-
-
$
Product Category: Projects
Product Code: 00005903
No of Pages: 60
No of Chapters: 5
File Format: Microsoft Word
Price :
$20
The study investigated the nature of the
farmers-herdsmen crisis in Nigeria and examined the major factors responsible
for the crisis in Nigeria. Also, it assessed the role of government in
addressing the crisis and identified gaps in government responses to the
farmers-herdsmen crisis. These were with a view to finding out the reasons why
conflict management strategies employed by the government in response to the
farmers-herdsmen crisis have not resulted in the end of the crisis.
The study made use of solely secondary method of data
collection. Secondary data was sourced from textbooks, journal articles, the
internet, magazines, commission reports and newspapers.
The result showed that
climate change, encroachment on areas of land reserved for grazing by farmers
and encroachment on farms by breeders, the proliferation of small arms and
crime in rural areas etc. are triggers of the farmers-herdsmen crisis in
Nigeria. It also showed that the federal government and the state government in
states where cases of the conflict have been recorded have unilaterally and in
collaboration come up with different statements, policies and actions such as;
the deployment of security operatives to communities where clashes have
occurred, the inauguration of several committees with the aim of coming up with
recommendations to end the conflict and the formulation of policies intended to
end the conflict such as the outlawing of open grazing in some states. Finally,
findings reveal that the failure of the government to come up with preventive
measures to curb the conflict; poor implementation of formulated policies;
absence of religious tolerance and political exclusion are gaps in government
management strategies of the farmers-herdsmen conflict in Nigeria.
The study concluded
that the management structures, processes and strategies of government in
addressing the farmers-herdsmen crisis are inadequate to the extent that they
are more reactionary than preventive or proactive, have implementation lapses
and are bedevilled by political exclusion.
TABLE OF
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Research Questions
1.4 Objectives of the Study
1.5 Working Assumption
1.6 Scope of the Study
1.7 Significance of the Study
1.8 Research Methodology
1.9 Limitations of the Study
1.10 Definition of Major Terms
1.11 Organization of the Study
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
2.1 Conceptual Review
2.1.1 Arable Cropping System
2.1.2 Cattle Herding System
2.1.3 Conflicts and Crisis
2.1.4 Conflict Management
2.2 Empirical Review
2.3 Theoretical Framework
2.3.1 Conflict Theory
2.3.2 Frustration-Aggression Theory
2.4 Summary of Identified Gaps
CHAPTER THREE
CASES OF FARMERS AND HERDSMEN CLASHES IN NIGERIA
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Nigeria
3.2.1 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Plateau State
.2.2 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Benue State
3.2.3 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Kwara State
3.2.4 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Delta State
3.2.5 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Taraba State
3.2.6 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Enugu State
3.2.7 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Kaduna State
3.2.8 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Kogi State
3.2.9 Cases of Farmers and Herdsmen Clashes in Ogun, Adamawa and Ebonyi States
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The Nature of the Farmers and Herdsmen Conflict in Nigeria
4.2.1 The
Relationship Between the Farmers and Herdsmen Before the First Clash
Occurred
4.2.2 Reaction of Both Parties to the Conflict and the Instruments Used During Clashes
4.2.3 Relationship between Herdsmen and Farmers since the Clashes Began
4.3 Causes of the Farmers and Herdsmen Crisis in Nigeria
4.3.1 Factors that have led to the Famers and Herdsmen Crisis in Nigeria
4.3.2 Grievances of the Parties Involved in the Conflict
4.4 Government Role in Addressing the Farmers-Herdsmen Conflict in Nigeria
4.5 Identified Gaps in Government’s Responses to the Crisis
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendation
REFERENCES
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Grazing reserves in Nigeria started during the pre-colonial
era (Bako and Ingawa 1988). Although, formally introduced by the British,
grazing reserves were demarcated by the Fulani who conquered and ruled Northern
Nigeria. The attempt by the British in 1940 to separate the grazing land from
the farm land, however, faltered because the Europeans imposed land use
controls divorced from economic and demographic dynamics in the pastoral system
(Frantz 1981).
