schooling” (because of money)
“shortage of jobs”
o “theft”
o “alcoholism”
• “poor leadership (in government)”
“no accountability”
o “corruption”
• “land scarcity”
The needs of the outside villagers reflect an overall low level of development in the
region, which affects livelihoods and other aspects of social and domestic life. The
villages surrounding NV, like NV itself, are isolated from regional markets, medical
facilities, churches and schools. Transportation and water infrastructure are also lacking
as a result of isolation from economic centers and inability to pay for them. The poor
economic condition of the area is reflected in job shortages, lack of markets, theft,
alcoholism and inability to send children to school because they cannot afford school
fees. Poor, corrupt leadership and a lack of accountability in local government are
impacting villagers’ access to decision-making processes and development of social
services that benefit the whole community. Environmental factors also place the
villagers at a disadvantage because of frequent droughts and low annual rainfall, affecting
crop production used for income generation and household consumption. High
population density reduces land available to purchase even if people did have money.
Outside villager RRA results
1. Model building exercise

The RRA model created by the outside community (Figure) requires further
explanation because the respondents provided extra information about what they believe
needs to happen to each resource in order for it to develop. During the RRA participants
expanded upon the following resources (but not all 15):
Appendix Two 85
• Land → need more wells
• Rivers → need more sand dams
• Trees → need capacity (to care for them) and to plant more
• Rocks for building → need a market
• Brick-making → (depends on) water availability
• Basket weaving → need markets and materials
• Farming → need pest control, water, quality seeds, machines, plows, and
information
• Milk production → need cows and fodder
• Chickens → need training, markets, processing capabilities, cross-breeding, better
facilities to keep them
Five of the resources analyzed by the outside villagers are directly related to the need
for water and infrastructure for water conservation. Construction of wells on land and
sand dams on rivers are believed to be ways to increase access to water. The presence of
sand dams would allow for sand extraction as an economic activity. Other income-
generating activities, namely farming and brick-making, are dependent on water.
Infrastructure development and increased social services are also important factors for
the outside community. There is no electricity, which is related to the municipality’s low
population and lack of funds to bring it there. Water infrastructure, education and
medical services are clearly lacking, which is also connected to the poverty and isolation
of the region. Isolation and lack of education also impede access to and possession of
information and know-how for development of economic activities.
A lack of markets impacts all income-generating activities, especially selling rocks
for construction and basket weaving. Increasing tree cover is also a need, most likely to
provide a source of fuelwood for either household consumption or charcoal production.
A lack of information and know-how impacts their capacity for farming, animal
husbandry, and silviculture. All of the income generating activities (apiculture, sand,
farming, milk production, chickens, brick-making, rocks, basket-weaving and wood
carving) are dependent upon ecosystem services provided by the environment. The
environment’s reduced capacity impacts their livelihoods as much as the lack of
infrastructure and isolation from local markets to sell their goods.
Themes from the model building exercise:
• Environmental services limit income generating activities, farming for subsistence, milk
production
• Lack of markets
• Lack of infrastructure
• Lack of social services (electricity, education and medical services)
• Lack of information about income-generating activities
Appendix Two 86
Rivers
Trees
Land
Sand
Rocks
Brick-making
Basket-making
Wood-carving Chickens
Electricity Education
Hospital
Milk-production
Api-culture Farming
2. Discussion after model-building exercise

Participants agreed that education, farming, land, a hospital, trees and chickens were the most
important resources they could develop for sustainability. When asked what steps could be taken to
develop these resources they came up with interesting ideas. One of the first things they mentioned
was that they could not build more schools without a donor. They were encouraged to think about
donations as one-time activities, and sustainability means investing in long-term solutions. With this
acknowledgement they came up with the idea of pooling money to provide loans and help each other
provide access to education, especially for girls. There was also an emphasis to work together to
develop farming and land management. In the discussion about trees and land, participants
mentioned the need for soil conservation, terraces and fodder production, which manifests an
understanding of basic ecological concepts that influence their ability to conduct their traditional
income-generating activities. The need for materials for animal husbandry, farming and silviculture
was articulated, which must be preceded by income. Some needs, such as a hospital, are dependent
on the government.
When asked how they could work with NV to help develop these resources, participants
mentioned maintaining a good relationship and coming together as a group to help the NV children
and the larger community. They also mentioned that sometimes there are difficulties in working
with NV, including the fact that capacity building exercises sometimes only include a few
individuals and that they are often working with volunteers rather than staff.
Appendix Two 87
Grandparents and children living in NV

