before the grazing reserves and stock routes are created - email broadcast version

8/10/2019 Before the Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes Are Created - Email Broadcast Version

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/before-the-grazing-reserves-and-stock-routes-are-created-email-broadcast 1/30

1

BEFORE THE GRAZING RESERVES ARE CREATED IN NIGERIA

By

Joseph Tanko Atang

Centre for Peace and Strategic Studies, University of Ilorin, Ilorin.

and

Director,Conflict Triangle Consulting1, 1 Ahmed Ali Close, Off Zambia Road, Barnawa, Kaduna.

(Cell Phone: 08059126270, 08170418130 Email: [email protected])

Discussions on the sedentarization of pastoralists have generated two opposite views. One viewargues for the sustenance of pastoralism. The other view marshals the advantages ofsedentarizing pastoralists, which include the improvement of their living conditions. Themitigation and possible elimination of conflicts between pastoralists and farmers is central to the

argument for the sedentarization of pastoralists. This need alone makes the argument against pastoralist sedentarization untenable because where there is conflict, there cannot bedevelopment. Therefore, the challenge in sedentarization cannot be the what , but the how . Howshould pastoralists be sedentarized? Should they sedentarize or should they be sedentarized?

This paper is not intended to give answers to these questions. However, I believe that itis pertinent to make some observations on the issue from the perspectives of Conflict Resolutionscholarship and practice, which are salient to answering the questions. The objective of this paper is to ginger Nigerians, especially stakeholders, into identifying the challenges in the policyof grazing reserves development by critically examining its conceptualization, as well as its planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation processes in order to establish their conflictsensitivity. This is more so as a Presidential Committee on Grazing Reserves Development

and Settlement of Pastoralists is currently at work. The fact that there are serious challengeswith the sedentarization of pastoralists through grazing reserves creation in Nigeria is a pointer tothe fact that something is wrong with the concept (policy), or its implementation, or the waygrazing reserves and stock routes are being monitored and evaluated, or all of the foregoing.Without any intention to prejudice the minds of readers, let me hazard the possible outcomes of putting the concept (policy), planning, implementation, the monitoring and evaluation of grazingreserves on the conflict sensitive scale. A conflict sensitive assessment of these factors may havefour possible outcomes. The first outcome is that the process of formulating the policy may haveto be revisited because of its being defective in part. The second is that the implementation of the policy may have to be remodelled because it is not conflict sensitive. The third possible outcomeis that the monitoring and evaluation of grazing reserves and stock routes may have to be

redesigned. The fourth possible outcome is that the policy of grazing reserves creation may haveto be jettisoned for an alternative model of sedentarization because it is defective in whole.

But before delving into the observations, I want to briefly do a rehash of past efforts tocreate grazing reserves in Nigeria.

1 Conflict Triangle Consulting is a Conflict Resolution and Public Policy Consulting firm registered with the

Corporate Affairs Commission of Nigeria. CTC engages in Conflict Resolution Practice, Conflict ResolutionTraining, Conflict Resolution Research, Public Policy Analysis, and Public Policy Monitoring and Evaluation.



2

PAST EFFORTS TO CREATE GRAZING RESERVESI am chronicling the many past efforts to create grazing reserves in Nigeria only to call attentionto the fact that, considering that we are where we are now in spite of the many past efforts, thetask of creating grazing reserves is a herculean one indeed. This is more so as the issue currently

dovetails into many spheres of the Nigerian polity like ethnicity, religion, politics, the growingsensitivity of land matters, etc. I attempt a rundown of the past efforts below, without going intothe details. It is important to state on the outset, however, that with the political will, anappreciation of subsisting geo-political and cultural realities and sensibilities, an appreciation ofthe fact that change is the only constant in life, and a spirit of give and take by all stakeholders(particularly governments, pastoralists, agricultural communities and ―owners‖ of land), thechallenges of sedentarization are not insurmountable. With the fulfillment of the aforementionedconditions, it will be much easier for stakeholders to arrive at a common ground, some kind ofgive and take.

1. The Fulani Amenities Program

After the attainment of political independence, the ―Fulani Amenities Program‖ became acomprehensive pastoral resource development program, providing for the establishment offacilities such as marketing channels, watering points, veterinary posts, and grazing reserves inthe pastoral areas of Northern Nigeria.

2. Northern Nigerian Grazing Reserve Law, 1965

The Northern Regional Legislature gave legal protection to the creation of grazing reserves andstock routes in the region by passing this Law. This law empowered the Ministry of Animal andForest Resources and the Native Authorities to acquire any given native land for the creation ofgrazing reserves. The Nigerian civil war of 1967 – 1970 affected the timely implementation ofthe Programme, even though some minimal activities were accomplished.

3. The Third National Development Plan of 1975-80The Third National Development Plan of 1975-80 proposed the acquisition of 22 millionhectares of land area to be constituted into grazing reserves. Not more than 3 million hectareshave so far been acquired.

4. First Livestock Development Project (FLDP) 1976 – 1986 Sixteen grazing reserves were to be created under this programme, which was jointly financed bythe Nigerian Government and the World Bank. However, the programme was drastically reducedin scale because State Governments failed to gazette the grazing reserves. They were thereforereduced in number to six and limited to only watering points and small parcels of strip-sown

forage for livestock. The project was extended three times due to the slow disbursement of funds.

5. Second Livestock Development Project (SLDP) 1987 – 1995This was a follow-up to the FLDP and it was also jointly financed by the Nigerian Governmentand the World Bank. It was to learn from the mistakes of the latter. Pastoralists were to be givenland rights in eight grazing reserves. Due to a slow start, however, the project was redesigned in1989/1990 to make provision for twenty grazing reserves.



3

6. The Food and Agricultural Organization/Federal Livestock Department (FAO/FLD)

Project 1987 – 1993

The FAO/FLD project could only settle 38 pastoralist families in two grazing reserves. Eight ofthe families were semi-settled. The project provided some limited infrastructure to improvegeneral animal health and production.

7. Range Management Intervention in Arid Zones 1990 – 1995 This was a programme financed through a European Development Fund (EDF) soft loan forintegrated Rural Development Program in Sokoto/Zamfara and Borno/Yobe States. Its livestockcomponent focused mainly on range management. The Gidan Jaja grazing reserve in ZamfaraState produced fodder on which pastoralists grazed and pad some charges.

8. North-East Arid Zone Development Program (NEAZDP) 1990 – 1995

In the Jakusko-Nassari Grazing Reserve, the NEAZDP mobilized pastoralists into herd ownersassociations through which a charge of N100 per week for the provision of infrastructure andfacility management were introduced, irrespective of herd size.