The Nigerian Grazing Reserve Act of 1964 was passed for the
purpose of providing grazing lands for the Pastoralists, thereby encouraging
sedentarisation and addressing conflict with a plan to improve productivity and
social amenities (Awogbade, 1978; Ibrahim, 2012). The Nigerian Grazing Reserve
Act of 1964, in broader sense was expected to address constraints facing the
cattle market and disease control (Ingawa et al., 1989). However, even though
this law was passed, very little implementation was observed (CIEL, 2006).
Looking at the impending farmer-pastoralist conflict and a reduced cattle
production in which Nigeria imports about 23% of cattle from the neighbouring
Sahel countries, the government again enacted the National Agricultural Policy
of 1988. The law stipulates that a minimum of 10% of the national territory
that is 9.8 million acres, be allocated to grazing reserves (Ibrahim, 2012).
However, only 2.82 % was acquired out of 313 reserves (CIEL, 2006; Ibrahim,
2012).
Grazing reserves in Nigeria in the 1950s can be linked to
Hamisu Kano. When working with pastoralists on livestock vaccination, he
foresaw the shortages of grazing land in Northern Nigeria. Supported by the
government, he initiated the grazing reserve scheme from the abandoned
government resettlement schemes (Fulani Settlement Scheme). The resettlement
schemes collapsed because the government had neither the financial nor the
managerial ability to continue with the financially burdensome scheme, and the
best alternative use of the land, the government thought, was to convert it
into grazing reserves which had less financial burden. Grazing reserve hatched
in 1954 after a study of the Fulani production system contained in the
"Fulani Amenities Proposal." The proposal suggested the creation of
grazing reserves, the improvement of Fulani welfare, and the transformation of
the herd management system. By 1964, the government had gazetted about 6.4
million hectares of the forest reserve, ninety-eight per cent in the savannah
(Awogbade, 1982). Sokoto Province had twenty-one per cent of the land, followed
by Kabba, Bauchi, Zaria, Ilorin, and Katsina, with 11-15 per cent each (Awogbade
1982). The Wase, Zamfara, and Udubo reserves followed in succession.
Conflict between arable crop farmers and cattle herdsmen over
the use of agricultural land is still pervasive in Nigeria and portends grave
consequences for rural development. Past conflicts were solely due to overlap
of farmlands with cattle routes, where farmers grow crops on the routes. But
recently, the conflict has escalated, taking another dimension of ethnic and
religious differences with little effort from government or community leaders
aimed at addressing them.
The rainy season has been identified as the intense period of
clashes between nomadic herdsmen and farmers over arable land. Some researchers
have related the causes of conflict to the global climate change and the
contending desertification and aridity that has reduced arable and grazing
lands, forcing pastoralists to move southwards in search of pasture for their
livestock (Okoli, Enyinnia, Elijah and Okoli, 2014; Odoh and Chigozie, 2012;
and Abbass, 2012). However, there appears to be no consensus among both groups
as to the causes of their mutual conflict. According to De Haan (2002),
‘destruction of crops by cattle and other properties (irrigation equipment and
infrastructure) by the pastoralists themselves, are the main direct causes of
conflicts cited by the farmers, whereas burning of rangelands and fadama and
blockage of stock routes and water points by crop encroachment are important
direct reasons cited by the pastoralists’. This conflict between herdsmen and
farmers is still on-going till date with reports of killings and destruction of
properties being recorded frequently by the media in Nigeria.
