Conceptualising The Links Between Hiv/aids And Pastoralist Livelihoods

Abstract

While understanding of the links between HIV/AIDS and agriculture-based livelihoods is increasing, there has been very little research on the links between HIV/AIDS and pastoralism, despite the fact that pastoralists represent a large group of the poor and vulnerable in many countries long affected by HIV/AIDS. This article identifies key linkages as priorities for further research, by combining an understanding of both the core common features and the diversity of pastoralist livelihoods with conceptual frameworks from the literature on HIV/AIDS and agriculture: particularly the concepts of susceptibility and resistance (to HIV infection) and vulnerability and resilience (to the socio-economic impacts of AIDS). Features of pastoral livelihoods discussed include: mobility, for grazing, marketing and non-pastoral labour; food insecurity and vulnerability to adverse policy, ‘natural’ and ‘man-made’ disasters; isolation from health services; exposure to zoonotic diseases; labour patterns including traditional institutions to match labour to livestock; reliance on collective action; labour intensive and risky marketing chains.

Alors que la compréhension du rapport entre le VIH/SIDA et les moyens d'existence reposant sur l'agriculture s'améliore, il existe peu de recherches sur les liens entre le VIH/SIDA et les systèmes pastoraux, bien que les éleveurs représentent un groupe important de personnes pauvres et vulnérables, aux pays affectés de longue date par le VIH/SIDA. Cet article identifie des relations clés considérées comme prioritaires pour des recherches ultérieures, en combinant une compréhension à la fois des caractéristiques communes essentielles et de la diversité des moyens d'existence des éleveurs. Il utilise des concepts provenant de la littérature sur le VIH/SIDA et sur l'agriculture: notamment les concepts de prédisposition (susceptibility) et de résistance (à l'infection), de vulnérabilité et de resilience (aux effets socio-économiques du SIDA).

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this article was presented at the Annual Conference of the Development Studies Association of the UK and Ireland in 2003, and some of the material was also presented at the FAO/ILRI Technical Meeting on Linkages between HIV/AIDS and the Livestock Sector in East and Southern Africa, Addis Ababa, March 2005. I am grateful to participants at both meetings for their comments. The article represents a continuation of work originally carried out under contract from the Department for International Development's Programme for Advisory and Support Services. While it is not based on primary research, discussions with Bahima pastoralists in south-western Uganda (see Morton et al. 2004) helped greatly to clarify the issues, as did discussion with Michael Loevinsohn of ISNAR and Theogen Rutagwenda of Makerere University. Responsibility for the views expressed is that of the author alone.

Notes

 1. And many other references.

 2. Research Network on AIDS and Livelihoods, an initiative co-facilitated by ISNAR and IFPRI, see < www.isnar.org/renewal>: see particularly Loevinsohn and Gillespie (2003).

 3. Further work on HIV/AIDS and livestock, including a review by Michael Goe, was presented at the FAO/ILRI Technical Workshop on Linkages between HIV/AIDS and the Livestock Sector in Eastern and Southern Africa, Addis Ababa, March 2005, proceedings forthcoming. On pastoralism, the presentation at that meeting by Gerald Kitaka, based on his unpublished master's thesis for Larenstein University, should also be noted.

 4. The concepts of ‘coping’ and ‘coping strategies’ have subsequently been problematised largely on ethical grounds (Barnett and Whiteside, 2002; Lowinsohn and Gillespie, 2003).

 5. Barnett et al. (1995); see also FAO (1995).

 6. Barnett and Whiteside (1999); see also Barnett et al. (2000).

 7. Loevinsohn and Gillespie (2003: 35–7), and by others such as White (2003).

 8. As the authors point out, this also refers to mitigating food insecurity and malnutrition from causes other than AIDS.

 9. These estimates were provided by the Pastoral and Environmental Network in the Horn of Africa, based on various sources.

10. Haslwimmer (1994): her work also forms part of FAO (1995) and various other FAO documents.

11. But subsequent unpublished work by Michael Goe covers linkages between HIV/AIDS and the livestock sector more broadly.

12. May and McCabe (2004) have similar concerns, shared by Talle (1999), both discussed under ‘Susceptibility and Resistance’ below.

13. Current sero-prevalence in the district under discussion is relatively low, and the effects of the epidemic have not yet been widely felt, hence the stress on projection.

14. The recent annotated bibliography by Müller, (2004: 43–4) supports this view.

15. The ITDG study also includes an Organisational Capacity Assessment of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development (MoLFD) in the various districts, and an analysis of other stakeholders, not summarised here. These have been used to draft a Strategic Plan on Pastoralism and HIV/AIDS for the MoLFD.

16. Koech (2001), cited by Markakis (2004).

17. Afar Region HAPPCO, personal communication to the author, May 2004.

18. Lesorogol (1998), see also Morton and Meadows (2000).

19. A phrase used by Coast (2002) and usefully avoiding the negative connotations of ‘promiscuity’.

20. Pamela Hussain, personal communication.

21. Loevinsohn and Gillespie (2003: 13), following Semba and Tang (1999).

22. Loevinsohn and Gillespie (2003), following Semba (1998).

23. The unpublished thesis by Gerald Kitaka, University of Larenstein, presents some evidence for this occurring in Uganda.

24. Little (1995); see also Jaffee and Morton (1995) for a general discussion of risk and transaction costs in marketing perishable produce.

25. A point also made by Engh et al. (2000).

26. As witnessed by NAADS (2003) and ITDG-EA (2005), and more generally by Barnett and Whiteside (2002).

27. One example of an apparently successful prevention education in a pastoral society, though not one focusing on pastoralism per se, is the ‘Community Conversations’ methodology applied in Borana Zone, with support from UNDP Ethiopia (UNDP, 2004).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

John Morton

John Morton is Professor of Development Anthropology, Livelihoods and Institutions Group, Natural Resources Institute and a specialist on social, institutional and policy aspects of livestock and pastoral development. [email protected]