9. PTF Pastoral Development Program 1996 – 1999The pastoral programme of the Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund identified and recommended therehabilitation of 22 grazing reserves. 500 Pastoral Herd Owners‘ Associations were formed inthe grazing reserves preparatory to the take-off of the rehabilitation program. The PTF could notgo beyond its mobilization phase as it was terminated in 1999 following the exit of thegovernment that created it.

10. The Presidential Committee on Livestock 2003President Olusegun Obasanjo set up a 26-man committee on livestock in October 2002 to do adetailed assessment of the livestock industry and make recommendations on the way forward.The committee was, however, not inaugurated until November 2003. The Committeeharmonized the findings of its six (6) sub-committees comprising Feeds and Nutrition; AnimalBreeding and Genetic improvement; Poultry Development; Livestock Processing and Marketing;Animal Health and Veterinary Services; and Grazing Reserve and Stock Routes Developmentand recommended the establishment of a National Land Reform Commission.

11. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)A five-year livestock development plan to be funded under the MDGs has been designed for pastoral development and empowerment activities including support for the acquisition;development and protection of lands for grazing and livestock access; rehabilitation of rangelandvegetation; development of infrastructure; and conservation of surplus fodder.

12. The Bassey Ekpo Ewa Bill

In 2010, a member of the Nigerian House of Representatives, Honourable Bassey Ekpo Ewa, proposed ―A Bill for an Act to establish the Nigerian Grazing Reserve Authority which shall provide for the Establishment and Management of Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes in Nigeriaand other matters connected therewith‖

2, otherwise called Nigerian Grazing Reserve Authority(Establishment and Development) Bill , 2010. The objectives of the Act were to be:

2 www.nassnig.org/nass2/legislation.php?id=742



4

(a) to establish the Nigerian Grazing Reserve Development Authority which shallundertake the National Grazing Development Program to provide a framework formanagement of Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes in Nigeria, infrastructuraldevelopment and facilities such as livestock markets, watering points, veterinary services, breed improvement for their full integration into national economy;

(b) to provide for the acquisition of suitable land in line with the provisions of the LandUse Reform Act for the establishment and development of grazing reserve and stockRoutes across the Country;(e) to empower the Authority adequately to liaise with the States, the private sector andother relevant agencies towards the establishment and development of grazing reserveCenters and stock routes across the Country;(d) to empower the Authority to promote and encourage the National Nomadic EducationProgram nationwide to educate pastoralists;(e) to provide for the harmonization of most disjointed projects funded by donoragencies, into the Authority's programme for national development.

The Bill was not concluded by the National Assembly.

13. The Zainab Kure BillThe National Assembly is also considering another bill on grazing reserves and stock routesdevelopment by Senator Zainab Kure. Titled ―A Bill for an Act to provide for the Establishment,Preservation and Control of National Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes and the Creation of National Grazing Reserve Commission and for purposes connected therewith‖, the Bill seeks theestablishment of A National Grazing Reserve Establishment and Development Commission withthe following duties:

(a) Designating, acquiring, controlling, managing and maintaining the National GrazingReserves and Stock Routes established under this Act;

(b) Constructing roads, dams, bridges, fences and such other infrastructures the Commissionmay consider necessary for the purpose of the National Grazing Reserves and StockRoutes;

(c) Identification, retracting, demarcating, monumenting, and surveying of primary andtertiary stock roués;

(d) Ensuring the preservation and protection of any objects of geological, archaeological,historical, aesthetic, or scientific interests in the National Grazing Reserves and StockRoutes;

(e) The development of facilities and amenities within the National Grazing Reserves;(f) Fostering in the minds of the general public, particularly the pastoral and transhumance

population, the necessity for the establishment and development of National GrazingReserves and Stock Routes with the object of development a greater appreciation of thevalue of livestock and environmental conservation; and

(g)

Doing all such things incidental to the foregoing functions which, in the opinion of theCommission, are calculated to facilitate the carrying on of the duties of the Commissionunder this Act.

14. Grazing Reserves Committee of the National Council of States 2013 The National Council of States at its meeting of July 18, 2013 announced the establishment of acommittee on grazing reserves to address the problem of clashes between cattle rearers and



5

farmers. Comprising members from the Federal Ministries of Agriculture, Water Resources,Interior, Environment, Boundary Commission and the National Planning Commission, theCommittee will work out the modalities for producing a comprehensive recommendation forestablishing grazing reserves. The Committee will work in collaboration with State governmentsas ―the Council recommended state governments to come up with their proposals for the

development of grazing reserves. The Council also mandated the Governor of Adamawa to chairthe national co-ordination efforts, while the Governors of Akwa Ibom, Enugu, Ondo, Adamawa,Kaduna and Benue will coordinate the efforts in the various geopolitical zones.‖3 The Committeewas given eight (8) weeks to submit its report.

15. State Government EffortsState governments have also made efforts to establish grazing reserves with minimal success inonly a few of the states. For example, the Kaduna State Government has designated 14 areas forthe creation of Grazing Reserves and three (3) areas for the development of pasture (pasturereserves) within Kaduna State. To date, only three of the 14 grazing reserves have beenestablished in the State. These are the Kachia Grazing Reserve, the Gayan Grazing Reserve and

the Damau Grazing Reserve. Only the Kachia Grazing Reserve and the Gayan Grazing Reservehave been gazetted. The Damau Grazing Reserve has been surveyed and appropriate documentsforwarded to the State Ministry of Justice by the State Ministry of Agriculture for gazettement.All of the other grazing reserves have been taken over by the local farming communities,individuals, government officials, and the government itself through the fadama project. Morestates in Nigeria, particularly in Northern Nigeria, have subsisting policies on pastoralism andgrazing reserves development. There is hardly any reasonable success story from any of thesestates.

OBSERVATIONS

The following observations are meant to be food for thought. They comprise a conceptualclarification of conflict and conflict management, as well as some findings on a number of issues pertaining to pastoralist life and the relationship between pastoralists and agriculturalcommunities.

1. Conflict and Approaches to ConflictThere are many definitions of conflict. One definition that captures all others is the following byCoser (1968, 232).

―Conflict is a struggle over values or claims to status, power, and scarce resources, in

which the aims of the conflicting parties are not only to gain the desired values but also toneutralise, injure or eliminate their rivals.‖

As scary as this definition is, it is important to note the following about conflict.

(a) Conflict in its generic sense is inevitable within individuals, between individuals, and insociety. Conflict is a fact of life. Individual conflicts can be resolved though, at least in itssubsisting nature.

3 News Agency of Nigeria. ―FG to hand over 80 Almajiri Schools to states, sets up grazing reserves committee‖.

www.nanngonline.com. Accessed August 13, 2013



6

(b) A conflict is neither positive nor negative in itself. It is the way we handle it that makes iteither positive and constructive or negative and destructive. When conflict is handledconstructively, it becomes an opportunity for growth, for desired change. That is theonerous task of this Committee of very carefully selected distinguished personalities.

