Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya; Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo; Maurice Ochieng Ombok

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

| Peer-Reviewed

Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya, Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo, Maurice Ochieng Ombok

Published in International Journal of Agricultural Economics (Volume 6, Issue 6)

Received: 26 October 2021 Accepted: 9 December 2021 Published: 29 December 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This paper examined the effects of land use changes on the livelihood of the local communities in Baringo County. Land is a principal factor of production, a source of life and livelihoods. It provides a means of living and a variety of uses such as agricultural, human settlement, environmental conservation, urban and industrial development purposes among others. These uses compete for space in a fixed area, hence the rising land use conflicts and degradation. The situation has threatened lives and livelihoods, making it difficult to plan for the livelihood activities in Baringo County. This is happening against the backdrop of land use policy changes including; the National Land Policy, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the Land Act, 2012, the Land Registration Act, 2012, the Community Land Act, 2016 and the National Land Use Policy that confers sanctity on land use. Using non-experimental survey design, 323 households were randomly sampled from Baringo South, Tiaty, Baringo North and Eldama Ravine Constituencies. Cobb-Douglas production model was used to analyze livelihood assets productivity. The study found out that land use changes decreased livelihood assets productivity at varied level of significance; human by 56.1% at 1%, physical by 53.4% at 10% and financial by 65.6% at 5% level. This decrease is related with the unregistered community land in dry areas (pastoral) largely in Tiaty constituency, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 282.4% at 5%, and in the marginal areas (agro-pastoral) largely in Baringo South, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 9% at 1% level of significance. In contrast, land use changes increased livelihood assets productivity in the highlands, particularly, in Eldama Ravine constituency, it increased by 139.3% at 10%, and in Baringo North Constituency, it increased by 5.1% at 1% level of significance. This increase in livelihood assets productivity in the highlands was associated with security of land tenure under registered private land use. The study concluded that unregistered community land is the main cause of unstable and uncertain livelihoods in Baringo County particularly in dry areas. The effects led to severe land use conflicts occasioning deaths, displacement and distorted livelihood perpetuating uncertain conditions for future livelihood development. The government, therefore, need to recognize, protect and register the local communities’ interest on community land. This will guarantee land tenure security, enhance livelihood assets productivity and secure future development for the local communities.

Published in	International Journal of Agricultural Economics (Volume 6, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
Page(s)	329-345
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Land Use Changes, Livelihood of Communities, Policy Decisions

