Between co-production and institutional hybridity in land delivery: Insights from local planning practice in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana

Akaateba, Millicent Awialie; Huang, Huang; Adumpo, Emile Akangoa

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.043

Cited by 48 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notions of trust, willingness to collaborate, momentum, and symmetrical power relations cannot be taken for granted and failing to recognize this could have detrimental consequences [36]. For example, a study of land reform processes in Ghana found that co-production became a conduit for private wealth accumulation within the broader context of weak institutional capacities and poor governance [37]. In such a context, those with power and resources were able to take advantage of the co-production process and undermine the efforts to promote more equitable governance [37].…”

Section: Unequal Power Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation

Turnhout

Metze

Wyborn

et al. 2020

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

553

364

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Literature on co-production is booming. Yet, most literature is aspirational and methodological in nature, focusing on why coproduction is important for environmental governance and knowledge production and how it should be done, and does not address the question why these processes often fail to achieve stated objectives of empowerment and societal transformation. In this review, we address this gap by reviewing literature on the political and power dimensions of co-production. Our review shows how depoliticization dynamics in co-production reinforce rather than mitigate existing unequal power relations and how they prevent wider societal transformation from taking place. Drawing on literature about participation, deliberative governance, and democracy, the review concludes by emphasizing the importance of (re)politicizing co-production by allowing for pluralism and for the contestation of knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Unequal Power Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation

Turnhout

Metze

Wyborn

et al. 2020

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

553

364

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As Synonymous to other SSA countries, contestations over land in Ghana is acute and insidious permeating/ far-reaching implications for the socio-economic development [10]. The increasing commodification and individualisation of land is manifested in the growing land scarcity and disputation over land [8,29]. According to the National Land Policy [37] the causes of land-related disputes have been identified to include multiple sale of land.…”

Section: Contemporary Hybrid Land Governance and Dispute Resolution Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current debates in the literature revolves around two main issues: (1) whether customary should be supported due to their inherent flexibility, social embeddedness and accessibility, and do they guarantee tenure security [10], and (2) customary tenure are anachronistic and do not adequately safeguard security due to their inherent power imbalances [8,29].…”

Section: Contemporary Hybrid Land Governance and Dispute Resolution Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, given the 'right' institutional tinkering or tenurial re-engineering of customary tenure institutions (with others have characterized as adaptation, [28]) they are better positioned to deliver tenure security and respond to other emergent tenurial challenges [5,9,22]. In any event, an important 'take-home' message from the two opposing conceptual positions rests on how customary tenure institutions fare[ing] on the ground in terms of safeguarding tenure security, and more particularly effectively addressing land disputes across the sub-region [22,29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Building on “Traditional” Land Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Rural Ghana: Adaptive or Anachronistic?

Asaaga¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the ongoing land administration reforms being implemented across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), including Ghana as viable pathway to achieve tenure security and greater efficiency in land administration, the subject of land dispute resolution has received relatively less attention. Whereas customary tenure institutions play a central role in land administration (controlling ~80% of all land in Ghana), they remain at the fringes of the formal land dispute adjudicatory process. Recognizing the pivotal role traditional institutions as development agents and potential vehicles for promoting good land governance, recent discourse on land tenure have geared towards mainstreaming traditional land disputes institutions into the architecture of formal judicial process via alternative dispute resolution pathways. Yet little is known at least empirically as to the operations of traditional dispute resolution institutions in the contemporary context. This study therefore explores the importance of traditional dispute resolution institutions in the management of land-related disputes in southcentral and western Ghana. Drawing on data collated from 380 farming households operating 746 plots. The results show that contrary to the conventional thinking that traditional institutions are anachronistic and not fit for purpose, they remain strong and preferred forum for land dispute resolution (proving resilient and adaptable) given the changing socio-economic and tenurial conditions. Yet these forums have differing implications for different actors within the customary spheres accessing them. The results highlight practical ways for incorporating traditional dispute resolution in the overall land governance setup in Ghana and elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. This has implications for redesigning context-specific and appropriate land-use policy interventions that address local land dispute resolution.

show abstract

“…Chiefs made a pivotal contribution during the independence struggle (Prah & Yeboah, ) and serve as traditional leaders and conflict‐resolution experts, change agents and leaders of development. The chieftaincy institution serves as a practical and parallel means of local governance (Akaateba, Huang, & Adumpo, ), having survived long after independence. However, many studies identify the chieftaincy institution as a possible source of conflict and insecurity (Boamah, ), hindering development and suggesting it is irrelevant in modern local government (Carscious, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living in protracted communal conflict: Socioeconomic trends and household poverty in Ghana's Yendi area

Adonteng‐Kissi

Adonteng-Kissi

Jibril

et al. 2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivation The conflict in Yendi, which dates to the colonial period, was one of the major sources of conflict in northern Ghana. The conflict was partly attributed to the contention on whether it is a convention that succession to the Yendi throne must essentially rotate between the two warring royal factions or revert to the primogenital tradition of unilateral royal family succession to the Ya Na Skin. Purpose This article provides a critical synthesis of the impact of communal conflict on household poverty and economic empowerment of the poor to achieve decent standards of living in Ghana's Yendi area. It is therefore necessary to answer the research question, what is the impact of the Yendi communal conflict on socioeconomic trends and household poverty? Methods We aimed to ascertain the impact of the Yendi conflict on 20 local government officials, NGO representatives, traders, parents, teachers, students, farmers, nurses, members of the traditional authority and security personnel. The average age of participants was 35. Unstructured interviews were conducted with key informants using in‐depth interview techniques to gather the necessary data and purposively sampled across Ghana's Yendi. Interviews were recorded, transcribed using a framework approach Results The article finds that families that were rich in landed assets and had sufficient income but were most impacted by the conflict have seen their economic conditions deteriorate. This study further reveals that conflict impacts negatively on the welfare of families in different ways. Families endowed with more assets and higher education are identified as having better capacity to withstand economic shocks. Conclusion There is a need for agricultural industrialization to offer spin‐offs and the generation of backward and forward linkages. To create strong linkages within the agriculture industry, it must become a resourceful business environment that offers a steady supply of quality raw materials at low costs. Government must help transform the rural environment from its subsistence structure to a commercially appealing, feasible and active sector, one which is critical for the accomplishment of sustained equitable growth.

show abstract

Between co-production and institutional hybridity in land delivery: Insights from local planning practice in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana

Cited by 48 publications

References 45 publications

The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation

The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation

Building on “Traditional” Land Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Rural Ghana: Adaptive or Anachronistic?

Living in protracted communal conflict: Socioeconomic trends and household poverty in Ghana's Yendi area

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About