The creation of grazing reserves is aimed at ―positivising‖ conflict between pastoralists andagricultural communities.

Conflict resolution theory and practice suggest two competing dual-faced approaches toconflict: the violent approach which employs force versus the non-violent approach whichemploys non-violent means that lead to mutual outcomes or solutions; the adversarial approachwhich uses power and lay claim to rights versus the non-adversarial approach which seekscommon ground with a deliberate discountenance of right and wrong, guilty and innocent, and places emphasis on satisfying interests and needs. Advantages of the non-violent/non-adversarialapproach include the following:

(a) The violent approach to conflict is very costly in terms of lives, property, psychologicaleffects and state resources.

(b) Violence does not resolve conflict. It only settles it for a short period of time. A settled

conflict comes up again because the attitudes and the context that feed the conflict still persist.

(c)

A conflict does not end even with a favourable outcome to one of the conflict partiesengaged in contentious behaviour. No people have been subdued forever. Colonialismcame and went. Once upon a time, there was apartheid in South Africa and racialdiscrimination in all of Southern Africa. Neo-colonialism cannot be forever. The subdued peoples of today across the globe will be free sooner or later. The oppressor and theconqueror live on borrowed time. The “Arab Spring” is still raging. Nobody knowswhere and when it will stop. If we look around us here at home, we will see thatyesterday is gone. And tomorrow will be different from today. The only permanent thingin life is Change. There is always a resort to the round table at the end of the destructive

behaviour after all. Even while war is raging, there are still behind the scene directnegotiations between the warring parties, and third parties or mediators facilitating thenegotiations. So why do we have to go to the unavoidable round table via destruction?

(d) There is no guarantee for conflict party satisfaction in contentious behavior. Inlitigation/adjudication, conflict parties have no ownership of both the process and theoutcome as they fall under the purview of a judicial officer. In extreme cases ofcontention as in war, both conflict parties do not necessarily own both the process and theoutcome as these are unpredictable even when one party feels and is quite obviouslysuperior in number, professionalism and fire power

Until recently, governments at all levels, as well as stakeholders in conflicts related to

pastoralism and grazing reserves development have placed more emphasis on theviolent/adversarial approach to conflict management. Security agencies, for example, have beenof very immense help in providing security in the country. However, security is not synonymouswith peace. While the security agencies play the very vital role of changing or stopping people‘sdestructive behaviour, and therefore engendering the right atmosphere for peace work, the needto take off from where their work stops has not been very well appreciated. Peace is aboutchanging people‘s behaviour, their attitudes towards each other and the context (socio-politicaland economic conditions) that promote the existing conflict. Without a follow-up change in



7

attitudes and context, behaviour change is only short term. That is why crises erupt continually toour ―surprise‖. Peace of the graveyard only needs a little trigger to push us all into the graves.

At the community and group levels, violence only begets violence. Guerrilla attacks andcounter attacks have prevailed and are still going on in some parts of the country. However, thenature of such attacks is that after the first attack, each other attack is aimed at achieving a

balance of terror or injury. In the prevailing situation, each surprise revenge attack gives a senseof ―justice‖ to the revenge attackers and a loss of equity in ―justice‖ to the attacked; then formervictims become victors and former victors become victims who must seek new ―justice‖. On andon goes the ―justice‖ cycle until the last person standing is dropped into the grave. This is thesituation that informs Reconciliation, which seeks to achieve Substantive Closure by bringing parties together for mediation on substantive issues through acknowledgement of reality andtruth telling, as well as achieving Psychological Closure through Reconciliation andReintegration, anchored on apology, forgiveness, closure ritual and reintegration.

2. Constitutional Responsibility for Grazing ReservesGrazing Reserves fall under the Concurrent Legislative List in the Nigerian 1999 Constitution

and, therefore, the constitutionality of the Federal Government legislating on them has to beestablished. There will be many challenges to getting any federal government policy on grazingreserves implemented at all levels of government and at many levels of society. Also, animalhusbandry is a private endeavor or occupation and therefore, governments cannot take overindividual and community lands and give them away to private businesses.

3. A clash of culture and development. Transhumance pastoralism is driven by culture. Culture changes but some aspects of culture diehard. Transhumance pastoralism is one of such aspects of the Fulani culture. Transhumance pastoralists are adamant about sticking to the cultural practice. On the other hand, development,especially infrastructural development, is unstoppable in any modern society. The mechanizationof agriculture and large scale farming are unstoppable in the current situation of growingmodernization and technological advancement in Nigeria, and indeed Africa. It is tenuoustherefore to sustain existing grazing reserves and to create new ones. There is no chance thattranshumance pastoralism will suppress development. It‘s a matter of time. Many communitiesin Nigeria, especially North Central Nigeria, have taken to owning large stock of cattle.However, they are mainly agro-pastoralists. Only the Fulani and related ethnic groups like theMassai of Eastern Africa practise transhumance pastoralism. In most other parts of the world,especially in the West and America, ranches are preferred. In some African countries,transhumance pastoralists have woken up to the reality of the unstoppability of development andits consequent clash with their culture of transhumance pastoralism. In Kenya, for example, pasoralists are currently taking to ranching.4

Agricultural communities indigenous to existing and prospective grazing reserves areextremely suspicious of the projects. They allege that the grazing reserves policy is only a ploy by indigenous and external elite to seize their lands by using the nomadic Fulani pastoralists asinstruments. This fear is not without reason. Large parts of many of the existing grazing reserveshave already been taken over by serving and retired civil servants, public servants, politicians,military personnel and business entrepreneurs. Very good examples of this phenomenon are theKachia and Gayan grazing reserves in Kaduna State. Following from that fact, the peoples of

4 Aljazeera News. Monitored August 3, 2013



8

Central Nigeria where pastoralism is more suited and, therefore, most of the existing and prospective grazing reserves predominate are alleging that the push for grazing reserves is anexpansionist agenda by Hausa and Fulani elite and oligarchs. The peoples of the sub-humidregion of Nigeria, otherwise referred to as the Middle Belt, as well as parts of Southern Nigeriawhere pastoralism is suitable and practised, see the grazing reserves policy as an attempt by the

Northern Hausa-Fulani to conquer them by means other than war. The allegation goes that landson which grazing reserves are created will eventually be taken over from the Fulani nomads bythese elites and oligarchs. If this allegation is the truth, then the Fulani nomadic pastoralists areup against everybody, including their own elite brothers who are now blue blooded and/or largescale farmers and not transhumance pastoralists any more. More disturbing about the allegedexpansionist agenda, however, is the fact that I see war waiting to be waged because in the worldof today, the only instrument for territorial annexation is outright war. And that is scary because by the nature of modern warfare, no party goes unscathed.