References

[1]	Ahmed, A. G. M. (2001). Livelihood and resource competition, Sudan. Mohamed Salih, Dietz and Mohamed Ahmed (eds.) African Pastoralism: Conflicts, Institutions and Government. Pluto Press, London, 172-193.
[2]	Ahmed, I. and Lipton, M., (1997), ‘Impact of structural adjustment on sustainable rural livelihoods: a review of the literature, IDS Working Paper 62, Brighton: IDS.
[3]	Alimaev, I. I., & Behnke Jr, R. H. (2008). Ideology, land tenure and livestock mobility in Kazakhstan. In Fragmentation in Semi-Arid and Arid Landscapes (pp. 151-178). Springer, Dordrecht.
[4]	Armitage, D., Berkes, F., & Doubleday, N. (Eds.). (2007). Adaptive Co-Management: Collaboration, Learning, and Multi-level Governance. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
[5]	Aspinall. J. and Hill, M. J. (2008). Land use change: Science Policy and Management, New York; CRC Press.
[6]	Bezemer DJ, Lerman Z (2002). Rural Livelihoods in Armenia. The Centre for Agricultural Economic Research, the Department of Agricultural Economics and Management Discussion Paper No. 4. 03.
[7]	Cahn, M. (2003). Sustainable livelihoods approach: Concept and practice. In D. Story, J. Overton & B. Nowak (Eds.), Contesting development: Pathways to better practice. Proceedings of the third biennial conference (pp. 284-288). Aotearoa/New Zealand Development Studies Network (Dev-Net).
[8]	Carney, D, Drinkwater, M, Rusinow, T, Neefjes, K, Wanmali, S & Singh, N. 1999. Livelihood’s approach compared: A brief comparison of the livelihoods approaches of the UK Department for International Development (DFID), CARE, Oxfam and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), November 1999. London: Department for International Development.
[9]	Carney, D. (1998). Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach. Paper presented to the DfID Natural Resource Advisers’ Conference. London: Department for International Development.
[10]	Carney, D. (1999). Livelihood approaches compared. London: DFID.
[11]	Carney, D. (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods: What Contributions Can We Make? London: Department of International Development.
[12]	Chambers, R & Conway G. 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. (IDS discussion paper; no. 296.).
[13]	Coast, E. (2002). Maasai Socio-economic conditions: Cross-border comparison. Human Ecology 30, 1, 79-105.
[14]	Cobb, C. W. and Douglas, P. H. (1928). Theory of production American Economic Review.
[15]	Conroy and Litvinoff. (1988). The Greening of Aid: Sustainable Livelihoods in Practice. IIED prints papers from its 1987 Forum.
[16]	Constitution of Kenya (2010) The Constitution of Kenya (2010). Government printer, Nairobi.
[17]	Debertin D. L. (1986). Agricultural Production Economics, Collier Mac Millan, Canada.
[18]	Dharmasiri, L. M. (2009). Applicability of Cobb-Douglas production function in measuring the spatial variation of agricultural productivity in Sri Lanka, University of Peradeniya Press.
[19]	DFID (1999) Department for International Development). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets. Available from the livelihoods learning platform www.livelihoods.org.
[20]	Ellis, F. (2000). Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. New York: Oxford University Press.
[21]	Farrington J, Ramasut T, Walker J (2002). Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches in Urban Areas: General Lessons, with Illustrations from Indian Cases, ODI, London, UK.
[22]	Fratkin, E., and Roth, E. (2005). As pastoralists Settle: Social, Health and Economic Consequences of the Pastoral Sedentarization in Marsabit District, Kenya. Kluwer Academic Press.
[23]	GOK, (2013). Baringo County CIDP, 2018-2022. County integrated development plan. County Government of Kenya.
[24]	GOK, 2013 Wayumba, G. (2017). A Review of Recent Land Policy Developments in Kenya.
[25]	GoK. (1954), A Plan to intensify agriculture in Kenya. Government Printer, Nairobi, 1954.
[26]	Gosh, A. (1958). Input-output Approach in an Allocation System Economical 25 (97) 58-67.
[27]	Gujarati, D., and Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic Econometric. Fifth Edition, Mc Graw- Hill.
[28]	Guo, J. and Planting, M. A. (2000). Using Input-output Analysis to Measure US Economic Structural Changes Over 24 years. Bureau of Economic Analysis working paper 1.
[29]	Hahn, M. B., Riederer, A. M., Foster, S. O. (2009). The Livelihood Vulnerability Index: Pragmatic Approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change. A case of study in Mozambique. J Global Environ. Change 19 (1) 74-88.
[30]	Kaguru, J. M. (2018). Towards Effective Commissions of Inquiry in Kenya: a Review of the Commissions of Inquiry Act in Light of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 University of Nairobi (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).
[31]	Kameri-Mbote, P. (2016). Kenya Land Governance Assessment Report: World Bank Group.
[32]	Kanji, N., MacGregor., J Tacoli, C.(2005). Understanding Market Based Livelihoods in a Globalizing World: Combining Approaches and Methods. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).
[33]	Kateiya, E. L., Thuo, A. D. M., Ombok, M. O. (2021). Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihoods of the Local Communities in Baringo County: Understanding the Drivers. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11 (9), 560-591.
[34]	Leontief, W. (1936). ‘Quantitative Input-Output Analysis and National Accounts. The Review of Economic Statistics 49 (3) 412-419.