interviewees)
Current Needs Additional Responses Number of Interview Code
Responses
“food shortage” “cannot plant enough to feed 7/10 NVI1; NVI2;
themselves”; “food shortage”; “food NVI4; NVI5;
shortage”; “food shortage”; food NVI6; NVI7;
supply often lacking”; “food supply” NVI9
“bigger farms” “would like to have her own farm” 2/10 NVI2; NVI4
“girls are growing “especially the girls-they will need 3/10 NVI4; NVI6;
and have special more clothes…”; “for the girls, they NVI8
needs” (congas, need congas to follow the Kamba
sanitary napkins, traditions”
underwear)
“social “getting all of them to live together” 2/10 NVI4; NVI10
integration…in
village”
“more income” 1/10 NVI4
“children not getting 1/10 NVI5
exposed to what they
will face when they
have to leave the
village”
“transportation” 1/10 NVI7
“lack of supplies “supplies are often low” 2/10 NVI8; NVI9
(clothing, congas,
shoes)”
• Basic Needs
o “food shortage”
“bigger farms” (to deal with food shortage)
o “lack of supplies” (clothing, congas, shoes)
“girls are growing and have special needs” (congas, sanitary napkins,
underwear)
o “more income”
• “social integration in village”
• “children not getting exposed to what they will face when they have to leave the
village”
• “transportation”
The interview results from the grandparents show that some basic needs are still yet
to be met by the NV project. 70 percent of the respondents mentioned that the food
shortage was an issue and responses showing the need for more land on which to farm
indicate the desire to grow more food for consumption. Some respondents felt that
supplies were low for items such as clothing or shoes and supplies for girls were
especially an issue. The need for more money is related to the last issue because the only
Appendix Two 88
income generating activities for the grandparents are basket-making and wood carving.
Other issues were lack of transportation and lack of social integration among villagers.
An interesting response was that the children need to be prepared for the hard future they
will face when they leave the village. This indicates concern that the children are cared
for at this point in their lives, but after they leave the village may not be prepared for life
on their own without an institution giving them support.
Grandparent RRA Results
Water
Baskets
Trees
Land
Shambas/Farms
Shambas/Farms/Land
A full report of the RRA is located in this Appendix. In the final RRA
grandparents decided to merge land, shambas and farms into one category. A particularly
interesting aspect of the RRA was during the discussion of sustainability prior to the
model building exercise. The grandparents clearly do not understand the idea of
Appendix Two 89
sustainability. This was evident because they said they did not know how they even play
a role in it because they are old and going to die soon and the kids are only going to be
there until they graduate from secondary school. This exhibits a lack of willingness to
engage in a major part of the village’s goal, that of being an ecovillage. The translator
asked them to think about what they would need to do to sustain themselves and the
children for five years, and then they were able to think about resource use in a more
mid-term type of time frame.
In the end the grandparents indicated that water was the most important factor
because it affects agriculture. Baskets were considered the other most important resource
to be developed because it provides them with a source of income, but needs to be more
steady and more lucrative. Trees and farming also need to be developed, but they see
water and baskets as the foundation of their well-being.
Discussion of Objective Eight Results
1.Grandparents
The grandparents did not mention that their basic needs were not being met or that
the children were not receiving an education, so there is strong evidence that they feel
NV is meeting these identified needs and project goals. However, the frequent mention
of the food shortage and need for more farms (highlighted in both the interviews and the
RRA) show that food security is lacking. This is most likely exacerbated by the global
food crisis that began in 2007 and the climactic factors that put the area at such an
extreme disadvantage for farming anyway. The RRA results show the need to increase
water resources, which highlights that fact that water is a limiting factor for food
production, especially given that most of the agriculture in the region is traditionally rain-
fed, so it is often at the mercy of drought.
The grandparents also see the need for more money making opportunities.
Although baskets and wood carvings have brought some income, they do not provide a
steady source because they only make money if they sell one. The earned income from
these activities helps the grandparents buy things they need or pay for transportation to
their home villages, but does not allow for them to buy extra items the children may need.
The village supplies most items for the kids, such as clothing, but it was mentioned that
this is lacking and puts a further strain on the household income brought in by the
grandparents.
An important comment from one of the grandparents was that the children are not
being prepared for the difficult future that lies ahead of them after they leave the village:
‘the children are not getting exposed to what they will face when they leave the
village…here they are just given water and firewood, but outside they will have to travel
long distances in search of both; the same with farming” (NVI5). This is reinforced by
comments made in interviews with the community leaders and NV staff: “there is no
work to help the kids build lives after they leave the village…they need to contribute to
the development of the children…they need exposure” (NVS9). Although NV can
provide the children with a formal education, the life skills needed to live in a region with
a semi-arid climate, little land available and few job opportunities are lacking in their
education.
Appendix Two 90
2.Outside Villagers
The needs of the outside villagers reflect an overall low level of development in
the region, which affects livelihoods and other aspects of social and domestic life. First,
all of the primary income generating activities (apiculture, sand, farming, milk
production, chickens, brick-making, rocks, basket-weaving and wood carving) are limited
because they rely upon local ecosystem services, which are extremely reduced because of
environmental degradation. The area, a semi-arid dryland prone to frequent droughts, has
suffered from overgrazing, removal of sand in river beds and removal of vegetation for
fuelwood, charcoal production and agriculture. Being a dryland, the region is particularly
vulnerable to anthropogenic stress, which is now to such a degree that humans are having
a difficult time eking out a living or even obtaining their basic needs. A lack of
knowledge regarding the connection between ecosystem health and human well-being is
evident and people are forced to think in very short, day to day, terms rather than
improving or restoring natural resources. The region’s lack of education and many
villagers’ inability to pay for school fees reinforces ignorance of systems connections.
The economic state that exists in the surrounding villages is one in which many
people are living in abject poverty, which promotes short-term thinking. Employment
opportunities are scarce and NV is one of the only job sources in the area. People do not
have money for investment in materials that would help them develop economic
opportunities. For example, many outside villagers do not even own a jimbe, a simple
tool used for farming, of their own. This severely limits their ability to escape poverty
traps. Isolation from regional markets impacts the economic state as well because the
nearest villages, KwaVonza and KwaMatonga, are many kilometers away for most
people and do not provide a strong market anyway. Many people cannot pay for school
fees because they simply do not have the money. The poverty then becomes cyclical
because children are not able to break free from the situation to which their parents are
exposed.
The overall poverty of the region and the fact that it is not an urban area means
that infrastructure and social services are minimal. The closest medical center is in Kitui,
though they can now go to NV for minor issues and consultation. Roads are poor and
transportation is lacking, especially for those who live far away from Kwa Vonza.
Schools are lacking as well. Electricity does not exist and will only be brought to the
area if the villages can help pay for installation, but even if it did come, many would not
be able to pay for services anyway.
The outside villagers are faced with a very difficult situation. Poverty is repeated
from generation to generation. However, NV is offering some of them the chance to
break free from the poverty they to which they have become accustomed. The outside
villagers see Nyumbani as a place that can give them opportunities for wage labor and
capacity building, as well as a place to care for the orphans who come from their own
communities.
Appendix Two 91
Objective Nine Results from Nyumbani Village Interviews
Community vision
Community Members (10 interviewees, 10 interviews)

Desired state Additional comments Number of Interview
responses codes
“more perimeter “should be given bigger farms”; 3/10 NVI1;
shambas” “bigger farm” NVI2; NVI9
“bee hives” 1/10 NVI2
“registered group to 1/10 NVI3
address issues”
“for NV to help kids after 1/10 NVI3
they leave”
“grandparents to do 1/10 NVI4
something more than the
baskets”
“more social integration” “more harmony between the staff, 2/10 NVI4; NVI6
grandparents and children”
“secondary school” “higher education for the kids”; 4/10 NVI5;
“secondary school”; “see children NVI6;
prospering and using their education”; NVI8; NVI7
“for kids to prosper” 1/10 NVI10
“grainery to mill corn” 1/10 NVI10
Develop economic activities