4. Land TenureThere is a confused land tenure situation in Nigeria. There have been three Land Tenure

legislations in the country:(a)

The Land Tenure Law of Northern Nigeria, 1965(b) The Public Lands Acquisition (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1976, N0.33 of the

Federal Government(c)

The Land Use (Decree) Act, 1978 of the Federal Government.These Land Tenure legislations have, however, not been practicable and implementable forvarious political, cultural, and socio-economic reasons. One of these reasons is that these LandTenure legislations ―affect the basis of family ownership of land in a rather radical manner and purports to shift the emphasis from land ownership to dynamic land use‖ (Famoriyo, 1979a).

There is, therefore, very stiff resistance to the latest legislation, the Land Use Act, 1978, in most parts of the country. Indeed, the Act is applied only in the Northern States of Nigeria, and evenwith questionable justifications and processes. Consequently, the reality of the situation is that Nigeria currently has multiple Land Tenure Systems, namely:

(a) Family or Ancestral land tenure system(b) Customary/Traditional/Community land tenure system(c) Islamic Land Tenure System(d) Local Government land tenure system(e) State Government land tenure system(f) Federal Government land tenure system (The Land Use Act, 1978)

There are still extant legislations and reforms that are not favourable to grazing reservesdevelopment, and transhumance pastoralism generally.

Pastoralism is predominantly a Northern Nigerian phenomenon. The concentration of

functional and proposed grazing reserves is therefore in that part of the country. The land tenurelegislations and administrative measures discussed below are those applicable to the former Northern Protectorate and today‘s Northern Nigeria. The post-colonial legislations andadministrative measures discussed, however, are applicable to the entire country. The Britishtook over the administration of Northern Nigeria on January 1, 1900 and made a number of landtenure decisions and legislations. These are discussed chronologically below.



9

(a) Land Proclamation No. 8, 1900. This vested the power of administration of all land in the Protectorate in the High Commissioner.

(b) The Crown Lands Proclamation No.16, 1902.

This vested lands, rights and easements earlier vested in the Royal Niger Company in the High

Commissioner in trust for the Queen of England.

(c) “Letters of Appointment”, 1903. The British Suzerainty gave the conquered Fulani Emirs ―Letters of Appointment‖, the content

of which included a declaration that the ultimate title to their lands rested with the suzerain power, the Queen of England. This was a condition for their continued traditional rulership andBritish non-interference with their religion.

(d) The Land and Native Rights Ordinance No. 9, 1910. This was a proclamation of the recommendations of the Northern Nigerian Land Committee,1908 which were as follows:

1.

That the person or community entitled to the occupation, use or enjoyment of the landhereinafter called the ―occupier‖ should have the exclusive right thereto against all person

other than the government;2. That the whole of the land of the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria should be under the

control of the government. And that no title to the occupation, use or enjoyment wasvalid without the consent of the governor;

3. That the control and dominion of the government should be exercised in any particularcase with regards to lawful province or district where the land was situated;

4. That except insofar as it was specifically provided by the term of any lease license, thegovernment was entitled for good cause, to revoke the title of an occupier and to assume possession or dispose of the land, and that the express ―good cause‖ shall include:

(a) Non-payment of taxes or dues;(b)

Voluntary alienation by sale, mortgage or transfer of possession without consent ofthe government;

(c) Requirement of the land by the government for public purposes.5. That in the event of any land being required for public purposes, due compensation

should be paid by the government to the occupiers;6. That the devolution of the right of the occupier upon his deceased/demised should be

regulated by any lawful custom existing in the locality in which the land was situatedexcept that in the locality in the case of non-natives, the devolution of the interest should be regulated by the law of their domicile.5

(e) The Land and Native Rights Ordinance No. 18, 1916

The major provisions of this Ordinance were that the whole of the land, occupied andunoccupied, of the Northern Protectorate became, with some exceptions, native lands; rights overthem were vested in the governor; the governor was to pay due regard to native law and customin granting rights of occupancy. It also contained rules on the rights of occupancy.

5 See Table of Ordinances in Elias, T.O (1957): Nigerian Land Law and Custom, 2nd Ed. Routledge and Kegan PaulLtd: London, pp.xxi - xxiii



10

(f ) The Land and Nati ve Rights Ordinance No. 18, 1948This was a revised version of the 1916 Ordinance and it was the same in the main.

(g) The Land Tenure Law 1962

This was enacted by the new legislature of Northern Nigerian. It was, however, mainly the same

as the 1916/1948 Ordinances because it adopted their principles, values, policies, philosophies,ideologies and concepts. In 1966, the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) reported aboutthe land tenure system in Nigeria thus:

Land tenure is once the most complex and most delicate of problems facing agriculturaldevelopment in the country, but as the country moves from a tribal to a national state, andfrom a traditional to a modern society, a fundamental revolution in land tenure isinevitable.6

(h) Public Lands Acquisiti on (M iscell aneous Provisions) Act No. 33 1976

Promulgated by the Federal Military Government, this Act specified the basis on which landcompulsorily acquired should be assessed and compensated, specifying maximum

compensations for different zones of the country. The maximum compensations are no longerrealistic.

(i) The Land Use Act 1978

Following the continuing confusion in land tenure in the country, the Federal MilitaryGovernment set up many panels, including the Land Use Panel headed by Justice Chike Idigbe,which was inaugurated on May 16, 1977. The report of the Land Use Panel of 1977 led to theenactment of the Land Use Decree (now Act) in 1978, signed into law on May 29, 1978. The Nigerian Constitution 1999 has in Section 315(5)(d) listed the Land Use Act as one of itscomponent parts. This Act vests all land in the State in the governor to hold in trust and to beused for the common benefit of all Nigerians. It replaces traditional land allocators with bureaucratic administrators. It also turns all landowners into landholders because they are onlyleaseholders. The Act categorises land in Nigeria into urban and rural lands with the power togrant right of occupancy vested in the Governor and the Local Government Chairmanrespectively. Article 5 of the Act provides that:

(1) It shall be lawful for the Governor in respect of the land, whether or not in an urbanarea:a. to grant statutory rights of occupancy to any person for all purposes b. to grant easements appurtenant to statutory rights of occupancy;c. to demand rental for any such land granted to any person;d. to revise the said rental:(i) at such intervals as may be specified in the certificate of occupancy, or(ii) where no intervals are specified in the certificate of occupancy at any time during theterm of the statutory right of occupancy;e. impose a penal rent for a breach of any covenant in a certificate of occupancy requiringthe holder to develop or effect improvements on the land, the subject of the certificate ofoccupancy and to revise such penal rent as provided in section I9 of this Act;

Article 6 provides that:

6 Gefu J.O (2003): Land Tenure Systems in Nigeria: Evolving Effective Land Use Policy for Poverty Alleviation.



11

(1) It shall be lawful for a Local Government in respect of land not in an urban area — a. to grant customary rights of occupancy to any person or organisation for the use ofland in the Local Government Area for agricultural, residential and other purposes; b. to grant customary rights of occupancy to any person or organisation for the use ofland for grazing purposes and such other purposes ancillary to agricultural purposes as

may be customary in the Local Government Area concerned.(2) No single customary right of occupancy shall be granted in respect of an area of landin excess of 500 hectares if granted for agricultural purposes, or 5,000 hectares if grantedfor grazing purposes, except with the consent of the Governor.

