While the guarantees provided in the Katiba mark an extraordinary achievement for women’s land rights, many more steps are needed to reach gender-equitable land ownership in Tanzania. Mama Ardhi members therefore continue to advocate for additional changes in policy and practice that will bring about real transformation for women, their children and society as a whole. 

In northern Tanzania, new grassroots groups called Women’s Rights and Leadership Forums (WRLFs) are mobilizing women and men in pastoralist communities to promote and defend local land rights. This briefing highlights some of the WRLFs’ achievements and strategies; asks how these forums, which appear to be a part of an emerging grassroots social movement for land rights, can be further supported; and explores whether such forums could be replicated elsewhere in the region

Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) have the potential to benefit both people and wildlife in Tanzania. But are Tanzanian communities earning enough from WMAs to want to protect the wildlife that live on their land? This policy brief addresses this question by examining two WMAs in the Tarangire ecosystem and looking at their performance and revenue streams. This reveals that while communities are earning some income, the WMAs do not yet have enough funds to cover management and wildlife protection costs.

Despite progressive provisions on gender equality in Tanzania’s land laws, women have little representation in land allocation decisions, including meetings of village councils and village assemblies. Mainstreaming gender in local regulations can help to address this problem.

Specific objectives of the study included reviewing the state of implementation of CAADP in Tanzania in the context of on-going multiple development initiatives; identifying and analyse gaps on policies and frameworks related to CAADP implementation; making objective analysis of commitment of the Government of Tanzania to 2003 Maputo Declaration; and assessing engagement of small scale farmers in CAADP process in Tanzania

The main objective of this study was to assess the impacts of biofuel investments in local livelihood systems and local economy in Tanzania.

Large-scale land acquisitions have increased in scale and pace due to changes in commodity markets, agricultural investment strategies, land prices, and a range of other policy and market forces. The areas most affected are the global “commons” – lands that local people traditionally use collectively — including much of the world’s forests, wetlands, and rangelands. In some cases land acquisition occurs with environmental objectives in sight – including the setting aside of land as protected areas for biodiversity conservation.

This report provides an overview of the conflict in Loliondo, reviewing historical information, current land uses and tenure arrangements. 

 One of the most wellknown biofuel investments was that of Bioshape, which acquired approximately 34,000 ha in Kilwa District for the cultivation of jatropha.

In this publication two pioneering grassroots organisations from northern Tanzania examine and present their experiences and insights from their long-term work to secure the land rights of hunter-gatherer and pastoral communities. The case studies were presented at a one-day learning event held on 5th October 2012, when Pastoral Women’s Council (PWC) and Ujamaa Community Resource Team (UCRT) joined together to share and reflect on their work to secure land rights, to learn from each other, and to identify ways to build on their achievements moving forward.

Large-scale land acquisitions are increasing in pace and scale, in particular across parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Weak governance and poor land use planning mean that commercial ‘land grabs’ often damage biodiversity as well as dispossessing people from customary rights and livelihoods. Land can also be ‘grabbed’ for ‘green’ purposes, triggering conflicts that undermine potential synergies. Expanded state protected areas, land for carbon offset markets and REDD, and for private conservation projects all potentially conflict with community rights.