Constraints, multiple stressors, and stratified adaptation: Pastoralist livelihood vulnerability in a semi-arid wildlife conservation context in Central Kenya

•Institutional change has reinforced stratified, individualized livestock husbandry.•High livestock wealth families have key means of reducing exposure to drought.•Low livestock wealth families rely more on illicit, precarious access.•High livestock wealth families experience lower drought and market sensitivity.•Structural and relational access constraints shape vulnerability and livelihoods. The focus of this study is on how changes in formal and informal institutions have differential impacts across populations in terms of vulnerability of livelihoods to drought, and the unequal processes that shape adaptation to new conditions. Drought vulnerability occurs as a result of exposure and sensitivity to interrelated economic, social, political, and ecological dynamics. There is a need for approaches that can evaluate how the ability to reduce these exposures and sensitivities becomes socially stratified. Building on our understanding of institutional and biophysical constraints in one pastoralist group ranch, we use an approach that draws on quantitative and qualitative data to combine analyses of entitlements, access, and adaptive capacity. We asked how, in a context of changing herding institutions, the ability to adapt to drought and other stressors, is differentiated among actors. We found that herders with higher livestock wealth are more likely to have entitlement sets that include factors that enable access to secure cattle grazing on private wildlife conservation lands, and access to more distant areas with herds of sheep and cattle – two key means of reducing exposure to drought vulnerability, leading to greater coping ability during drought. Those with lower livestock wealth rely disproportionately on illicit, precarious access to external grazing resources. Higher livestock wealth families experienced disproportionately lower sensitivity to drought with smaller losses of cattle, and likely have decreased sensitivity to drought-related market fluctuations, while others are primarily reliant on small stock and/or precarious access pathways. However, rather than naturalize this differential ability as merely increased adaptive capacity for some that are better able to adapt to novel, local conditions, we argue this instead reflects the unequal footing that households find themselves on, in a shifting institutional landscape of structural and relational access constraints and reconfigurations of reciprocity, that are intertwined with interventions by