The main intent of this Act is the nationalization of land so as to make land in any State, LocalGovernment, District available to all Nigerians for residential, agricultural, grazing, commercialor industrial purposes irrespective of their states of origin, tribe, religion and political affiliation.Although the Land Use Act makes provision for compensation for compulsorily acquired land, itleaves the determination of that compensation to the whims and caprices of the governor and thelocal government chairman. This is one problem confronting grazing reserves and stock routes

development because compensation has been rejected for many lands already functioning as andthose proposed to be grazing reserves. The Kachia Grazing Reserve in Kaduna State is anexample.

The Land Use Act is probably the least obeyed of all land reform proclamations andenactments so far. Land is the most precious thing an individual, community and nation can possess. Land is capital, wealth, money, sustenance, freedom and liberty. And land has fivecomponents: soil, water, vegetation, biological and aquatic resources. Aboyade (1972) says itdifferently that land is ―all endowments of nature on, over, or under the surface of the earth...‖.Umeh (1973) posits that all land in Nigeria belongs to someone, and owners could beindividuals, supernatural persons, corporate bodies, and the State. These explain why, in spite ofthe Land Use Act and the Nigerian Constitution, there are still multiple land tenure systems in Nigeria. The Act and the Constitution have not been and may never be hindrances to thismultiplicity. Abdulkadir (2003) reports that ―most communities in the southern parts of Nigeria

still see ... land as belonging to them.‖ In spite of this Act, government still appeals tocommunities to ―donate‖ their lands for development purposes. Land does not increase. It onlydecreases over time. Again, land reform is essentially a political decision because someindividuals and groups are bound to benefit from it more than others, and some others will sufferas a consequence of it. These are some of the land related problems with grazing reserves andstock routes development in Nigeria.

Another land related challenge is that the Fulani understanding of land possession differsfrom the legal and traditional definitions of ownership. To the Fulani man, the possession of landis strange because it is unnatural. To the Fulani, no one possesses land as all land belongs to Godand anyone can use land anywhere he/she chooses. And where they do choose to settle for a longtime, it means the de facto possession of uncontested and unchallenged land. When a Fulani manclears a parcel of land and builds his hut on it, he claims rights of that piece of land if nobodyelse objects. When he leaves, he relinquishes the claim to the land. Property rights to the Fulani,therefore, are temporary, circumstantial, and require no formalities like acquiring title deeds andrequiring witnesses. All it takes is physical presence on the land.

It is not a serious problem for an individual of any identity to acquire a piece of land in Nigeria. However, when it comes to grazing reserve development, individual claims give way to



12

collective claims because the land is extensive, and in some instances, is used by both pastoralists and non-pastoralists. And in spite of the Land Use Act, ownership of land is the rulerather than the exception, and like Niamir (1990): 83) asserts ―...traditional tenure system is still

de facto if not de jure viable.‖ The Land Use Act is currently being reviewed by the National Assembly through the

instrumentality of The Land Use (Amendment) Bill. The Bill seeks to review the exclusive powers of the Governor in relation to the alienation/parting of possession with property and the powers of the Governor to revoke a right of occupancy where the holder of the said rightalienates the property without the Governor's approval.

5. Animal Husbandry OptionsThere are three pastoralist production systems: agro-pastoralism, ranching and transhumance pastoralism. Agro-pastoralism involves production of crops and livestock in environments wherecattle owners have voluntarily sedentarized. Pastoral mobility is increasingly getting constraineddue to the persistence of conflict between pastoralists and farmers, thereby providing an impetusto spontaneously and voluntarily sedentarize where adequate land has been secured by the

pastoralists. Consequently, the settled pastoralists experience a new production environment. ARanch is a farm where cattle, sheep, horses or other livestock are raised on large tracts of openland. It is a specialised farm devoted to keeping a particular kind of animal. A ranch is a vastlandscape, including various structures, given primarily to the practice of ranching, the practiceof raising grazing livestock such as cattle or sheep for meat or wool. Ranches generally consistof large areas, but may be of nearly any size. The ranch may include arable or irrigated land, andmay also engage in a limited amount of farming, raising crops for feeding the animals, such ashay and feed grains. In Nigeria, ranching is done mostly by government and its institutions.There are also a few private ranches. However, attempts at ranching by government have largely been unsuccessful. In Kaduna State, for example, all of the government animal ranches wereclosed down more than 20 years ago. These are the Dairy Cattle Multiplication Centre, Shika;the Cattle Breeding and Fattening Ranch, Manchok; the Cattle Breeding Ranch, Damau; theCattle Breeding Ranch, Kachia; and the Bull and Boar Holding Centres at Giwa, Saminaka,Ikara, Kachia, Zonkwa, Kagarko and Zaria.

Transhumance pastoralism is practised by nomadic Fulani, who move seasonally withtheir animals in search of fodder and water. Transhumance may be over a long or short distance.But whatever distance is covered, a major characteristic of this system of production is the totalattention given by the producer to raising livestock. No crop production is done. Transhumanceis a major feature of pastoral production. Well over 75% of the ruminant population of thisregion is kept under this production system (Gefu, 2012). Pastoralists number approximately 5.3million in Nigeria.7 The largest group of pastoralists is the Fulbe or Fulani that constitute about95 per cent of the nomadic herders in Nigeria.8 They hold over 90 per cent of Nigeria‘s livestock population with the livestock sub-sector accounting for 3.2 per cent of the nation‘s Gross

7 Other Nigerian nomadic pastoralists include the Shuwa (1.01m), Koyam (32 000), Badawi (20 000), Dark

Buzza (15 000) and the Buduma (10 000). See G Tahir et al , ‗Improving the quality of nomadic education in Nigeria, Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) 2005‘, sourced from http://www.ADEAnet.org (accessed 25 February 2013).8 E. Fabusoro. ―Key Issues in Livelihood Security of Migrant Fulani Pastoralists: Empirical Evidence from

South-Western Nigeria‖ , sourced from http://ecas2007.aegiseu.org/commence/user/view_file_forall.php?fileid=931. (Accessed 25 July 2012).



