A case of benign neglect

Key messages related to availability of information about pastoralists and rangelands • While there is a wide variety of statistics and data sets for environmental and socioeconomic issues, only a third of the sample reviewed provide some information about pastoralism and rangelands, with only a few providing it in a manner that could inform decision makers on sustainable livelihoods and ecosystem management. For most sources screened, data arenot disaggregated inaway that couldprovide information on the ecosystem’s well-being, land use, herding strategies, migration and distribution and ownership of pastures and livestock, as well as other types of information relevant for decision-making. • Specific assessments and online knowledge repositories often provide more integrated information, but this is most often site and topic specific and does not provide a holistic assessment of pastoralism in a country or worldwide. Furthermore, information is often difficult to access because of broken links, password protection and non-existing or non-intuitive search engines. Quite often, the search engines are not programmed to be sensitive to the first-tier keywords and their metonyms and return information that is not relevant. In addition to the 100 databases and assessments reviewed, some other databases were found that were either closed down (for example, GLADIS) or that were in development. • Many databases are not available without a password, although they provide direction on how passwords can be obtained. Several relevant databases were also found that are maintained by individual researchers or organizations, but are not publicly accessible. Future assessments should establish partner agreements early on in order to obtain passwords and in some cases appropriate software for such sources.

• Confidence in the accuracy and reliability of existing data and information is generally medium to high, since data are from global or multilateral databases that usually have some form of review and verification process. • Country statistics that are routinely reported in United Nations portals focus on livestock production only, including animal numbers, types, offtake and export, but not specifically on pastoral livestock production. Statistics on rangelands are rarely disaggregated out of broader land-use types, making it difficult to separate out natural rangelands and grasslands. Socioeconomic statistics on pastoralists are not disaggregated at all, except in a few countries where pastoral production dominates the agricultural sector, though even in these cases there is no distinction between the different categories of pastoralist mobility. • Due to the limited resources for this study, it was not possible to create an exhaustive list of all potential data sources, which would be a useful practice in the future. Furthermore, it would be practical for one or two global institutions championing pastoralism and rangelands to agree to establish a comprehensive repository of information. • A future assessment could invest considerable resources to further examine data sets and other knowledge repositories. However, it is likely that the information extracted would still be inadequate for a thorough assessment on account of low disaggregation, outdated information and unverified statistics. For example, anecdotal evidence suggests that, despite a reduction in the size of rangelands due to agricultural expansion, older statistics for rangeland cover are still being used in reports. The collection of science-based and accurate field data is therefore crucial in the

subject areas identified to fill gaps in knowledge and update information on systems as these rapidly change. • There is no standard method, process or structure for the databases, meaning it is not possible to compare statistics and data sets. Some organizations are attempting to develop global comprehensive databases (for example, the Land Resources Planning Toolbox). However, these are sector- specific and do not provide an integrated approach to understanding pastoralism and rangelands. • Long-term monitoring platforms for rangelands are available in several developed countries, but no publicly available platforms were found for developing countries, with the exception of GEOGLAM, which is a global monitoring site. It is difficult to locate disaggregated information on pastoralists, since most countries do not distinguish between crop farmers and confined livestock raisers. • The challenge of finding information is largely due to the inconsistency in how terms are used. The terms ‘pastoralist’ and ‘rangelands’ are defined in many different ways and are not relevant in all parts of the world, where their metonyms may instead be used. A future assessment could help clarify terminology and definitions, thus making future data collection more efficient, consistent and comparable. • Most convention texts of the MEAs do not show hits for keywords related to pastoralism and rangelands, except one SDG target that mentions pastoralists. • Country reports are submitted in different United Nations languages. Future assessments should make available sufficient resources to cover the translation of sources with such data.

41