[35]	Leontief, W. (1970). Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach. The Review of Economic Statistics 53 (3) 262-271.
[36]	Lewis, P. E. T., Martin, W. J. and Savage, C. R. (1988). ‘Capital Investment in Agricultural Economy Quarterly Review Rural Economy.
[37]	Little, P. D., & McPeak, J. G., (2018). Mobile peoples, contested borders: land use conflicts and resolution mechanisms among Borana and Guji Communities, Southern Ethiopia. World Development, 103, 119-132.
[38]	Meinzen-Dick & Adato, 2001 Adato, M., & Meinzen-Dick, R. (Eds.). (2007). Agricultural research, livelihoods, and poverty: Studies of economic and social impacts in six countries. Intl Food Policy Res Inst.
[39]	Mugabe, J & B D Ogolla. (1996). ‘Land Tenure Systems and Natural Resources Management. In J K Coetzee, J Graaff, F Hendricks & G Wood (eds). Development, Theory, Policy and Practice. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
[40]	Ochuka, M., Kiprop, C., Minagawa, and Ogando, G. (2019). Land Use/Land Cover Dynamics and Anthropogenic Driving Factors in Lake Baringo Catchment. Rift Valley, Kenya. Natural Resource Journal 10, 367-389.
[41]	Odhiambo, W., and H. Nyangito, (2002) Land laws and land use in Kenya: Implications for agricultural development: Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysi.
[42]	Odote, C. (2013). The dawn of Uhuru? Implications of constitutional recognition of communal land rights in pastoral areas of Kenya. Nomadic Peoples, 17 (1), 87-105.
[43]	Ondiege, P. (1996). Land Tenure and Soil Conservation. In J K Coetzee, J Graaff, F Hendricks & G Woods (eds). Development Theory, Policy and Practice. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
[44]	Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual 4th edition: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS version 18. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press. Retrieved on from http://www.allenandunwin.com/spss
[45]	The Republic of Kenya, (1954), The Swynnerton Plan of 1954: A Plan to intensify agriculture in Kenya. Government Printer, Nairobi, 1954.
[46]	Scoones, I. (2008). Sustainable Rural Livelihood: A Framework for Analysis.
[47]	Singh, A. S., & Masuku, M. B. (2013). Fundamentals of applied research and sampling techniques. International journal of medical and applied sciences, 2 (4), 124-132.
[48]	Singh, P. K., Hiremath, B. N. (2010). Sustainable livelihood security index in a developing country: a tool for development planning. Journal of Ecology. Indic 10 (2) 442-451.
[49]	Soini, E. (2005). Land use patterns and livelihood dynamics on the slopes of Mt Kilimanjaro, Tanzania J. Agric. Syste. 85 (3) 306-323.
[50]	Smith, D. R., Gordon, A., Meadows, K. et al. (2001). Livelihood diversification in Uganda: patterns and determinants of change across two rural districts J. Food Policy 26 (4), 421- 435.
[51]	Suzane Serneels, Mario Herrero, Shauna Burn Silver, Pippa Chenervix Trench, Kath Cochrane, Katherine Homewood, Patti Kristjanson, Fred Nelson, Maren Radeny, D, Michael Thompson, and Mohamed Yahya Said. (2009). Methods in the Analysis of Maasai Livelihoods. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-87492-02, Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC 2009.
[52]	Van Loon, G. W., Patil, S. G., and Hugar, L. B. (2005). “Agricultural Sustainability; Strategies for Assessment. SAGE Publication, New Delhi.
[53]	Warren, C. (2005). Community mapping, local planning and alternative land use strategies in Bali. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography, 105 (1), 29-41.
[54]	Kenya National Bureau of Statistics Report. (2019). Kenya Population and Housing Census, 2019, Volume 1. Government Printer, Nairobi. info@knbs.or.ke.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya, Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo, Maurice Ochieng Ombok. (2021). Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. International Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6(6), 329-345. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya; Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo; Maurice Ochieng Ombok. Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. Int. J. Agric. Econ. 2021, 6(6), 329-345. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya, Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo, Maurice Ochieng Ombok. Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. Int J Agric Econ. 2021;6(6):329-345. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21,
  author = {Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya and Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo and Maurice Ochieng Ombok},
  title = {Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes},
  journal = {International Journal of Agricultural Economics},
  volume = {6},
  number = {6},
  pages = {329-345},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijae.20210606.21},