13

Domestic Product (GDP).9 The Fulanis draw their livelihood from livestock herding based onunrestricted grazing and movement of their ruminant livestock according to the availability ofwater, grazing pasture and the limitation of livestock diseases.10

Also, because of the high price of meat in southern towns and cities like Lagos, Ibadanand Port Harcourt, the Fulani pastoralists take their animals by truck to the edge of these cities

and fatten them on marginal grazing patches by using drugs. This practice has been encouraged by the high premium price of fat stock, rising transportation costs, and the economies of scale inherding close. This practice works so well that even cattle traders in Southern Nigeria engage init. There are now grassy patches recognized as locations for ―fattening herds‖ in the Southernforest zone.

6. Growing non-exclusiveness of Pastoralism

The most visible and popular pastoral ethnicity in Nigeria are the Fulbe (popularly referred to asthe Fulani). They are predominantly transhumance pastoralists. However, there are other pastoralist peoples in Nigeria. These include the Kanuri related groups, the Shuwa, the Koyam,the Badawi, the Dark Buzza, the Buduma, the Yedina and the Uled Suliman (camel-herders of

Libyan origin).

11

The indigenous peoples of the Jos Plateau are also engaged in agro-pastoralism.However, the most numerous and widespread of pastoralists in Nigeria are the Fulani. The other pastoral groups of Nigeria have barely been described. The Koyam, Shuwa and related peopleshave remained in the semi-arid zone around Lake Chad. With a very few exceptions, they do notcome into contact with cultivators outside of their own ethnic group who cultivate in rivervalleys or engage in catch-cropping at the foot of dunes. Ecological change and pressure ongrazing has produced some adaptations among the Uled Suliman, who now migrate between Niger and North Eastern Nigeria. Desertification, the pressure on grazing resources and has pushed them further south. Also, the high levels of water abstraction that are causing theHadejia-Nguru wetlands to dry up (Blench et al. 2003) have made parts of the zone accessible toUled Suliman camels in the dry season. Since camels consume vegetation (especially acacias)that is of little use to farmers, the potential for conflict is reduced.

ETHNIC GROUP LOCATION MAIN PASTORAL

SPECIES

Arabs

Baggara South of Geidam Cattle

Shuwa Eastern Borno/Cameroon Cattle

Uled Suliman Komadugu Yobe valley Camels

Fulani (A few representative groups)

Anagamba Northeastern Borno Cattle

Bokolooji Northern Borno Cattle

Maare South-eastern Borno CattleSankara North-western Borno Cattle

Uda'en North-Eastern Nigeria Uda Sheep

9 Ibid

10 Ibid

11 Tahir, G et al (2005) ―Improving the quality of nomadic education in Nigeria.‖ Association for the Development

of Education in Africa (ADEA). http://www.ADEAnet.org (Accessed 25 February 2013).



14

WoDaaBe Northeastern Nigeria Cattle

Kanuri Group Badawai Central Borno Cattle

Jetko North of Geidam/Niger Camels

Kanuri Borno Cattle

Koyam South-Central Borno CattleManga North-west Borno Cattle/Camels

Mober North-Eastern Borno/Niger Cattle

Kanembu Group

Kuburi Extreme north-east Borno/ Niger

Cattle

Sugurti Lake Chad shore Cattle

Saharans Teda (Tubu) Northern Borno/Niger Camels

Berber

Twareg North of Sokoto/Niger Camels

OthersYedina (Buduma) On Lake Chad Cattle

Source: adapted from RIM (1992, III)

Pastoralism and the ownership of livestock in large numbers is a fast growing phenomenonamongst other ethnicities across Nigeria, particularly in the Middle Belt states of Plateau, Benueand Nassarawa, as well as in Southern Kaduna. The number of individuals and groupsestablishing large scale mechanized farms with large numbers of cattle and other animals is fastincreasing. A great number of them are government and private sector retirees. This means thatthe exclusive claim to ownership of cattle by the Fulani pastoralists is fast becoming untenable.And in this fact is a great threat to their livelihood and their belief of an exclusive right to

grazing reserves since grazing reserves are for ALL transhumance pastoralists and agro- pastoralists. Maybe the Fulani should take this into cognizance in their own independent searchfor solutions to the challenges of their itinerant pastoral life.

7. Communities without BordersThe pastoralist community is by nature a very fluid one with no geographical and citizenship borders. Because of this, a majority of nomadic pastoralists do not hold any citizenship ornationality. In Nigeria, nomadic pastoralists come from many places in West and Central Africa.In sedentarizing them, therefore, a way must be found for establishing and convincing Nigeriangovernments and Nigerians on who is a Nigerian pastoralist and who is not. But let me opine in passing that this is not anything to be done in a hurry because it does seem like the collaboration

of other West African and Central African countries has to be cultivated so that each countryimplements the sedentarization of pastoralists within their borders at an auspicious time likeduring the rainy season, before they start moving down south and to other favourable grazingareas of Africa. In that light, therefore, the Presidential Committee on Grazing ReservesDevelopment and Settlement of Pastoralists which is currently at work will need either to beexpanded to include representatives of stakeholder countries, or to embark on scholarly anddiplomatic interactions with those countries after completing its work with a view to getting



15

them to accept the Committee‘s recommendations as they are or with mutually acceptedadjustments.

Also, unless other stakeholder countries like Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Malisedentarize their pastoralists simultaneously and in the same manner with Nigeria, Nigeriangrazing reserves will only become centres of conflict between settled Nigerian pastoralists and

nomadic pastoralists from those countries. And conflict between Nigerian agriculturalcommunities and those foreign nomadic pastoralists will neither stop nor abate. Collaborationamongst West African countries with sizable pastoralist communities is not new as witnessed bythe ECOWAS Protocol Relating to the Regulation on Transhumance Between ECOWASMember States 1998 and the ECOWAS Regulation on Transhumance Between ECOWASMember States 2003. These two instruments seek to regulate transhumance by ensuring thatmovement of stock is restricted to along the corridors defined by member states. ECOWAS hasalso developed the Strategic Action Plan for Livestock in West Africa to develop and transformthe sector.

Similarly, unless all states within Nigeria sedentarize pastoralists within their borderssimultaneously and in the same manner, grazing reserves in some states will become centres of

conflict between itinerant pastoralists from both within and outside Nigeria and settled pastoralists.

