In Africa, traditional conflict resolution is based on values, norms, cultures and beliefs as practiced by the members of the community. Thus, traditional conflict resolution decisions are readily accepted by the community. However, colonialism had very serious impact on African values, norms, cultures and beliefs. It disregarded, undermined and weakened them. Cultural hegemony (as a result of colonialism) and legal transplantation (without adequate attention to traditional systems) have adversely affected traditional conflict resolution in Africa. Nonetheless, the continuous use of traditional dispute resolution mechanisms across African communities clearly demonstrates that they still have a role to play. The article aims to assess the institution of traditional conflict resolution in Africa with particular emphasis on South Africa and Ethiopia. Both countries are multiethnic societies with a variety of cultures, languages and religions. Ethiopia maintained its freedom from colonial rule with the exception of a short-lived Italian occupation and from 1936 to 1941. South Africa was a Dutch colony from 1662 to 1815, a British colony from1910 to 1948 and under the Apartheid era from 1948 to1994. Using case studies of South Africa and Ethiopia, the article examines some of the successes and challenges faced by traditional conflict resolution institutions. The opportunities offered to them by the two legal systems are also examined. The two systems are not selected for the purpose of comparative analysis compared, but are examined as self representative examples in their own historical, political and legal contexts.

This article examines the concept of sustainable development after the Post-2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement with particular emphasis on Ethiopia. Various African countries are vulnerable to climate change, as is evidenced by recent droughts. Ethiopia is selected as a case study in light of its pace in economic growth and as a country which is among the ones that are most affected by climate change. I argue that the concept of sustainable development will be meaningful if it is related only to the core idea of ecological sustainability. Long-term economic growth in Ethiopia is possible if the underlying environmental resources that underpin it are protected and enhanced. Sustainable development remains peripheral and impractical as long as the pursuit of economic and social development remains the practical driving force behind the Ethiopian government's policy as the primary measure of success. It is argued that the overarching standard for the application of sustainable development should be the integrity of the country's ecosystem. It is the economic growth which needs to be aligned to the ecological integrity, not the other way round because equitable economic growth requires the protection of its foundation, i.e. the ecosystem. If sustainable development is not based on ecological integrity; it remains a form of hegemonic knowledge, 'based on a narrow, weak notion of sustainability that promotes reformist fantasies that the crisis can be addressed within the social, political, economic and cultural structures that created it.'

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract