Abstract: .................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 4 Theoretical Perspective: Broad‐Based, Sustainable Community Development ..... 5 Geographic & Cultural Context: the Bissa of South‐Central Burkina Faso .............. 11 Neem: Tree of a Thousand Uses .................................................................................... 15 Methods .................................................................................................................................. 17 Key Concepts in Qualitative Research .......................................................................... 17 Tradition of Inquiry: Action Research in Case Study Context ................................... 19 Qualitative Data Collection ............................................................................................ 21 Quantitative Forestry Methods ..................................................................................... 24 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 26 Results & Discussion ............................................................................................................. 27 Note on Timing of Research .......................................................................................... 27 Introducing Neem to Community Groups ................................................................... 27 Resource Assessment: Neem Tree Inventory ............................................................. 29 Seed Collection ............................................................................................................... 44 Oil Extraction ................................................................................................................... 47 Market Identification ..................................................................................................... 50 Implications for Future Neem Activity in Moléntah .................................................. 52 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 55 Appendix A: Semi‐Structured Interview Sample Questions ............................................ 60 Appendix B: Regression Results for Neem Tree Heights .................................................. 62 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. 64 Literature Cited ..................................................................................................................... 65 Additional References ......................................................................................................... 74 Neem Tree Assessment for Socioeconomic Empowerment in Rural Burkina Faso Page 4 of 78 INTRODUCTION The people of Burkina Faso are known to be warm and welcoming, full of smiles and thanks. But their generosity often belies profound struggle – to eat, to obtain healthcare, to send children to school, to earn income, to make life more stable, a little bit easier. Vast potential is muted by the strain of day‐to‐day life. The neem tree of India is hardy and full of biological potential, full of health and agricultural applications. But it mostly sits idle in South‐Central Burkina Faso, aside from offering shade, wood, and the occasional toothbrush. This research aimed to unlock the potential of neem within the communities of Moléntah, Burkina Faso, by introducing the value of neem and how to process it in order to increase opportunities to enhance quality of life. The project is based on work completed during the summer of 2009 in rural Burkina Faso, West Africa, where I worked in conjunction with local community members in Moléntah to assess the neem resource base as well as the feasibility of utilizing the naturalized neem tree to generate income. The study was designed as participatory learning and action research, meant to bridge informational gaps around neem and facilitate the community’s desire, if any, to process neem for agricultural inputs or salable product. The work was introductory and educational in nature, with the goal of diversifying economic activity by helping interested parties better understand their natural resource base and the market potential available via its processing. The myriad uses of the neem tree are largely unknown in South‐Central Burkina Faso, and thus the tree is generally underutilized there; the disparity between actual and potential neem use in Moléntah motivated my work. I facilitated the conceptualization and utilization of neem as an economically useful natural resource in four neighboring communities, completing with them an assessment of neem as a potential driver of socioeconomic empowerment. The following pages first establish the context for community development in Moléntah and then discuss the results of our initial effort to identify and process neem locally: an understanding not only of the baseline neem tree resource in Moléntah, but also of the community processes that shaped its use during this project. After framing the research in theory, geography, and method, the paper presents outcomes and insights from these community processes, relating to our inventory of local neem trees, the constraints we encountered in working with neem, community capacity built around neem, and the potential local value of neem processing. Moléntah is a pseudonym. Neem Tree Assessment for Socioeconomic Empowerment in Rural Burkina Faso Page 5 of 78 Theoretical Perspective: Broad‐Based, Sustainable Community Development My theoretical perspective in approaching this work is broad‐based, integrated, sustainable community development. I will dissect that terminology to elucidate assumptions implicit in my approach. Broad‐Based, Integrated Development The term development carries implicit assumptions and judgments regarding desirable progress (Kumar 2003), and has often been used synonymously with economic growth, largely modeled on industrialization. Over the years, its interpretation has broadened to account not only for increasing gross domestic product and productive capacity, but for equity and rights within the political economy. Broad‐based development emerged, taking account not only of a growing and widely distributed economy, but also of effective governance and environmental preservation (Weaver et al 1997). Development came to focus increasingly on standard of living and quality of life in addition to economic productivity. Amartya Sen (1997) highlights these differences in distinguishing between the development of human capital – valuing people’s ability to contribute to economic growth – and development of the more broadly defined human capability – those opportunities which enable people to choose a meaningful life. For example, education may provide value to someone’s life, which is an end in and of itself, in addition to serving as a means for enhanced economic productivity. As such, Sen (1999) places humans, not economic growth, at the center of development, characterizing development as freedom – the opportunity to choose the life desired, with income and wealth as a means to that end. I support this broader context for development, focusing on helping people attain the goals they seek for a ‘better’ life, which often include aspects related to basic needs such as food, water and shelter; education; health care; income generation; and social and political participation. Indeed I ascribe to the idea that each such segment of life is interlinked, and that a development solution remains incomplete until all are addressed, or at a minimum, are balanced. Thus development hinges not only on economic progress, but is based on a broad set of factors that influence human capability and opportunity. Integrated development refers to development efforts that address multiple needs within the same project; most common are integrated conservation and development programs that are designed to address environmental conservation alongside human or economic development goals. Integrated development has been both criticized as no more effective than single‐sector development projects as well as lauded for being more relevant and sustainable than single‐ sector approaches (Alpert 1996). I prefer to bypass that debate in favor of focusing on serving community needs in a way fitting the local context – often somewhat integrated, being based in Neem Tree Assessment for Socioeconomic Empowerment in Rural Burkina Faso Page 6 of 78 life’s complexities, but usually with a particular need at the core. A simple example: a farmer struggles to make ends meet. Cutting down trees to gain income may leave the farmer with cash, but with limited fruit and shade, and without revegetation, also with a degraded soil and a bleaker future. A more integrated scenario might incorporate natural resource management into small business development, to sustainably generate income through rotational timber or non‐timber forest product harvests. A still more integrated scenario might both share financial management techniques to build wealth and incorporate preventive health strategies to reduce incidence of disease, plan pregnancy, and thus increase productivity of the entire family. Sometimes, crisis may necessitate intermediate, sectoral problem‐solving, but community needs may be best met when development efforts recognize and address the multiple factors at play. Community and Participation The second term to consider then is community. Development takes place at many levels – from ind