8. The Grazing Reserve Law of 1965Like the Land Use Act 1978, entrusting the right to grant and revoke right of occupancy to anindividual (the Governor) as stipulated in the Grazing Reserve Law 1965 for all lands takes nocognisance of the reality of the multiplicity of land tenure systems in the country. To establishgrazing reserves in some parts of the country therefore, some governors must resort, and haveindeed resorted, to impunity. This is highly risky in a plural society like Nigeria. It is not asurprise therefore that this provision has been impracticable. This is one of the key reasons whylands designated as grazing reserves have not been gazetted and the gazetted grazing reserves are being encroached into by the original land holding neighbouring communities. This provisionhas also made it possible for the Governor to allocate large expanses of land to individuals andcorporate bodies and for government officials to allocate parts of grazing reserves and stockroutes to themselves like in Gayan and Kachia Grazing Reserves in Kaduna State.

9. The Nigerian Constitution, 1999Article 44 of the Nigerian Constitution makes grazing reserves development a capital intensiveventure. It states inter alia:

No moveable property or any interest in an immovable property shall be taken possessionof compulsorily and no right over or interest in any such property shall be acquiredcompulsorily in any part of Nigeria except in the manner and for the purposes prescribed by a law that, among other things:

(a) requires the prompt payment of compensation therefore; and(b) gives to any person claiming such compensation a right of access for thedetermination of his interest in the property and the amount of compensation to a court oflaw or tribunal or body having jurisdiction in that part of Nigeria.

Apart from the huge amount of money needed to compensate land owners in a developingeconomy like Nigeria, this constitutional provision also makes it cumbersome to acquire land toestablish grazing reserves or develop stock routes because it gives the claimant of any such land



16

the right to seek legal protection over his land. This makes it almost impossible to compulsorilyacquire land from the rich and powerful, considering the possibility to buy and self-determine―justice‖ in the country. And the possible social costs of forcefully taking land from the poorrural people can have serious security and political implications.

10. Environmental Impact Assessment Decree No. 82 1992 The EIA Decree 86 of 1992 makes Environmental Impact Assessment mandatory for alldevelopment activities (although with some exceptions) to be embarked upon by both public and private sectors in Nigeria. It establishes the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) asthe apex regulator. FEPA published various sectoral EIA procedures together with EIA procedural guidelines in 1995.The general principles of the EIA are:

1. The public or private sector of the economy shall not undertake or embark on public orauthorise projects or activities without prior consideration, at an early stage, of theirenvironmental effects.

2. Where the extent, nature or location of a proposed project or activity is such that is likely

to significantly affect the environment, its environmental impact assessment shall beundertaken in accordance with the provisions of this Decree.3. The criterion and procedure under this Decree shall be used to determine whether an

activity is likely to significantly affect the environment and is therefore subject to anenvironmental impact assessment.

4. All agencies, institutions (whether public or private) except exempted pursuant to thisDecree, shall before embarking on the proposed project apply in writing to the Agency,so that subject activities can be quickly and surely identified and environmentalassessment applied as the activities being planned.

5. In identifying the environmental impact assessment process under this Decree, therelevant significant environmental issues shall be identified and studied beforecommencing or embarking on any project or activity covered by the provisions of thisDecree or covered by the Agency or likely to have serious environmental impact on the Nigerian environment.

6. Where appropriate, all efforts shall be made to identify all environmental issues at anearly step in the process.12

An environmental impact assessment shall include at least the following minimum matters, thatis – (a) a description of the proposed activities;(b) a description of the potential affected environment including specific information necessaryto identify and assess the environmental effects of the proposed activities;(c) a description of the practical activities, as appropriate;(d) an assessment of the likely or potential environmental impacts on the proposed activity andthe alternatives, including the direct or indirect cumulative, short-term and tong-term effects:(e) an identification and description of measures available to mitigate adverse environmentalimpacts of proposed activity and assessment of those measures;(f) an indication of gaps in knowledge and uncertainly which may be encountered in computingthe required information;

12 Environmental Impact Assessment Decree, No. 82, 1992



17

(g) an indication of whether the environment of any other State, Local Government Area or areasoutside Nigeria is likely to be affected by the proposed activity or its alternatives;(h) a brief and non technical summary of the information provided under paragraph (a) to (g) ofthis section.13

The areas for mandatory EIA under the Agriculture Sector are:(a) Land development schemes covering an area of 500 hectares or more to bring forest andinto agricultural production.

(b) Agricultural programmes necessitating the resettlement of 100 families or more.(c) Development of agricultural estates covering an area of 500 hectares or more involving

changes in type of agricultural use.14

Grazing reserves fall under all of the three mandatory areas above. Again, overgrazing of landwhich causes soil exposure, soil water loss and, ultimately, soil erosion and desertification is a phenomenon in Nigerian grazing reserves. Apart from increasing the capital intensiveness ofgrazing reserves development, this provision makes it difficult for grazing reserves to be sited on

cultivable land and even close to human settlements.

11. Population increase and the growing importance of land

In spite of the Land Use Act 1978, there is hardly any piece of land in Nigeria today that is notclaimed by one individual or community or the other. Land is wealth. And there is such a bigshortage of it in some parts of the country that the indigenes are migrating to other parts of thecountry where land is considered to be available. Land is also inherited from parents andancestors and it is held in trust for generations. With the rapid increase in agricultural activities,most of the land is fast being taken up by farmers. Moretimore and Wilson (1965) observed thatas early as the 1960s, farmers in Northern Nigeria cultivated up to 83.5 percent of the land.Moretimore (1971) shows that around Katsina, with 119 people per 135 square kilometers,farmers cultivated 66 -75 percent of the land, leaving only a quarter of the land for grazing, whenat all grass grows on it. In the outlying areas of Kano City, where the population density reaches235 per square kilometre, farmers have occupied most of the vacant lands. The current cattle and pastoralists populations of 16 million heads and 2 million respectively in Nigeria will need threequarters of the country‘s land mass if they are to sedentarize.15 For the uncultivated lands,grazing sites are diminishing because sedentary farmers have taken them over for habitation.With the increase in population, grazing is changing from surplus to subsistence, and to survivalmethods of land exploitation (Awogbade 1980).

12. The Rising Political, Ethnic and Religious temperature in the country

Since the 1980s, there has been an unprecedented increase in the frequency of violent conflicts between farmers and pastoralists and between inhabitants of grazing reserves and theirneighbouring communities. With the reintroduction of democracy in Nigeria, politicians havecontinued to manipulate religious and ethnic cleavages for selfish political interests. Theerstwhile strictly resource based small-scale herder-farmer clashes that typically occurred onlyduring every dry season are now being interpreted and executed on the platforms of religion and

13 Environmental Impact Assessment Decree, No. 82, 1992 14 Ibid15 Interview with Dr. Leo Nyam, Director, Agricultural Transformation Agenda, North Western Zone



18

ethnicity. This has made it increasingly impossible to acquire land to establish new grazingreserves and to expand existing ones. It has also made the Fulani pastoralists to vacate existinggazing reserves.