• “grainery to mill corn”
• “grandparents to do something more than the baskets”
• “bee hives”
Children’s well-being
• “secondary school”
• “for kids to prosper”
• “more perimeter shambas”
• “for NV to help kids after they leave”
“More social integration”
Discussion of results
The grandparents would like to develop economic activities and see the children
educated and doing well. In the RRA (Figure ???) the grandparents emphasized farming
to provide more food for the families and the development of economic activities.
Appendix Two 92
interviewees)
Desired state Additional comments Number Interview
of codes
responses
“more training in “more crop productivity” 2/7 NVO1;
farming” NVO6
“better “more vehicles for transport”; “roads”; “better 5/7 NVO1;
transportation roads and access to transportation”; “more road NVO4;
system” infrastructure” NV03;
NVO6;
NVO5
“education” “more schools” 2/7 NVO1;
NVO4
“capacity building” 1/7 NVO1
“reduction in 1/7 NVO1
corruption”
“more water” 1/7 NVO4
“hospital nearby” “health centers”; “closer medical clinic” 3/7 NVO4;
NVO3;
NVO5
“shopping center” 1/7 NVO4
“churches” 1/7 NVO3
“more greenery” 1/7 NVO3
“more employment 1/7 NVO6
opportunities
“more realistic 1/7 NVO7
view of the
unemployment
rate”
“to be able to 1/7 NVO2
sustain themselves”
Capacity building
• “more training in farming”
• “to be able to sustain themselves”
Social services
• “hospital nearby”
• “education”
Infrastructure
• “better transportation system”
Improvement of natural resources
• “more water’
• “more greenery”
Economic opportunities
• “more employment opportunities”
Appendix Two 93
• “shopping center”
Other
• “churches”
• “more realistic view of the unemployment rate”
• “reduction in corruption”
The outside community would like for the area to become more developed in
terms of social services, infrastructure and economic opportunities. There is also desire
for there to be improvement in the state of natural resources and capacity building to
improve their skills for livelihoods and basic needs provision. The RRA results show an
emphasis on developing economic activities and social services, which aligns with the
interview results.

Shared Additional responses Number Interview
community vision of codes
responses
“not actively “no, there is a lot of disconnection as to where 5/12 NVS1;
involved” the village should go”; “they are not fully NVS2;
involved in developing a shared vision because NVS7;
the planning of activities is very NVS9;
disconnected…between departments”; “not a NVS10;
formal procedure or an interactive process
where they deliberately get together for that
purpose”; “not sure”
“have the clinic be 1/12 NVS3
self-sustaining”
“NV has its own “the board develops the vision” 2/12 NVS4;
vision” NVS8
“grandmothers play “grandparents-very much in dialogue” 2/12 NVS5;
a big role NVS12
“all activities 1/12 NVS6
geared toward the
children
“shared vision can 1/12 NVS11
be developed”
No shared vision
• “not actively involved”
• “shared vision can be developed”
Departmental vision
• “have the clinic be self-sustaining
Institutional vision
• “NV has its own vision”
o “all activities geared towards children”
Appendix Two 94
o “grandmothers play a big role”
The interviews with COGRI staff members indicate that there is not a shared
community vision for NV. There is an institutional vision developed by COGRI, but it
does not seem that NV has attempted to come together with staff, villagers and the
outside community to provide a desired state for the future.
Action plan

Have action plan Additional responses Number of Interview
responses codes
“had one but had to change it” “strategic plan for 2/12 NVS1; NVS9
(sustainability department) sustainability has been
developed”
“just work from week to week-they 1/12 NVS2
don’t have a long term strategic plan”
“individual work plans for each staff” 1/12 NVS4
“home care does not have a specific 1/12 NVS5
work plan”
“(school) have a 2-year strategic 1/12 NVS6
plan”
“not a specific time line” 1/12 NVS10
“each department has a plan but they 1/12 NVS11
need to make a comprehensive plan”
“have a ten year strategic plan for 1/12 NVS12
NV”
Plan for each department

• “had one but had to change it”
• “individual work plans for each staff”
• “each department has a plan but they need to make a comprehensive plan”
• “(school) have a 2-year strategic plan”
Plan for the village
• “have a ten-year strategic plan for NV
Unsure/Do not have a plan
• “not a specific time line”
• “home care does not have a specific work plan”
• “just work from week to week-they don’t have a long term strategic plan”
It seems as though the COGRI staff members have different levels of knowledge
about existing plans for the village. It appears that each department comes up with a plan
but there is not a comprehensive plan for the village. COGRI has an overall strategic
Appendix Two 95
plan, but specific actions for NV are not present. The “ten year strategic plan for NV”
was not shared with the researcher.
Appendix Two 96
Rapid Resource Assessment Results
RRA with Grandparents
24 July 2008 4pm

Alice, Mercy, June, Lindsey
Introduction:
I had interviewed many of the sho-shos prior to this meeting and began with explaining
the concept of sustainability because it appeared from the interviews, conversations, and
observations that there is a lack of understanding of the concept in spite of living in a
village striving to be an eco-village. The grandparents are a crucial element to the village,
so fostering an understanding of sustainability is very important. We moved on to the
next question, what is needed for sustainability in the village and they mentioned
shambas and baskets. This led back to the discussion of sustainability because they are
not there for a long time and don’t know how long they will be there so how can
sustainability be an issue? The translators had a difficult time explaining the concept, and
there was a lot of discussion because they feel that they cannot ensure sustainability of
the village because they are older and their children are not going to stay in the village
after secondary school anyway. The translators then asked them to think in terms of five
years and they were more able to grasp that time frame and what is needed to sustain
themselves and their children during that time. 16 of the grandparents were present (out
of 29).
Question 2: What human and natural resources do they currently have that are important
to sustaining themselves and their children (question rephrased because of the difficulties
mentioned above). They came up with the following list. There was a lot of discussion
because as soon as someone mentioned an asset they immediately went to analyzing it, I
had to keep mentioning that we will do that later and for now we are just brainstorming.
They came up with the following list and ranked each as follows (on a 1-10 scale, current
rank and then the desired development of each asset/leg):
• Water (3) → 10 (most important) (7 point increase)
• Land (3) → 8 (5 point increase)
• Trees (2) → 9 (7 point increase)
• Shambas/Farms (3) → 8 (5 point increase)
• Baskets (5) → 10 (5 point increase)
They consolidated land and shambas.
Question 3: which are the most important for sustaining themselves and their children?
Baskets and Water (water is the most important because without it they cannot farm or
drink or irrigate trees)
Question 4: what can they do to develop these resources?

