Ethnic faultline in the farmer–pastoralist conflict (FPC) – when does ethnicity matter to the FPCs? A case study of Adani-Nimbo area in South-Eastern Nigeria

Abstract

The farmer–pastoralist conflict (FPC) has been discussed and given ethnic and religious appellations in some countries of West Africa, such as Ghana and Nigeria. In Nigeria, such a reading of the conflict is rampant in the media and dominant in national political discourse. However, these ethno-religious insinuations have not received serious scholarly treatment in Nigeria or been downplayed. In this paper, I examine the context in which ethnicity becomes vital to the FPCs, based on fieldwork in the Nimbo-Adani area of Uzo-Uwani municipal council of Enugu State affected most by the conflict in South-Eastern Nigeria. This area is an essential hot spot of the FPCs that has not been explored in analyzing the FPCs in Nigeria. The study is based on field observations and semi-structured in-depth interviews. The paper draws on the FPCs literature regarding the influence of ethnic identities on the conflict. It shows that the difference in ethnicity between pastoralists and farming communities is not the primary root of the conflict. At the first outbreak of violence, the difference in ethnicity was not the cause of the conflict. Ethnic identity only gets cited after the first brutal fighting between the nomads and the farming community. Non-violent conflicts often occur because of cattle destruction of farm crops and pollution of water sources. Although the herders are accused of various atrocities, such as rape and kidnapping, the first outbreak of violence was caused by retaliation for killing a herder in one of the villages. Heightening ethnic identity amplifies the construction of the herders’ identity and social status as non-indigenous and non-belonging in the villages. Thus, the villages seek the eviction of the herders based on their social status as non-indigenes. The paper argues that ethnic faultlines matter to the FPCs but only after other factors have initiated the conflict. Therefore, we should pay attention to the primary root of conflicts and how they get the basis for social exclusion activated.

The Moral Economy of the Agatu “Massacre”: Reterritorializing Farmer-Herder Relations

“…Thus, the findings support “political ecologists” claim that material conditions alone do not trigger farmer-herder conflicts. It requires an ideological commitment violation to manifest breaching traditions of utilizing resources (Turner et al, 2011 ) and other issues unrelated to seeking redress for uncompensated crop damage, such as killing herder for sacrifice (Nwankwo & Okafor, 2021 , 2022 ).…”

“…They did it because of the Hardo, their chief that Tiv kidnapped from here” (Interview A50, traditional ruler). Indeed, pastoralists often consider the killing of a herder by farmers unacceptable and a transgression that must be avenged (Nwankwo & Okafor, 2021 , 2022 ). The herder fled Agatu following this incident and planned for revenge for a year.…”

Assemblage thinking and actor–network theory: Reconciling the perspectives of environmental security and political ecology for improving the understanding of farmer–herder conflicts in Africa

“…Turner (2004) argued that the ‘scarcity’ narrative perpetuates neoliberal efforts to bring peace to volatile areas by privatizing natural resources, thus, furthering the conflict. The issue of moral transgression has been re-echoed in recent studies on Nigeria, highlighting the fact that moral wrongs interact with issues of identity and belonging (Nwankwo and Okafor 2021, 2022) and that the changes in the moral economy shape the practice of the exclusion of pastoralists (Nwankwo 2023).…”