Two Maps, Two Tales and Two Truths: A Purposeful Transformational Approach to the Nkonya–Alavanyo Conflict in Ghana

Abstract

In this article, we suggest rethinking the conflict resolution agenda among seemingly latent intractable communal conflicts by moving toward a constructive transformation of these conflicts. We connect Coser's theorization on social conflict and Lederach's conflict transformational ideas to, first, offer an alternative way of reconceptualizing conflict in ways that focus on harnessing the inherent potentialities of conflicts while changing the negative relational patterns among disputants; second, we propose emancipation from the local turn in peacebuilding to a local-local turn that will create a sense of local ownership, legitimize the process and increase the likelihood of acceptable and durable outcomes. To substantialize our argument, we present phenomenologically generated evidence from the Nkonya–Alavanyo conflict, which persists for over a century despite several attempts at its resolution. The conflict revolves around two truths derived from two maps and two tales and is overshadowed by mutual accusations and historically conditioned distrust of mediators.

Voices of disputants: Perspectives from Alavanyo on the Nkonya–Alavanyo conflict in Ghana.

“…The study thus underlines the significance of these voices in peacebuilding, the exclusion of which, as Millar (2018) argues, has been a huge deficit in our ability to resolve these conflicts. Additionally, this study builds on the local-local turn, which calls for a conceptual reorientation of approaches to latent communal conflicts, especially in light of the failure of past attempts (see Agyei et al, 2023). It is the contention of this article that each voice is important and especially so because everybody is affected (Bar-Tal, 2013 characterization above); each voice can enhance our understanding of the conflict, and respecting each individual voice shows respect for the people.…”

“…The Nkonya-Alavanyo conflict has elicited significant academic attention in recent times. However, the story and relationship between the two groups has huge historical antecedence going back to precolonial times (see Agyei et al, 2023). While it is believed that the Nkonyas and Alavanyos settled in their current location around C16th and C18th, respectively, and enjoyed peaceful coexistence, their disagreement began around C20th in the wake of a violent land confrontation (Gariba, 2017).…”

“…Understanding the intractability of the conflict through these missing voices underscores the claims and significance of the local-local turn . The idea of a local-local tun, first suggested in peace research by Agyei et al (2023), refers to a turn toward the very people in conflict ( actual disputants ). The term local, which has now entered mainstream social science usage, and its resultant local turn in peacebuilding denotes “a fundamental shift away from the liberal peacebuilding project, with its externally driven peace-making and statebuilding agenda.…”

“…The local turn remains very much unl ocal, as it is completely alienated from the very people (local-local) whom it is supposed to serve by getting them involved in peace processes. The local-local turn thus “reflects many claims made in the local turn but substantializes them by, among other things, adding an emancipatory element to the local in peacebuilding—emancipatory, that is, with regard to external mediators” (Agyei et al, 2023, p. 9). In a sense, the local-local turn appreciates the voices of the very people—most of whom remain on the fringes as far as the local turn is concerned—at the center of all forms of violence as critical ingredients in the search for peace.…”

“…In this article, I am interested in examining the reasons for the intractability of the Nkonya–Alavanyo communal conflict through the eyes of the Alavanyo (the disputant), which is conspicuously missing in the literature. Previous studies have discussed the conflict differently—from causes and intervention mechanisms to alternative ways of reconceptualizing the conflict (see Adzahlie-Mensah & Benson, 2018; Afele, 2020; Agyei et al, 2023; Bedzra, 2019; Gariba, 2017; Yakohene, 2012). Arguably, the closest to the subject of intractability is Agyei (2021), which is limited crucially by his concentration on the Nkonya people.…”