Baskets- Be hard-working and cooperate together
Water- they have to depend on NV for this.
Appendix Two 97
I then posed the question of how they could do water conservation as families and
individuals but there was not any response.
We concluded the meeting at this point. They said that it was making them think and that
was a good thing.
Participants:
Agnes Nzembi
Lena Muaya
Mary Ndooni
Ruth Musangi
Telsia Kithsua
Susana Syonzau
Syokwa Mutiaya
Mutave Mwenzwa
Anges Nzambi
Esther Ngithi
Syokwa Kasyoka
Loise Mathua
Ndulu Muli
Malonza
Kathini Mairu
Kansi Mathei
Baskets
Water
Trees
Land
Shambas/Farms
Appendix Two 98
Water
Baskets
Trees
Land
Shambas/Farms
Shambas/Farms/Land
Appendix Two 99
RRA with Organic Outgrowers Group
18 July 2008 8:30 AM- 1st RRA session
The Organic Outgrowers Group was formed by the GEMSAF staff to create income
generating activities for villagers living near NV, primarily by selling products to the NV
agro-processing center which it would then turn into a value added product to sell. Before
a meeting of the group I asked some of the members to participate in the Rapid Resource
Assessment exercise. John Ngao, a casual worker on the main farm of NV translated
between English and Kikamba for me. With the help of another NV staff member
(Nancy), I had translated the questions and process on a sheet of paper to make sure he
understood (see appendix). He read through the questions and process before we began.
When we began about 10 people were sitting in a circle. He asked them if they agreed to
participate and they said yes, so he began with the first question:
1) What are the things in our community that we could change to make it better?
Responses were as follows:
• Agriculture
• animal husbandry
• planting trees
• more sand dams and wells and more ability to conserve water.
2) He then explained what sustainability means and posed the question, what is needed to
move towards sustainability in this community? Responses were as follows:
• Water availability in order to grow crops for subsistence and income generation
• Hospital
• Education
• Animal husbandry
• Better housing
• Electricity
• Mill to process grains
• Clothing and shoes, snake boots
3) We then moved on to the question: what human and natural resources currently exist
that are important in moving towards sustainability: We divided them into categories:
natural and human (see # 4 below for the list). At first they had a difficult time discerning
between human and natural resources, but I explained some examples of human
resources (e.g. their knowledge) and they then understood what the concept meant.
4) We then moved to a room where we could use a chalkboard to draw the spider web
model. By then about 19 people were present. They then ranked each from 1-10 to assess
how well developed each resources (or leg of the model) is. They discussed and came to
a consensus on the rank/number each should receive (if only one or just a few people
Appendix Two 100

gave an answer I would ask if everyone agreed and only then write the rank on the
board):
Natural:
• Land (7)
• Rivers (6)
• Trees (6)
• Rocks for building (1)
• Sand for building (2)
Human:
• Brick-making (4)
• Basket weaving (2)
• Farming (5)
• Milk production (1)
• Api-culture (2)
• Chickens (3)
• Wood carving (2)
4) after making the first spider web model we asked them assess and rank each leg they
would like to develop in order to move towards sustainability. During this step they
ended up saying what they needed to do instead of just ranking, but the process was
moving along well so it was not a hindrance; I noted what they said for each leg if they
had indeed discussed it. The results were as follows:
Natural:
• Land (7) → 9 need more wells
• Rivers (6) → 8 need more sand dams
• Trees (6) →
• Rocks for building (1) →
• Sand for building (2) → 5 can collect from sand dams
Human:
• Brick-making (4) →
• Basket weaving (2) → 4 need markets, materials
• Farming (5) →
• Milk production (1) → 5 need cows, fodder
• Api-culture (2) →
• Chickens (3) →
• Wood carving (2) →
At this point we stopped because of other commitments and agreed to finish the model at
a later time. All of the steps in this process took about 1 hour and 45 minutes.
Appendix Two 101

Thursday 24 July 2008 11 am. Conclusion of the RRA
Nancy and Millicent translated into Kikamba from English. We reviewed what happened
in the previous meeting on Friday (what sustainability is, the list they made of needs for
sustainability, the current human and natural resources important to sustainability, and
the ranking process in the model we began creating). 22 people present excluding myself.
Finishing the model:
Natural:
• Land (7) → 9 need more wells
• Rivers (6) → 8 need more sand dams
• Trees (6) → 7 need capacity and to plant more
• Rocks for building (1) → 2 need a market
• Sand for building (2) → 5 can collect from sand dams
Human:
• Brick-making (4) → 5 water availability
• Basket weaving (2) → 4 need markets, materials
• Farming (5) → 7 need pest control, water, quality seeds, machines, plows,
information
• Milk production (1) → 5 need cows, fodder
• Api-culture (2) → 5
• Chickens (3) → 3 need training, markets, processing capabilities, cross-breeding,
better facilities to keep them
• Wood carving (2) → 4
I drew the model on a blackboard with chalk and connected the web, using the same
model for the current and desired asset development.
Refining the model:

I asked them to revisit the needs for sustainability (listed on the chalkboard) and to add
any of the items on the list they created to the model. They added the following and
ranked them according to current status and desired status:
• Electricity (0) → 4 (even though we had been using a 1-10 scale they wanted to
give this a zero)
• Education (3) → 8
• Hospital (2) → 5
Analyzing the model:

I asked them which of the legs are most important to the sustainability of the village and
they mentioned the following:
• Education
• Farming
Appendix Two 102

• Land
• Hospital
• Trees
• Chickens
I then asked how they, as a group, can move from where they are to where they want to
be. We went through each of the 6 listed above and they discussed what they as a group
can do.
• Education- they initially say that the only thing they can do is wait for a donor to
provide funds because they need money for school fees and a facility. I then
mentioned that when they are thinking of solutions they need to consider the long
term and solutions that will carry them through to sustainability. They agreed that
a donor was a one-time option and perhaps not the best. The then began
discussing the creation of a group to get loans and save money to help each other;
being active in the community; and sharing the knowledge of the value of
education, because many people still do not see why it is important, especially for
girls.
• Farming- they need more wells, and to work together to do soil and water
conservation; work together to purchase tools and equipment; create terraces; buy
quality seeds and share among themselves.
• Land- plant trees for soil conservation, set portions aside for fodder, better breeds
of goats, bee-keeping, cows for milk production, terraces, plant grasses for fodder,
build a meeting house where they can secure tools.
• Hospital- the government must help
• Trees- nursery development, training for capacity building, water harvesting for
irrigation
• Chickens- have a housing structure for them; feed; money to purchase them;
markets; ability to process them.
We then noted how there are some underlying themes in each of the activities mentioned
above- for example needing money and forming a group to help themselves. I mentioned
that some of the things they are discussing Nyumbani can help them to develop. I then
asked how they could work with NV to do these things:
• Have a good relationship with NV
• Try to help the NV children when they actually start making money
• As a group they can come together to help the community
They also mentioned some aspects that have been challenging with NV:
• Sometimes when there are trainings they only take one or two people, but they
would feel more supported if they could train more people
• They are often only with volunteers, they feel disconnected with the staff because
of this and they would like more help from the staff.
Conclusion:
At this point we came to a conclusion of the meeting. I explained that I would be having
similar meetings with the grandparents and NV staff and asked for four volunteers to
attend the meeting on Wednesday, 30 July at 2pm to represent the group. Ndeti Ileli,
Appendix Two 103

