Managing a Living Cultural Landscape with Communities: The Sacred Mijikenda Kaya Forests Anthony Githitho, National Museums of Kenya

The sacred Mijikenda Kaya Forests Small forest fragments 10 – 800 ha Linked to Mijikenda migration and origin myths. Each group claims a site or sites Evidence of past human settlement and use, paths, clearings, burial grounds etc Continuing Ritual use to present day Strong cultural and political symbolism Prominent in the landscape Over 50 sites known 42 gazetted as National Monuments (or Forest Reserves

Diagnostic Cultural Elements The association with the tribes’ migration from Singwaya The presence of the ‘Fingo’ or talisman from Singwaya A defined ‘Kaya’, or Central clearing, marking historical village ‘Moroni’ The site of the Moro or historical meeting hut The ‘Mwara’ (plural nyara) paths The ‘Mvirya’ (gate) sites ‘Makaburini’ or burial sites. ‘Chiza’, prayer sites or altars

Outstanding Universal Value Spread out along around 200km of the coast province of Kenya are ten separate forested sites, mostly on low hills, ranging in size from 30 to around 300 ha, in which are the remains of fortified villages, Kayas, of the Mijikenda people. They represent more than thirty surviving Kayas. The Kayas began to fall out of use in the early 20th century and are now revered as the repositories of spiritual beliefs of the Mijikenda people and are seen as the sacred abode of their ancestors. The forest around the Kayas have been nurtured by the Mijikenda community to protect the sacred graves and groves and are now almost the only remains of the once extensive coastal lowland forest

Site Management Objectives conserving and enhancing the unique cultural values, landscape and natural values of the kaya forests contributing towards meeting subsistence and livelihood needs of local communities, where this does not compromise cultural and natural heritage

Continuing threats: Cultural Values Decreased opportunities for Kaya Elders to pass on traditional knowledge to youth due to : Formal education, migration and movement to seek employment Death of the experienced seniour Elders, the ‘Kambi’ Lack of resources to carry out some of the traditional Kaya rites Avoidance of percieved ‘backward’ practices by sections of the community Political intrigues by local leaders for personal aggrandisement and power Ritual power struggles

Management Activities Monitoring boundaries, forest condition, interference Apprehension of major, ‘sophisticated’ offenders Meeting Kaya Elders, briefings, conciliations Checking, reporting on state of ritual paths, clearings, Shrines Supporting traditional ceremonies Reinforcing traditional site regulations, rules Documentation of traditional knowledge (Intangible Cultural Heritage)

Community Partnership features and Challenges Living site: still in use, sacred knowledge part of OUV. Conserving this knowledge is a challenge Traditional institutions not formal Pressure to meet basic human needs Benefit management, reinvestment Backup role of state laws and agencies Contest of traditional leadership by vested interests. ‘Stealing the glory’ etc