21 Sep 2006: ISS Today: Botswana: The Case of the Basarwa: Strengthening Land and Resource Rights
21 September 2006: Botswana: The Case of the Basarwa: Strengthening Land and Resource Rights
Insecurity of land tenure is a socio-political condition that can be made – and unmade. During the last decade a large number of African countries have gone through processes of land policy change, leading in many instances to comprehensive legislative reforms. Although the notion of private property has been, and continues to be, viewed as “the ideal tenure system”, there is growing acknowledgement that customary tenure systems should not be ignored or ‘abolished’ – in fact, underway is a new wave of land reform within which the legal status of customary rights held by rural Africans is improving (1). There is also a growing awareness of the vital role of the commons (2) in local livelihood systems. Governments have become more open to devolving the responsibility for managing natural resources to local communities, despite conventional wisdom that persists in some quarters that privatization or state control are the only means of preventing the degradation of resources that are customarily held in common.
Botswana, which has never been colonised and does not have land alienation problems, is not without land-related tensions and localised conflicts. Most notable is the case of the Basarwa (San or Bushmen) who have been consistently denied their traditional rights by other races occupying their ancestral lands, even though the national constitution guarantees the people the right to live there in perpetuity. The Basarwa, who have lived in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR) for thousands of years, have repeatedly said that they want to remain on their ancestral lands, but the government insists that game reserves and National Parks are not to be used for human habitation (3).
The CKGR, a reserve created in (1961) the last days of British (Protectorate) rule before Botswana`s independence in 1966, guaranteed the San continued occupation of their land. However, living traditionally as hunter gatherers they have never been seen as having land of their own and have gradually lost their customary land areas to settlers, cattle farmers, natural parks and game reserves. The land dispossession has entailed loss of land tracts that entailed economic as well as cultural significance. In the late 1980s and early 1990s the government pursued a policy of “freezing” development – water tanks have been removed and the government had withdrawn services it admitted were "basic" and "essential" for the Basarwa. The government`s position is that it is too costly to provide even such basic services as medical care and schooling, despite the reserve`s existing tourism revenues. It has also banned hunting with guns in the Reserve and has said that the Basarwa threaten the Reserve`s ecology. Relocations, most intense since 1996, have taken place into government established settlements, but these are too small to support hunting and gathering and the quality of land and resources insufficient to sustain them. Compensation payments have been made, but these are too little to enable the Basarwa to restore their livelihoods to the levels that existed prior to their relocation. These relocations have taken place in the name of wildlife conservation and tourism promotion; however, Survival International, an advocacy group, believes that the Bushmen’s evictions from the game reserve in the Kalahari are driven by the Botswana government`s desire to access diamond deposits. The government has denied this.
Since late 2005 the government has resumed its policy of forcing all Basarwa off their lands using armed police and threats of violence or death. Many of those involuntarily displaced live in squalid resettlement camps and have resorted to prostitution, while about 250 others remain or have surreptitiously returned to the Kalahari to resume their independent lifestyle (4). Despite having managed the resources for generations the Basarwa are not reaping the rewards; the benefits are now being exploited by outsiders, including tourists and mining companies. It is a case of local elites asserting control over natural resources as the basis for wealth accumulation by framing their arguments around socio-ecological narratives - turning development inputs to the advantage of the few while further dispossessing rural populations.
The Basarwa, whose livelihood needs have for way too long now not been respected, are very serious in their call for security of tenure of the land over which they have been the primary custodians for thousands of years. Equally important is to acknowledge the legitimacy of their rights and for this to be reflected in both legal frameworks and the institutional mechanisms for gaining access to and managing land and natural resources.
Picture: Bushman woman in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (5)
Jenny Clover, African Security Analysis Programme, ISS Pretoria
1. Wily, L.A. (2006), Land Rights Reform and Governance in Africa: How to make it work in the 21st Century?, UNDP.
2. ‘The Commons’, or common property resources, are public goods that are governed by institutions who claim ownership and management rights over the resources in question on behalf of a known group.
3. Some 21% of the country is set aside for wildlife management, 9.8% for game reserves and 7.5% for national parks. Ref: Mpotokwane, M. & Keatimilwe, K. (2005), Botswana, SAEIA.
4. http://fixedreference.org/2006-Wikipedia-CD-Selection/wp/b/Bushmen.htm
5. http://fixedreference.org/2006-Wikipedia-CD-Selection/wp/b/Bushmen.htm