Peter Mumua, Muthikwa Mwaluko, and Winifred Mwikya offered to come. We then
compiled a list of all participants:
David Kimuyu
Kavutha Pius
Kathindi Makilya
Margret Muli
Kakundi Kilungya
Syombua Mwalimu
Kavisi Ngulu
Kawnio Mwambui
Jackline Munywoki
Muwu Mwanzia
Mulwa Munywoki
Mutua Mwambilo
Kyalo Mwathe
Harrison Musyoka
Peter Mutune
Emmah Peter
Millicent Musau
Nancy Mutua
Lindsey Wood
Trees
Land
Rivers Rocks
Sand
Basket-making
Brick-making
Wood-carving
Chickens
Milk-production
Api-culture
Farming
Appendix Two 104

Rivers
Trees
Land
Rocks Sand
Brick-making
Basket-making
Wood-carving Chickens
Electricity
Education
Milk-production Hospital
Api-culture Farming
Appendix Two 105

RRA with COGRI Staff
28 July 2008, 3pm
Attendants:
George
Nancy
Millicent
Joseph (clinic)
Steven
Mercy
Alice
1. What do you like best about working at NV? It’s unique; helping a sector of the
population that is poor and in need; helping orphans.
2. I explained the Brundtland Commission definition of sustainability that I am using in
my research; that I had done a similar activity with the grandparents and the Organic
Outgrowers Group and that I wanted to combine the results this week.
3. What is needed to move towards sustainability in NV? Attitude change, local
knowledge, life skills, good relationships; capacity building; time to evaluate;
resource assessment; stable household incomes; self-help groups and other
community organizations; local governance.
4. What are the current natural resources that NV has that are important to
sustainability? We made the list and then consolidated as follows:
• Renewable energy sources (consolidated after mentioning solar, wind, humanure,
animal waste, animal power, moon light)
• Water
• land (consolidated after mentioning soil, hills, stones)
• time to meet goals (modified in the assessment stage of the model building
exercise from “time” and moved to the human resource category)
• vegetation (changed from “trees” to include all types)
• livestock for human consumption (meat, milk)
5. Human resources? We made the list and then consolidated as follows:
• Village institution (NV)
• Exchange of knowledge (indigenous knowledge, professional knowledge,
knowledge from other countries and regions)
• Cultural Unity
• Communication
• Labor (broken into two categories in the assessment phase into Sustainable Labor
and Available Labor)
• Flexibility (broken into two categories in the assessment phase to Interest to
Change and Willingness to change)
• Morals
Appendix Two 106

6. Assessment of these resources; I explained the process we would use and how to rank
them- we give them a score of 1-10 based upon how developed the resource is,
relative to the others, to move towards sustainability. Results were as follows:
Natural:
• Renewable energy sources (1)
• Water (4)
• Land (6)
• Vegetation (2)
• Livestock for human consumption (2)
Human:
• time to meet goals (1)
• Village institution (NV) (3)
• Exchange of knowledge (5)
• Cultural Unity (2)
• Communication (.5)
• Sustainable Labor (2)
• Available Labor (8)
• Interest to Change (4)
• Willingness to change (2)
• Morals (5)
We had to stop at this point and agreed to meet at a later time to finish the model.
Notes: there was a lot of discussion and people seemed engaged in the process.
Discussion over the conflict of interests between the grandparents and the village; the
outside community and the village’s goals (e.g. they only see it as a place to make money
and do not want to contribute to the village for the orphans); the grandparents are
unaware of the expectations of living in an eco-village- it wasn’t spelled out in the
beginning and now there are dependent on the village instead of being self-reliant;
Continued on 30 July 2008 3pm
George
Joseph
Mercy
Steven
11. We finished the ranking on Tuesday and began by revisiting the needs identified in
number 3 above. They decided to add the following and ranked them:
• Capacity building (1)
• Local governance (0)
• Local resource assessment (2)
• Self-help groups (3)
Appendix Two 107

12. We then went to the desired state of the resources assessed in the model, discussing
their relative importance. The assets were ranked as follows, with some descriptions
of why following:
Natural:
• Renewable energy sources (1) → 8 (achieving this can help attain other goals)
• Water (4) → 8
• Land (6) → 8
• Vegetation (2) → 8
• Livestock for human consumption (2) → 5
Human:
• time to meet goals (1) → 4 (need not only time, but to use time wisely)
• Village institution (NV) (3) → 7
• Exchange of knowledge (5) → 6 (already rather developed)
• Cultural Unity (2) → 6
• Communication (.5) → 10 (the most important but one of the most lacking)
• Sustainable Labor (2) → 8 (want to be able to pay but also not need a lot of
manual labor if, for example, renewable energy is developed)
• Available Labor (8) → 8 (want to sustain the availability even though other
activities people may be associated with would rise with the desired state, e.g.
people would be increased)
• Interest to Change (4) → 1 (if at the desired state then the interest would be there
and they would not need to work developing it)
• Willingness to change (2) → 4 (need capacity building to have this, so it is
dependent on that resource)
• Morals (5) → 6
• Capacity building (1) → 8 (lacking especially for the staff, less so for the
grandparents and outsiders because the staff provides them with opportunities,
this affects willingness to change because people are able to see how new skills
can help them move forward).
• Local governance (0) → 9 (right now the village is just top-down management
and there is no democracy in decision making; they are also lacking very much in
involvement from the local chiefs and government officials, both of these are very
important and need attention)
• Local resource assessment (2) → 8 (very important because they need to know
what they have in order to move forward or to improve- for example, with
increasing the orphans they cannot currently take in more because they are having
a difficult time with the amount they currently have)
• Self-help groups (3) → 7 (SHGs are an entry point to sustainability, they develop
and then are disintegrated, for example the village is only associated with three in
a community of 20,000 people.
Appendix Two 108

9. I asked them, out of the model you just created, which are the most important
resources that you need for sustainability and reaching the desired state of development?
They decided upon: communication, capacity building, water, local governance, and
renewable energy.
13. How, as a staff do you help develop those resources?

