3. Water Rights in the Usangu Plains

The comment on my last blog recommended I pursue the topic of post-colonial water rights in more detail, specifically looking to the work of Frances Cleaver in the Usangu Plains, as well as Tanzania more generally, and Ethiopia. Consequently, having followed up on the recommendation this post will revisit post-colonial water rights. 

As stated in my previous post one of the key impacts of post-colonial water rights is the marginalization of smallholder irrigation as a consequence of said farmers being excluded from formal institutions. Or at least an uneven power dynamic existing within these institutions that under represents or over represents a certain group, this is certainly a principle concern of Frances Cleaver’s research, which focuses upon these power dynamics in the context of the Usangu Plains. 

The Usangu Plains are a catchment located in the upper part of the Great Ruaha River (GRR). The Plains feature a perennial swamp, which is crucial to continuously successful agriculture practices as it mitigates the extreme seasonal variability of rainfall in Tanzania. However, the GRR is in a period of severe drying as a consequence of climactic change and thus has exacerbated several problems for the users who compete over resource allocation in the area. 

Figure 1 – Map of Usangu Plains (Villoth, G. 2013: 1484)

‘The most common characterization of competing users in the Usangu Plain is one between ethnically based groups of sedentary agriculturalists (the indigenous Sangu and in-migrants such as Nyakusa and Hehe) and itinerant pastoralists (predominantly Il Parakuyu Maasai and Sukuma)’ (Cleaver, F. 2001: 27). This characterization is a legacy of British colonial influence under which ‘ethnicity became the key to defining who insiders and outsiders were in the Sangu system of communal property’ (Charnely, S. 1997: 114). This binary was principally a tool to ensure water rights worked in the interest of the British. This system continues to define water rights in the region and has proved problematic under recent processes of social change. This is most noticeable in the ongoing competition between migrant farmers and the indigenous population. These farmers migrated out of a necessity to seek new wetlands after a series of droughts in the surrounding nations. Under current laws farmers, who stake claim to the water resource on the grounds of indigeneity have a far more formalized stake to the resource and their power is reflected in their disproportionate political influence, particularly given that these groups often make up a minority in these regions. This is further compounded by the Tanzanian government’s adoption of an ‘Agriculture First’ ‘strategy (that) rhetorically links both large commercial and small-scale agricultural production to the national project of food security—resulting in a privileging of farmers and farming in policy discourses.’ (Cleaver, F. 2013: N/A). This strategy alongside a formalization of property rights in order to satisfy international development groups encouragement of economic liberalization has resulted in the under representation of pastoralists in formal agricultural and water policies. Moreover, the Tanzanian government are facing pressures to evict these migrants on grounds of their ‘illegitimate and illegal’ water use. 

As stated in the previous blog these formalized property rights pose significant obstacles to food and water as a pathway to development. Currently, in Tanzania it is possible that the Usangu Plain can serve as an effective resource for promoting agricultural practices that facilitate the development process. However, as a result of the power dynamics embedded in political institutions and these institutions capacity to exercise control over the resource this development may be uneven and consequently any development evidenced can be interrogated as being unsuccessful on these grounds. Francis Cleaver proposes an incorporation of institutional bricolage systems, which are considerably more adaptable to evolutions in the social and cultural groups and practices of the region when compared to the current political institutions in place presently. However, as she outlines these institutional bricolages can still obscure fundamental power inequalities that will be reflected in the uneven success of development. Consequently, in order to actualize food and water as a pathway to development a reform of political systems that are still reflective of colonial water rights must be conducted. If this does not occur uneven development might and as stated in the previous blog mobilizing poorer farmers as actors in the development process will still stand as a fundamental obstacle to development.