Decentralization, the State and Conflicts over Local Boundaries in Northern Ghana

Abstract

Decentralization projects, such as that initiated by the Rawlings government in Ghana at the end of the 1980s, create a political space in which the relations between local political communities and the state are re‐negotiated. In many cases, the devolution of power intensifies special‐interest politics and political mobilization aiming at securing a ‘larger share of the national cake’, that is, more state funds, infrastructure and posts for the locality. To legitimate their claims vis‐à‐vis the state, civic associations (‘hometown’ unions), traditional rulers and other non‐state institutions often invoke some form of ‘natural’ solidarity, and decentralization projects thus become arenas of debate over the boundaries of community and the relationship between ‘local’ and national citizenship. This article analyses one such debate, in the former Lawra District of Ghana's Upper West Region, where the creation of new districts provoked protracted discussions, among the local political elite as well as the peasants and labour migrants, about the connections between land ownership and political authority, the relations between the local ethnic groups (Dagara and Sisala), and the relevance of ethnic versus territorial criteria in defining local citizenship.

The Political Economy of the Creation of Districts in Ghana

“…Inanga and Osei-Wusu, 2004;Lentz, 2006;Crawford, 2008;Ahwoi, 2010;Awortwi, 2010;Ayee and Dickovick, 2010;Egbenya, 2010). In other words, the numerous studies do not fully explain the politics of the creation of districts, which has not only been a recurring phenomenon but also a contentious and sensitive one.…”

Re‐inventing traditional land tenure in the era of land commoditization: some consequences in periurban northern ghana

“…The study adds value to the existing works of Christian Lund (2006), Carola Lentz (2006), Kasim Kasanga (1997), and others by showing the empirical mechanisms and linkages between the different domains these authors concentrate on. Critically, it shows the mutation of tradition along the logical evolutionary perspective detailing differential mechanisms and processes that flout principles of social justice and equity.…”

“…The acephalous traditional polity The tendana or tigatuu 5 who owns and controls land in acephalous societies is always a descendant of the first settler and the eldest member of the lineage or patriarchal head of the group, although he may also be selected by a soothsayer (Pogucki 1965). The original settler subsequently allocates land and earth shrines to later arrivals upon the receipt of various customary items to consummate the transactions (Lentz 2006). Tendamba are described by the Commissioner of Land in 1948 as wielding absolute control over land under their jurisdiction as regards tenure and practical rules of agriculture and able to eject unsuitable occupiers (Lund 2006).…”

Translating Legal Rights into Tenure Security: Lessons from the New Commercial Pressures on Land in Ghana

“…Moreover, considering the difficulties faced in raising adequate funds to invest in development projects amid pressure from central government, district revenues accruing from land alienation are much welcomed new income flows. 9 As argued by Lentz (2006), the devolution of power in Ghana has also intensified special-interest politics. Despite difficulties in documenting such conflicts in this study, the rapid influx of investment capital undeniably creates new spaces for appropriating rents by local political elites.…”