• Communication- need better relationship between outside consultants and staff;
with the grandparents and children. Need to have community meetings “barazas”,
especially engaging the local chiefs and village elders. It is very low and probably
the most important.
• Capacity building- new staff need training; need more ability to receive new
training, attend workshops (they are very isolated here), they need more exposure
to similar programs so they can get advice and ideas, Need to have relationship
building exercises with the staff to develop morale and friendship; they need
counseling as well because dealing with orphans is difficult.
• Water- take advantage of rain harvesting, recycling water, building capacity in the
grandparents, etc to conserve water; teaching the kids how to conserve water.
• Renewable energy- they have the land, they need to utilize it to promote biofuels,
for example castor and jatropha; maximize animal power and reduce dependency
on petroleum.
• Local governance- identify people who can give support to the village in
surrounding areas; they need to go back to the local chiefs and churches to engage
them. They need other sources of support aside from the village institution and
administration. They want the village to be a part of the community, not some
institution plopped down here. The support of local government can reduce crises,
help in decision-making. They need more decentralized decision-making
processes.
Appendix Two 109

Key
1 Capacity building for staff
2 Willingness to change
3 Sustainable labor source
4 Cultural unity
5 Time to meet goals 2 18
6 Communication 1 17
7 Village Institution 3 19 16
8 Knowledge exchange 4 15
9 Interest to change
10 Morals 5 14
6
11 Available labor source
12 Land
13 Water 7 13
14 Self-help groups
15 Renewable energy
sources
9 12
16 Livestock 8
17 Vegetation 10
18 Assessment of local
resources 11
19 Local governance (0)
Key 19
1 Capacity building for staff 1

18
2 Willingness to change
3 Sustainable labor source 17
4 Cultural unity
5 Time to meet goals
6 Communication 3
7 Village Institution 2
8 Knowledge exchange 16
9 Interest to change
10 Morals
11 Available labor source 4 15
12 Land
13 Water 5
14 Self-help groups 14
15 Renewable energy 9
sources
16 Livestock 6
17 Vegetation 13
18 Assessment of local
resources 7 12
19 Local governance 8 10
11
Appendix Two 110

Observations of NV
1. Children and grandparents seem to be reliant completely on NV for food, they are
not working in the main farm and only some are working in the home gardens.
One grandmother said the kids don’t want to work in the gardens- they were given
a “grace” period in the beginning to settle in and they were not required to do
work, but now the grace period is over and they want them to work but they will
not. Note- kids are always in school, sometimes they go at 6 in the morning when
it is still dark. When they get home they have to wash clothes and help with
dinner and do homework.
2. Disconnect between the departments of the staff.
3. No crop rotation schedule, no reports saying exactly what was planted and when.
Hilary is working on this for the main farm.
4. Very sparse in the homes; chickens are all over the place, for example they leave
their dishes out to dry and the chickens come to drink the water that is dripping
off the plates and they come into contact with the plates.
5. After an interview, one of the staff seemed to be telling the “real story” and
actually contradicted what was said in the interview. For example, the level of
community understanding and involvement from the outside the interviewee felt
just wasn’t there; they just see NV as rich and a place to get work- no real
connection like they would like. This made me wonder if the staff and other
interviewees were not telling the whole truth.
6. Cluster one sho-sho responses- more dependence on the office to provide for
them, not so in cluster four, perhaps they think differently as groups because of
the housing arrangement?
7. Some limitations of the study- translations; are people honest (e.g., example in
number 5 above). How much do interviewees understand what sustainability is?
8. Sand dams, bore hole have helped with water quantity but quality is a huge issue.
Also water infrastructure is severely lacking on the outside.
9. Is tribalism an issue with the staff and between staff and villagers? Some staff are
from outside and there was a lot of talk about discrimination.
10. Staff seems to be lacking managerial skills, especially business skills. E.g.,
chickens were ordered from Nairobi but they didn’t give the right size chickens
and in the second order some of the chickens died. Orders for vegetables were
also erroneous- e.g., a shop ordered beets and they only filled half the order even
though they had the beets and sent the wrong greens. Lack of oversight and poor
work performance (e.g. air valve that was broken and water was leaking was not
fixed for quite some time…). Misuse of resources…e.g. Truck going to Nairobi
and forgetting to drop off the chickens.
11. Sister Mary gave me a strategic plan but the rest of the staff doesn’t seem to
know about it.
12. Staff was enthusiastic about RRA.
13. There seems to be a lot of motivation to move forward, especially from the
outside community. NV is providing a really good opportunity for them.
14. The idea of sustainability is not infused into all of the departments of the village.
The sustainability department is really the only one that is really trying to work
Appendix Two 111

off of sustainability practices. There seems to be discontent with the sustainability
department’s inability to provide all food for the village, but they are essential.
15. Solar panels stolen at the beginning of the summer- fear in working with outside
community as a result.
16. Notes- the sustainability of the village- they need to look at individual units and
come up with plans and work sustainability into each department. Right now
sustainability is only a very small part of the village as a whole and is really only
related to the farm, but sustainability isn’t only about food or income, they need it
to permeate all of the other workings of the village.
1. Number of acres/hectares of the main farm
- Drip fed – 12. 5 acres
- Rain fed – 33 acres
-1 acre under vegetables
2. Number of acres/hectares of the perimeter shambas
- 240 pieces of 15 by 70 meters.
3. Number of outside residents and grandparents that have access to perimeter shambas
-Grand parents – 40
- Residents - 342
4. Number of outside residents and grandparents that actually are cultivating the
perimeter shambas
-outside community - 160
- Grand parents – 11
Vegetable perimeter – 4 grand parents; 28 from community
5. Size of the home gardens and vegetables grown in them
25 meters by 20 meters. No vegetables
7. Volume of solid waste generated by the village each week.
Will take time to estimate
8. Volume of compostable waste generated by the village each week
Take time to quantify
9. Volume of fuelwood used by each family per week. How much is given to them per
day?
-40kg per week. The kids collect the firewood.
10. Number of acres/hectares planted with lueceana =5 acres planted but
Scattered
11. Number of acres/hectares planted with Melia volkinsii =47 acres already planted
12. Size of the riparian zone in acres/hectares =8 acres planted
13. Number of staff per department
‐ Sustainability – 15
‐ School – 13
‐ Polytechnic – 5
‐ Social service - 3
‐ Clinic - 2
14. Number of outside villagers employed in each activity
- Tree planting – 20
- Humanure application – 5
- Mulching – 11
Appendix Two 112

- Agro – processing – 1
- Composting humanure – 1
- Biopesticide preparation – 1
- Mashroom growing - 2
- Apiary – 8
- Vegetable raising – 4
- Clinic assistant – 1
- Grand parent house help – 1
- Transport loaders – 2
- Tractor helpers - 2
15. How many beds are in the clinic? - 2 beds in place
16. How many patients are seen in the clinic on a monthly basis?
- An average number of 250 patients
Appendix Two 113