  abstract = {This paper examined the effects of land use changes on the livelihood of the local communities in Baringo County. Land is a principal factor of production, a source of life and livelihoods. It provides a means of living and a variety of uses such as agricultural, human settlement, environmental conservation, urban and industrial development purposes among others. These uses compete for space in a fixed area, hence the rising land use conflicts and degradation. The situation has threatened lives and livelihoods, making it difficult to plan for the livelihood activities in Baringo County. This is happening against the backdrop of land use policy changes including; the National Land Policy, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the Land Act, 2012, the Land Registration Act, 2012, the Community Land Act, 2016 and the National Land Use Policy that confers sanctity on land use. Using non-experimental survey design, 323 households were randomly sampled from Baringo South, Tiaty, Baringo North and Eldama Ravine Constituencies. Cobb-Douglas production model was used to analyze livelihood assets productivity. The study found out that land use changes decreased livelihood assets productivity at varied level of significance; human by 56.1% at 1%, physical by 53.4% at 10% and financial by 65.6% at 5% level. This decrease is related with the unregistered community land in dry areas (pastoral) largely in Tiaty constituency, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 282.4% at 5%, and in the marginal areas (agro-pastoral) largely in Baringo South, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 9% at 1% level of significance. In contrast, land use changes increased livelihood assets productivity in the highlands, particularly, in Eldama Ravine constituency, it increased by 139.3% at 10%, and in Baringo North Constituency, it increased by 5.1% at 1% level of significance. This increase in livelihood assets productivity in the highlands was associated with security of land tenure under registered private land use. The study concluded that unregistered community land is the main cause of unstable and uncertain livelihoods in Baringo County particularly in dry areas. The effects led to severe land use conflicts occasioning deaths, displacement and distorted livelihood perpetuating uncertain conditions for future livelihood development. The government, therefore, need to recognize, protect and register the local communities’ interest on community land. This will guarantee land tenure security, enhance livelihood assets productivity and secure future development for the local communities.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes
AU  - Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya
AU  - Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo
AU  - Maurice Ochieng Ombok
Y1  - 2021/12/29
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
T2  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JF  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JO  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
SP  - 329
EP  - 345
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3843
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
AB  - This paper examined the effects of land use changes on the livelihood of the local communities in Baringo County. Land is a principal factor of production, a source of life and livelihoods. It provides a means of living and a variety of uses such as agricultural, human settlement, environmental conservation, urban and industrial development purposes among others. These uses compete for space in a fixed area, hence the rising land use conflicts and degradation. The situation has threatened lives and livelihoods, making it difficult to plan for the livelihood activities in Baringo County. This is happening against the backdrop of land use policy changes including; the National Land Policy, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the Land Act, 2012, the Land Registration Act, 2012, the Community Land Act, 2016 and the National Land Use Policy that confers sanctity on land use. Using non-experimental survey design, 323 households were randomly sampled from Baringo South, Tiaty, Baringo North and Eldama Ravine Constituencies. Cobb-Douglas production model was used to analyze livelihood assets productivity. The study found out that land use changes decreased livelihood assets productivity at varied level of significance; human by 56.1% at 1%, physical by 53.4% at 10% and financial by 65.6% at 5% level. This decrease is related with the unregistered community land in dry areas (pastoral) largely in Tiaty constituency, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 282.4% at 5%, and in the marginal areas (agro-pastoral) largely in Baringo South, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 9% at 1% level of significance. In contrast, land use changes increased livelihood assets productivity in the highlands, particularly, in Eldama Ravine constituency, it increased by 139.3% at 10%, and in Baringo North Constituency, it increased by 5.1% at 1% level of significance. This increase in livelihood assets productivity in the highlands was associated with security of land tenure under registered private land use. The study concluded that unregistered community land is the main cause of unstable and uncertain livelihoods in Baringo County particularly in dry areas. The effects led to severe land use conflicts occasioning deaths, displacement and distorted livelihood perpetuating uncertain conditions for future livelihood development. The government, therefore, need to recognize, protect and register the local communities’ interest on community land. This will guarantee land tenure security, enhance livelihood assets productivity and secure future development for the local communities.
VL  - 6
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya

Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Maasai Mara University, Narok, Kenya
Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo

Department of Environmental Studies, Geography and Agriculture, School of Natural Resources, Tourism and Hospitality, Maasai Mara University, Narok, Kenya
Maurice Ochieng Ombok

Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Maasai Mara University, Narok, Kenya

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya, Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo, Maurice Ochieng Ombok. (2021). Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. International Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6(6), 329-345. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya; Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo; Maurice Ochieng Ombok. Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. Int. J. Agric. Econ. 2021, 6(6), 329-345. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya, Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo, Maurice Ochieng Ombok. Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes. Int J Agric Econ. 2021;6(6):329-345. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21,
  author = {Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya and Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo and Maurice Ochieng Ombok},
  title = {Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes},
  journal = {International Journal of Agricultural Economics},
  volume = {6},
  number = {6},
  pages = {329-345},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijae.20210606.21},
  abstract = {This paper examined the effects of land use changes on the livelihood of the local communities in Baringo County. Land is a principal factor of production, a source of life and livelihoods. It provides a means of living and a variety of uses such as agricultural, human settlement, environmental conservation, urban and industrial development purposes among others. These uses compete for space in a fixed area, hence the rising land use conflicts and degradation. The situation has threatened lives and livelihoods, making it difficult to plan for the livelihood activities in Baringo County. This is happening against the backdrop of land use policy changes including; the National Land Policy, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the Land Act, 2012, the Land Registration Act, 2012, the Community Land Act, 2016 and the National Land Use Policy that confers sanctity on land use. Using non-experimental survey design, 323 households were randomly sampled from Baringo South, Tiaty, Baringo North and Eldama Ravine Constituencies. Cobb-Douglas production model was used to analyze livelihood assets productivity. The study found out that land use changes decreased livelihood assets productivity at varied level of significance; human by 56.1% at 1%, physical by 53.4% at 10% and financial by 65.6% at 5% level. This decrease is related with the unregistered community land in dry areas (pastoral) largely in Tiaty constituency, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 282.4% at 5%, and in the marginal areas (agro-pastoral) largely in Baringo South, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 9% at 1% level of significance. In contrast, land use changes increased livelihood assets productivity in the highlands, particularly, in Eldama Ravine constituency, it increased by 139.3% at 10%, and in Baringo North Constituency, it increased by 5.1% at 1% level of significance. This increase in livelihood assets productivity in the highlands was associated with security of land tenure under registered private land use. The study concluded that unregistered community land is the main cause of unstable and uncertain livelihoods in Baringo County particularly in dry areas. The effects led to severe land use conflicts occasioning deaths, displacement and distorted livelihood perpetuating uncertain conditions for future livelihood development. The government, therefore, need to recognize, protect and register the local communities’ interest on community land. This will guarantee land tenure security, enhance livelihood assets productivity and secure future development for the local communities.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Dynamics of Land Use Changes on the Livelihood of Local Communities in Baringo County: Effects of Land Use Changes
AU  - Edward Lekaichu Ole Kateiya
AU  - Aggrey Daniel Maina Thuo
AU  - Maurice Ochieng Ombok
Y1  - 2021/12/29
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
T2  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JF  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JO  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
SP  - 329
EP  - 345
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3843
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210606.21
AB  - This paper examined the effects of land use changes on the livelihood of the local communities in Baringo County. Land is a principal factor of production, a source of life and livelihoods. It provides a means of living and a variety of uses such as agricultural, human settlement, environmental conservation, urban and industrial development purposes among others. These uses compete for space in a fixed area, hence the rising land use conflicts and degradation. The situation has threatened lives and livelihoods, making it difficult to plan for the livelihood activities in Baringo County. This is happening against the backdrop of land use policy changes including; the National Land Policy, the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the Land Act, 2012, the Land Registration Act, 2012, the Community Land Act, 2016 and the National Land Use Policy that confers sanctity on land use. Using non-experimental survey design, 323 households were randomly sampled from Baringo South, Tiaty, Baringo North and Eldama Ravine Constituencies. Cobb-Douglas production model was used to analyze livelihood assets productivity. The study found out that land use changes decreased livelihood assets productivity at varied level of significance; human by 56.1% at 1%, physical by 53.4% at 10% and financial by 65.6% at 5% level. This decrease is related with the unregistered community land in dry areas (pastoral) largely in Tiaty constituency, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 282.4% at 5%, and in the marginal areas (agro-pastoral) largely in Baringo South, where livelihood assets productivity decreased by 9% at 1% level of significance. In contrast, land use changes increased livelihood assets productivity in the highlands, particularly, in Eldama Ravine constituency, it increased by 139.3% at 10%, and in Baringo North Constituency, it increased by 5.1% at 1% level of significance. This increase in livelihood assets productivity in the highlands was associated with security of land tenure under registered private land use. The study concluded that unregistered community land is the main cause of unstable and uncertain livelihoods in Baringo County particularly in dry areas. The effects led to severe land use conflicts occasioning deaths, displacement and distorted livelihood perpetuating uncertain conditions for future livelihood development. The government, therefore, need to recognize, protect and register the local communities’ interest on community land. This will guarantee land tenure security, enhance livelihood assets productivity and secure future development for the local communities.
VL  - 6
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download