Impact of Modern Conservancy Models on Pastoral Grazing and Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Borana Pastoralists in Merti Sub-County, Isiolo, Kenya

Abstract

This study assessed the impact of modern conservancies on four areas: land tenure security and pastoral mobility, vegetation cover and ecosystem health, social cohesion and community governance, and policy strategies for sustainable grazing and conservation in Merti Sub- County, Isiolo County, Kenya. The area is predominantly inhabited by Borana pastoralists who depend on communal rangelands for their livelihoods. The emergence of community conservancies has introduced new dynamics in land governance, raising questions about their influence on customary land rights, ecosystem functionality, and local governance systems. The study pursued four objectives: to explore conservancies’ impact on land tenure security and pastoral mobility; to evaluate their effect on vegetation and ecosystem health; to analyse their influence on social cohesion and community governance; and to propose policy strategies for sustainable grazing and conservation. A mixed-methods approach engaged 150 participants, including 138 pastoral households and 12 key informants comprising conservancy officials, local leaders, and government officers. Data were collected through household questionnaires, interviews, focus group discussions, and document review. Remote sensing analysis using 30-m Landsat imagery processed via Google Earth Engine was used to assess vegetation dynamics over time. To examine the impact of conservancies on land tenure security and pastoral mobility, household survey results showed that 81.9% of respondents perceived their tenure as secure despite 92.8% lacking formal land documentation. However, 14.5% reported restricted access to grazing areas due to the expansion of conservancy boundaries, and 58.7% observed changes in grazing access, with 26.1% attributing these directly to conservancy rules. Only 35.5% believed conservancies supported traditional mobility patterns, suggesting limited alignment with pastoral land-use systems. To evaluate the effect of conservancies on vegetation and ecosystem health, household responses were mixed: 40.6% believed conservancies contributed positively to environmental outcomes, 45.7% saw no impact, and only 30.4% considered conservancy lands better managed. In contrast, remote sensing analysis showed increased vegetation greenness and density within conservancies, supported by 2024 land cover maps that revealed improved shrub, grassland, and tree cover—indicating localized ecological recovery under conservancy management. To analyse the influence of conservancies on social cohesion and community governance, 55.1% of households reported receiving tangible benefits such as education support, water access, and livestock services, while 44.9% received none. Additionally, 50.7% felt excluded from conservancy decision-making. Interviews and focus groups reinforced these perceptions, highlighting elite capture, limited community involvement, and weak integration of customary governance systems like the Dedha. To propose policy strategies for sustainable grazing and conservation, the study drew on document reviews and stakeholder consultations. Key recommendations include the legal registration of communal lands to safeguard mobility corridors; formal inclusion of Dedha committees in conservancy governance; establishment of inclusive decision-making structures; investment in drought-resilient grazing infrastructure; promotion of community-based geospatial monitoring; and implementation of transparent, equitable benefit-sharing frameworks. In conclusion, while modern conservancies have potential to support rangeland restoration and diversify livelihoods, their effectiveness depends on aligning with customary tenure and mobility systems, producing measurable ecological benefits, and fostering inclusive, culturally legitimate governance.