Notes on Rapid Resource Assessment Methodology
Summarized by Victor D. Phillips, GEM Director

May 1, 2008
In GEM’s practical and applied service to communities engaged in building a sustainable

future, a rapid resource assessment is often used to engage, empower, and energize local citizens. It
is usually a participatory, preliminary action step to focus collective wisdom. After all, community
members know their community, culture, conditions, and challenges better than outsiders. They can
also best prioritize needs for which they can develop together a shared vision of desired outcomes.
To assist local citizens assess current status of community-based human and natural
resources—including strengths and assets, constraints and liabilities, and opportunities and
limitations—in the place where they live and work and interact and know well, a Rapid Resource
Assessment (RRA) methodology is described as follows. The RRA can be conducted quickly and
accurately adapted to local customs and preferences for optimal results. The results, which come
from the participants themselves, are presented back to the people as a easy-to-comprehend and
easy-to-adjust visual, the “spider web” (more on how this visual is constructed and interpreted later).
While group dynamics, including power structures and peer pressure, always come into play
when any group convenes, hang loose. Allow these anticipated, natural social mechanisms to occur.
You can’t prevent or stop them anyway. They always occur, so “get over it.” Alright, one quick
pointer on group dynamics: Quite often by allowing different formats and flows (e.g., large group,
small break-out groups, one-on-one; oral or written or drawings or skits; public or private; external
facilitator from outside or internal facilitator from inside, etc.), then more participation occurs with
“more light and less heat.” Also, different groups can convene at different times convenient to
them to conduct separate RRA’s, which can be later shared with other groups or a large group for,
comparison, refinement and possible aggregation, if desired.
Steps in facilitating Rapid Resource Assessment
In GEM projects, these four steps are commonly used at meetings or workshops to help
local citizens quickly and successfully assess the status of community-based assets and limitations:
Step 1 “Starting with ending” [focus on the end goal—sustainability]

Step 2 “Visioning” [identify what is needed for moving forward towards sustainability]
Step 3 “Sparring” [assess current status of community-based human and natural resources]
Step 4 “Spider webbing” [assemble spars in building spider web visual for summary analysis]
Brief descriptions of each step’s applications with suggested methods are presented below.
Appendix Three 1
Notes on Rapid Resource Assessment Methodology by Victor D. Phillips, GEM Director, May 1, 2008
Step 1 “Starting with ending” [focus on the end goal—sustainability]
In the context of what GEM does, how GEM operates, and how GEM deploys RRA, the
end goal is sustainability. It is not necessary or desirable to get hung up on definititions or pitfalls
associated with the term “sustainability.” Personally, I like the 1987 Brundtland Report (Our Common
Future) entry best: “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs." But let’s move on, shall we?
The GEM approach to sustainability is local, local, local. Only by helping people help
themselves with small, simple, practical steps—one farm field, one stream segment, one factory at a
time—can sustainability become an essential, conscious part of the shared vision for their
communities.
Suggested methods for Step 1:

o Sample starter questions:
9 Ask the people why they think they have been asked to gather here (don’t lecture or
instruct them on the purpose of the meeting or the RRA….allow participants to
voice their responses as to why we are gathering together)…or why they choose to
come to this gathering [interest, motivation, communication]
9 Ask the people what they like best about their place, their community [local
knowledge, local pride]
9 Ask the people if they had a magic wand what changes would they make to their
place, community [visioning, sharing]
o Quick brainstorming activity

9 What are neighboring communities like? [comparison]
9 How are neighboring communities different from our community? [contrast]
9 Is the “grass greener” in neighboring communities or in our community? [attitude,
perspective]
Step 2 “Visioning” [identify what is needed for moving forward towards sustainability]
Based on the above Step 1 ice-breakers, participants are primed to brainstorm what is
needed for moving toward sustainability in their communities. Any and all responses are welcomed
for a hodge-podge of concrete actions, dreams, obstacles, ideals, practical steps, impractical
objectives, philosophies, concerns, anything goes!

o Hodge-podge of needs
9 List of needs is generated by participants [brainstorming]
9 Participants identify similar or redundant needs to consolidate or simplify [agreeing]
o Further condensation
9 Participants condense remaining list of needs to 5-8 main factors or drivers
[discriminating, prioritizing]
Appendix Three 2
Step 3 “Sparring” [assess current status of community-based human and natural resources]
No, this doesn’t mean mock battle in the meeting room. “Sparring” refers to the process of
constructing “spars”—typically 5 to 8 undergirding structural beams deemed most important for
building the RRA spider web. Local citizen participants identify community-based human and
natural resources (or lack thereof) that reflect the current status of assets (or liabilities) important to
sustainability. After agreeing on the spars they have developed, participants assess how well-
developed or not well-developed each spar is. Step 3 “spars” (community assets) and Step 2
“needs” (drivers for change) may overlap, or may not…hang loose and let the participants resolve as
they deem appropriate and satisfactory. After all, this is their spider web-to-be and they will build
and own it.

o Community assets
9 List of assets is generated by participants [brainstorming]
9 Participants identify similar or redundant assets to consolidate or simplify [agreeing]
o Selecting spars
9 Participants condense remaining list of assets to 5-8 main spars [discriminating,
prioritizing]
o Determining spar lengths

9 Participants determine how well-developed or not well-developed each spar is, which
is represented by the length of each spar, e.g., long spars indicate well-developed
assets in the community; short spars depict less well-developed assets (or liabilities)
[evaluating]
Step 4 “Spider webbing” [assemble spars in building spider web visual for summary analysis]
Quick and easy, the spars are assembled as spokes from a hub. Participants “see” the frame
of the spider web they are constructing. To complete the spider web, the happy spiders in the
audience “spin the web” by connecting the outward tips of the spars revealing a polygon shape
distinctive to their community. This first polygon defines the current status of community assets
(see Fig. 1 for visual illustration of the spider web). The spiders will want to spin more polygons on
the spars to represent Needs and/or Goals, with the ultimate result or effect being a visual road map
they can embrace for building a more sustainable community (see Fig. 2 for visual illustration of
desired future). Voila!! …rapid resource assessment.

o Set the spars
9 Draw the spider web frame using the participants’ spars [drawing]
o Connect the spars

