A case of benign neglect

Challenges and opportunities for filling information gaps

The gap analysis selected a large number of keywords that best described the scope of issues to be reviewed, totalling 48 different first-tier synonyms and metonyms for pastoralists and rangelands, 38 second-tier keywords and 462 third-tier keywords. 10 Although such a large number of keywords was a useful method for conducting fast online, automated searches in assessments and databases, it would not be suitable for other means of data collection, such as field data or country statistics. Any future assessment should therefore bemore selective in how it defines its system boundary and scope, though this may reduce the integrative, holistic nature of the assessment. The majority of online, publicly available databases and assessments screened used secondary sources of information, thus reiterating what had already been published. The collection of science-based and accurate field data is crucial in the subject areas identified, in order to fill knowledge gaps and update information as socioeconomic and environmental systems rapidly change. Fewdata sets were found that had relevant, verified, primary data and statistics on pastoralism and rangelands. Such data sets may not be available to the public, may be held by individual researchers and organizations or may be accessible only through partnerships. While the study team is confident in the methodology used for identifying first-tier keywords in different data sources (that it, the pastoralism and rangelandmetonyms), it is less so for the more specific second- and third-tier keywords. The immense diversity in methodology, data storage, terms and definitions means that information from different sources (and over time) is barely comparable.

Language differences, ambiguity of terms used and a lack of disaggregated data pose challenges for any assessment. The subject matter (pastoralists and rangelands) is far less studied than other subjects (for example, forests) and has been discussed much less in international environmental arenas (for example, among the multilateral conventions, protocols and targets screened, only the SDGs specifically mention pastoralists). Due to the high diversity of definitions and linguistic nuances, the task of building global consensus on terms and definitions and fitting this to existing information may not be achievable in the near future. However, it should be possible to build a lexicon of related and comparable terms (semantic ontology), thus allowing for improved communication and data comparisons. Key reviewers from developed countries note the de-emphasis of the value of rangelands (sometimes called the “forgotten rangelands”) as a further gap,

resulting in a loss of resources to study, protect or even monitor rangelands at a time when climate change is increasing the need to understand this. This is shown by the closure of research facilities, reduction or loss of university departments and faculties, and non- replacement of experts as retirements occur. Stakeholders expressed highly diverse opinions in the survey, with some holding extreme and opposing views on gaps in information and technical support for sustainable pastoralism and rangelands. This is not surprising given the geographical differences, diversity and ambiguity in terminology, general lack of data availability and insufficient national or international dialogue space on pastoralists and rangelands. While this diversity can be seen as a challenge in communicating future needs for filling information gaps, it should also be seen as an opportunity for engaging a diverse set of stakeholders into the process.

10. Due to the general disaggregation of information on pastoralists and rangelands in the sources reviewed for this study, third-tier keywords were of limited use.

Kudu and cattle co-existing on the outskirts of Nairobi National Park, Kenya. Maryam Niamir-Fuller

67