The crisis has resulted in the reduction in output and income
of crop farmers as a result of destruction of crops by cattle and
indiscriminate bush burning. A lot of farmers lost part or the whole of their
crops. This spelt reduced yield which translated into low income on the part of
the farmers who take farming as major occupation. Also, there were reports of
displaced farmers and herdsmen alike. In the host communities, Nomadic herdsmen
relocate as a result of conflict, host farmers especially women farmers who
remain behind stop going to the distant farms for fear attack by the nomads in
the bush. Such displaced farmers have become a source of liability to other
farmers since they have to beg for food for themselves and their families. A
lot of killings by the nomads took place as a result of the conflicts and this
led to the reprisal killings of nomads by the host communities, the herds of
cattle belonging to the nomads were also killed. Also some of the victims
(young and old) were badly injured and others were maimed. This has reduced
some women farmers to the status of widows. All these have drastically reduced
agricultural labour force in the area. In the process there were reported cases
of proliferation of small arms and ammunitions. This was due to the fact that
host farming communities and headsmen saw others as arch enemies and this is
inimical to the spirit of integration of Nigerian tribes or ethnic groups and
peaceful co-existence.
Governmental efforts towards the resolution of the
farmers-herdsmen conflict have not been as effective. Every attack and clash
between the two land users is often accompanied with the deployment of
government security personnel to affected communities who are shortly withdrawn
after the conflict wanes creating avenue for launching of fresh attack more
severe than initial ones. Also, various policies and programmes of government
targeted at bringing lasting solution to the crisis have either not been
implemented or followed-up. This study investigates government’s strategies
engaged in addressing the farmer-herdsmen conflict. It paid attention to
unravelling the content and suitability of these strategies and mechanisms.
Farmers-Herdsmen conflict in Nigeria is a crisis that has
been on-going for the last two decades but increased in intensity from 2014.
These conflicts have exerted a heavy humanitarian toll, with thousands killed
and tens of thousands displaced (ACAPS, 2017). Some estimates suggest that
about 2,500 were killed countrywide in 2016 – a toll higher than that caused by
the Boko Haram insurgency over the same period (ACAPS, 2017). In Benue, one of
the hardest-hit states, Governor Samuel Ortom reports more than 1,878 people
were killed between 2014 and 2016 (Premium Times, 2017).
In addition, the economic toll has also been huge. According
to a 2015 study, the federal government was losing $13.7 billion in revenue
annually because of herder-farmer conflicts in Benue, Kaduna, Nasarawa and
Plateau states (Mercy Corps, 2015). The study found that on average these four
states lost 47 per cent of their internally-generated revenues (Mercy Corps,
2015). In March 2017, Benue state Governor Samuel Ortom claimed that attacks by
herders coming from more northerly states, and possibly also from Cameroon and
Niger, had cost his state N95 billion (about $634 million at that time) between
2012 and 2014 (The Nation, 2017).
Various government strategies have been implemented to address
the conflict such as the establishment of grazing reserves and grazing laws.
But these conflict management strategies of the government appear not to have
yielded positive results as killings and destruction of properties seem to be
on the rise. This study therefore examined the various strategies employed by
government in addressing the conflict so far.
The following research questions will guide this study.
i.
What is the nature of the conflict between farmers and
herdsmen in Nigeria?
ii.
What are the causes of the conflict between farmers and
herdsmen in Nigeria?
iii.
What has been the role of the government in addressing the
crisis in Nigeria?
iv. What gaps exist in government’s response in effectively addressing the crisis in Nigeria?
The aim of the study is the examination of government
strategies in addressing the farmers-herdsmen crisis. The specific objectives
of the study were to;
i.
Find out the nature of the farmers and herdsmen conflict in
Nigeria;
ii.
Ascertain the various causes of the conflict as provided by both
groups in the conflict;
iii.
Assess government role in addressing the farmers-herdsmen
conflict in Nigeria; and
iv.
Find out what gaps exist in government’s responses in the
crisis.
i.
The management strategies engaged by the government in the
Farmers-herdsmen crisis have been largely reactionary rather than preventive.
ii.
Processes and structures driving strategies for resolving the
farmer-herdsmen conflict are ridden with political exclusion.