9 Draw a line connecting the spar tips to generate a polygon of current status of
community assets [drawing]
o Spin more of the web
Appendix Three 3
9 Ask participants if they would like to “lengthen or shorten” the spars, i.e. address
Needs and/or Goals. Alternatively, standard length spars may be used for all spars,
with the point at the hub representing total lack of the asset (profound liability) and
the point at the tip farthest away from the hub representing a complete cornucopia
of the asset. [analyzing; visioning, sharing]
9 Participants extend or shorten spars (or add new spars??). Alternatively, using
standard spar lengths, participants pinpoint “where they wish their community in the
future” [discussing, agreeing]
9 Draw in spar length changes (these reflect Needs and/or Goals) and draw line
connecting the tips of the revised spars [drawing]
o Spider talk
9 Now the spider web is complete with an original polygon depicting current status,
and one or two more polygons representing where the participants want their
community to be in the future (addressing Needs and/or Goals). Ask participants
“what’s next?” or “how will this spider web ‘catch some flies’?” [forward planning]
9 Conclude session congratulating participants on their constructing a visual road map
of where they are now and where together they wish to be in moving toward a more
sustainable community. [smiling, clapping, dancing?]
Spider web model examples
For examples of spider web model RRA application, see the following links:
2004 GEM Wingspread Conference Proceedings (start with section, Spider-web Model for Stakeholder
Assessment on page 5; also see pages 6, 7 and
23): http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/gem/InternationalWatershed/PDF/Wingspread.pdf
2002 CARE booklet on Gender Equity Building Blocks (see page 6 of booklet for spider web diagram)
featured in the 2004 GEM Wingspread Conference Proceedings:
pqdhttp://pqdl.care.org/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_9B39F39208A111BDC378BAE7E6EC6034F3F
31A00l.care.org/practice/Programmatic%20Strategies/Gender%20Equity%20Building%20Blocks.p
df

Some final thoughts
o Keep it informal, upbeat, and happy.
o Tailor it to local culture and adapt to participants’ time availability and schedule.
o Don’t have to finish…just initiate the process and allow participants to determine if they are
interested and engaged (indicated by their presence and wakefulness if not active
participation) or not (indicated by their absence, sleeping through or walking out the session).
o It’s their community, their knowledge, their lives, their future, their hopes and dreams, and
their spider web….not ours.
Appendix Three 4
Citizen Participation in defining &

Local Income addressing local issues
generation capability
Local Governance & Leadership supportive of

sustainability as community priority
Land & other

natural resources Information Technology & GIS
planning/management tools
Indigenous Knowledge of cultural &
landscape history
Fig. 1. Most important community assets as spars arranged as spokes on a hub, with current status
of the relative strength of each asset depicted by spar length. Polygon shape characterizes
participants’ perceptions of their community. [see Step 4 “Spider webbing”].
Appendix Three 5
Citizen Participation in defining &

Local Income addressing local issues
generation capability
Local Governance & Leadership supportive of

sustainability as community priority
External financial support to

implement priority
sustainability projects
Land & other

natural resources
Indigenous Knowledge of
cultural & landscape
Information Technology & GIS

planning/management tools Emigration Problem of young
people moving away from
community
Fig. 2. Adding and lengthening spars to indicate meeting priority needs or desired goals in the future.
Blue (new) and red (revised) spars represent new community asset, need or goal added by
participants. Green polygon depicts the desired end-points envisioned by the participants for their
community as a roadmap to their desired future. [see Step 4 “Spider webbing”].
Appendix Three 6

10 1 1 427 6104

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10 1 1 427 6104

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10 1 1 427 6104

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:

CASE STUDIES FROM INDIA AND KENYA

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

College of Natural Resources

Stevens Point, Wisconsin

Dr. Victor D. Phillips, Comrnitt e Cha1r

A sustainable community can be defined as a community that implements projects

aimed at long-term management of natural resources for ecological health, economic

research project investigates two cases of sustainable community development in

sustainable community. A qualitative analysis of data collected in interviews, direct-

community, local panchayat government, and Foundation for Ecological Security,

sustainability by focusing on specific activities that were meaningful to the community,

by community members after the project’s conclusion.

making headway in achieving its specific goals. Operated by a Catholic organization,

the ‘lost generation’ of HIV/AIDS victims and principles of sustainability. Currently,

from Victor, and for that I am grateful.

I would also like to acknowledge the Global Environmental Management

Ron Tschida, ex-officio member of my graduate committee, spent many hours

thesis, which helped me immensely as I delved into the writing process.

To the organizations I worked with on this thesis I am eternally grateful. The

experiences, perspectives, and thoughts with me and for so graciously allowing me to

come to your communities.

Staff from Global Environmental Management Education Center (GEM) have

Many people in the College of Natural Resources made my graduate experience a

Stefanie Miller, Scott Reilly, Nicholas Syano and Sarah Windjue.

laughter- saying ‘thank you’ isn’t enough.

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ III

DISCUSSION OF SUSTAINABILITY ATTRIBUTES ...................................................................................... 76

TABLE 1. EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITIES MAKING EFFORTS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY ................................ 12

FIGURE 1. RAJASTHAN, INDIA (NATIONAL PORTAL OF INDIA, 2008) ............................................................. 56

FIGURE 9. LOCATION OF NYUMBANI VILLAGE IN KITUI DISTRICT, KENYA. .................................................. 89

Appendix One: Results from Sanjadi-ka-badia

Appendix Two: Results from Nyumbani Village

Appendix Three: Notes on Rapid Resource Assessment Methodology

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Importance of the Study

“Think globally, act locally”

by technological advances, wide venues of communication, free-market economics, trade

resulted in often unequal distributions of wealth and power, as well as over-exploitation

Sustainable development is an approach that aims to secure a better future for

Environment and Development: “humanity has the ability to make development

comprised of interdependent ecological, economic, and social factors (Agyeman &

development initiatives. The importance of these three elements is widely accepted,

however, there is divergence of opinion on how to achieve sustainability, especially the

appropriate level of governance to carry out sustainable development initiatives. Many

initiatives have been top-down, macro-level efforts by national governments and

international institutions. However, there is currently a predominant push to make

autonomy to govern themselves towards sustainability (e.g. Armstrong & Stratford,

Kijtewachakul, Shivakoti, & Webb, 2004).

Efforts towards local-level sustainability in developed countries differ from those

in developing countries (Redclift, 1993), especially in rural impoverished areas. In

developing countries rural populations often depend on their surrounding natural

community’s source of livelihood is degraded, its capacity to provide sustenance is

even if demand levels remain constant. Therefore, local-level sustainable development in

sustainability ultimately incorporates the long-term temporal capacity dimension to

limit or promote it.

This study investigates how local-level efforts at sustainability have been

implemented in two communities: Sanjadi-ka-badia, India and Nyumbani Village, Kenya.