The study examined government’s management strategies in the farmers-herdsmen conflict from year 2012 to 2019. Although, there have been cases of this conflict before 2012, but 2012 is the year the crisis became rather severe. Government interventions in the period 2012 to 2019 were examined. The cases of clashes covered include those that happened in Plateau, Benin, Taraba, Kaduna, Kwara, Kogi, Adamawa, Ogun, Delta, Taraba and Ebonyi states of Nigeria.
Scholars have tried to determine the causes of the conflict and provide solutions to address the conflict. However, there remains a dearth of studies in relation to government’s responses. Moreover, the findings of this study unravelled the gaps in government’s management strategies and made recommendations on how lasting solutions to the crisis can be formulated and implemented. This would be beneficial to both farmers and herdsmen. Additionally, if the conflict is stemmed, food production would be stabilized and income of both parties in the conflict would be guaranteed. Also, the federal government would benefit from this as peace and security would be restored in the areas affected and economic activities would return to normal.
The study relied on secondary data. Secondary data was gathered from relevant journal articles, official publications, internet-based materials, magazines, texts and commission reports.
The
limitation of this study was the inability of the researcher to conduct on-site
interviews in the communities affected by the conflict. This limitation would
however not compromise the effectiveness of the study as an in-depth
exploration of secondary data was resorted to by the researcher.
1.10 Definition of
Major Terms
A grazing reserve is a piece of land that the government
acquires, develops, and releases to the pastoral Fulani. The aims of grazing
reserves include getting and protecting pasture-space for the national herds,
and removing discord between agronomists and pastoralists living in the same
geographic area. By separating the herders from the cultivators, the government
hopes to foster peaceful coexistence between them by making the grazing reserve
a zone of no-conflict. Improving land use and herd management, providing social
welfare amenities to the Fulani and increasing national income are pivotal in
grazing reserve development in Nigeria (Laven 1991).
Conflict management is the process of limiting the negative aspects of
conflict while increasing its positive aspects (Rahim, 2011). It is the
principle that all conflicts cannot necessarily be resolved, but learning how
to manage conflicts can decrease the odds of non-productive escalation. Dalung (2013)
asserts that conflict management entails the long term management of
intractable conflicts. He further explained that it is the variety of ways by
which people handle grievances standing up for what they consider to be right
and against what they consider to be wrong. Conflict management therefore
involves acquiring skills related to conflict resolution, self-awareness about
conflict modes, conflict communication skills, and establishing a structure for
resolving conflict in the environment. It is a process that embraces all
articulated strategies, interventions and institutional mechanisms in
controlling the escalation of conflict (Usoro, Ekpenyong and Effiong,
2014).
Pastoralism is a social organization based on livestock raising as the primary economic activity. Pastoralism is a livestock farming method usually carried out in places with low to medium human population densities and the presence of extensive grasslands, usually in semiarid regions.
Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and
processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and
retribution. Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by
actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or
ideologies to the rest of the group (e.g., intentions; reasons for holding
certain beliefs) and by engaging in collective negotiation. The term conflict
resolution may also be used interchangeably with dispute resolution, where
arbitration and litigation processes are critically involved. The concept of
conflict resolution can be thought to encompass the use of nonviolent
resistance measures by conflicted parties in an attempt to promote effective
resolution.
Insecurity is defined by Merriam Webster Dictionary as the feeling and state of uncertainty or anxiety about oneself because of lack of confidence; being open to danger or a threat and there is lack of protection.
Buyers has the right to create
dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when
you experience issue with the file received.
Dispute can only be created when
you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of
contents and content of the file you received.
ProjectShelve.com shall either
provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or
send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and
Conditions are applied.
Buyers are expected to confirm
that the material you are paying for is available on our website
ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone
through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE
BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.
In case of payment for a
material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of
ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that
is available on our website within 48 hours.
You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.
No Review Found.
Login To Comment