13. Security challenges

Nomadic pastoralism has implications for national and regional security. Given the internationalcharacter of the Fulani pastoralists, it is quite clear that many of them who have continued to push into different parts of the country are not even Nigerian citizens. Creating grazing reservesin the country for the benefit of non-Nigerians who come from neighbouring countries like Chad,Cameroon, Niger and Benin Republic at the expense of Nigerian farmers poses serious securitychallenges. Arms and ammunitions can be and are being moved into the country withoutdetection. The sophisticated weapons deployed by Fulani militias in places like Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba, Kaduna, Imo, Sokoto, Zamfara and Benue states is enough proof of thegrievous security challenges of taking land from citizens of Nigeria in order to sedentariseforeigners. There is not yet a dependable way of knowing the Fulani indigenous to Nigeria sincethe 2006 census did not establish the ethnicities and religions of citizens.

14. Security of land tenureDue to the forceful acquisition of land and the non-payment of compensation to land owners,farmers become antagonistic to grazing reserve projects and they harass the settled pastoralists.There is an increasing number of court cases bordering on alleged crop damage and farmlandencroachment by pastoralists settled in grazing reserves across the country. In 2010, GroupCaptain Dan Suleiman, Col. Aliyu Kama, Mr. Wilberforce Juta and Mr Paul Wampana, all eldercitizens of Adamawa State alleged that the Governor, Murtala Nyako, had ―seized farmlandsfrom the locals and gave them out to imported Fulani people‖. Although crop damage conflicts

predominated in the Kachia grazing reserve in the early 1980s (Waters-Bayers and Taylor-Powell, 1986), other types of cases like the land issue are being brought to court (Kjenstad,1988). Waters-Bayer and Taylor-Powell (1986) observed that none of the pastoralists who hadsettled in the Kachia grazing reserve were previously nomadic. All of them had been living in theKachia area for generations and simply relocated a few kilometres to the reserve. They weredriven by the hope for greater security of tenure, believing that the grazing reserve "belongs tothe Fulani". The current wave of violence across Southern Kaduna and the Middle-Belt regionhas forced other non-nomadic Fulani from other parts of Southern Kaduna and the Middle Beltto immigrate into and overpopulate the reserve.

15. Capital intensive planning and implementation

Grazing reserve development is a capital intensive venture. Costs include for roads andfirebreaks; water development; housing and buildings; stock handling facilities; officeequipment; pasture improvement; tractors and equipment; motor vehicles; increasing land surveycharges; compensation to land owners; and overhead. These expenses make the grazing reserve acapital-intensive venture, and discourage states from gazetting new reserves or expanding theexisting ones. Landlords who do not get a fair payment for their excised land from thegovernment harass the Fulani who settle on the reserve.



19

16. The growth of fadama cultivationThe availability of modern farming equipment like the water pump, improved rural transport andan expanding urban market for horticultural products has made fadama farming a major sector ofthe economy. This has become an all-year round activity and has also been adopted by manyother minority ethnic groups in the North and Middle Belt. The Federal Government has also

introduced a World Bank assisted Fadama Project. The third and current phase of the fadama project (Fadama III) has been extended from three to four years, and a $200 million (N32 billion)credit has been accessed from the International Development Association in order to ―scale up

the project‘s achievements and strengthen the development effectiveness of the h ighly performing Fadama III by aligning it more closely with the Agricultural Transformation Agenda(ATA) of the present administration.‖16 There are 24,000 million hectares of fadama land in Nigeria. This is intended to be taken up by the Fadama Project. The following statement by theMinister of Agriculture underscores the dilemma of achieving food security versus the need toencourage pastoralism and grazing reserves development.

It is important for us to optimise the 24,000 million hectares of Fadama land across thecountry. The evaluation of the project itself by the World Bank showed that the

beneficiary income under Fadama II project has increased by 20 per cent. Forty-seven percent of the farmers that were involved in the Fadama project have also been able toincrease their incomes by about 40 per cent.The crops we are focusing on are very criticalfor Nigeria for reducing our import dependency and also for creating jobs. Those cropsare rice, cassava, sorghum and horticulture. For rice, the states will include Lagos, Niger,Anambra, Enugu and Kano. For sorghum, it will be Kano state and for horticulture weare focusing big time on Kano State. For cassava, it is Kogi State. What is unique aboutthis project is the number of farmers it will reach. This project will reach 317,000 farmersand will impact on 1.7 million beneficiaries. So it is a programme that will have a scaleof impacts. Full implementation will begin in January 2014 under the AgriculturalTransformation Agenda of the Federal Government and all states of the federation will participate in the programme.17

However, it has generally had negative consequences for pastoralists and grazing reservesdevelopment as it has forced pastoralists to travel deeper into the South. Before the expansion offadama farming, cattle could be managed with relatively small amounts of labour as there werenot many farms where they could potentially stray and cause damage.

17. Large infrastructural projectsLarge agricultural projects like hydro-electric dams and the fadama, as well as development projects like roads, airports, railways, and industries have taken up very valuable grazing spacesin Nigeria. These projects are seen to favour progress. For example, the Nigerian governmentcontinues to promote dams for irrigation on the Hadejia-Jama‘are and Sokoto-Rima river basins.

18. Large-scale farms

Large-scale farms and ranches, large agricultural schemes and extensive tractorised farms havedisplaced considerable numbers of pastoralists. They have also reduced the chances ofestablishing more grazing reserves and even increased the chances of the existing ones beingtaken over for large agricultural farms.

16 Minister of Agriculture: ―N32 billion loan for fadama projects‖. The Nation newspaper, Friday August 30, 2013.17 Minister of Agriculture: ―N32 billion loan for fadama projects‖. The Nation newspaper, Friday August 30, 2013.



20

19. Desertification

The rapid desertification of the Sahara has continued take consume grazing reserves and suitableland for grazing reserves development. This is a driving force behind the push of nomads out ofgrazing reserves and into other parts of Nigeria in search of pasture. This push is exacerbated by

nomads from other West African countries that flood the Nigerian area in search of pastureespecially in the dry season. Their population has continued to grow in Nigeria, furtherexacerbating the population explosion in the grazing reserves.

20. The Cattle ComplexCoined by Herskivirts (1926), the cattle complex explains how the traditional tendency of theirrational, irresistible, and sometimes irreversible liking for animals by pastoralists is counter- productive because it is anchored on possession of a large number of livestock regardless of thecarrying capacity of the land. The cattle complex has it that traditional pastoralists rely oninefficient grazing treks, focus on milk rather than beef production, and keep large numbers ofanimals beyond their economic and reproduction functions (Brokensha, Horowitz, and Scudder

1977; and Western and Finch 1987). For example, the Fulani keep post-adolescent bulls becauseof their physical attractiveness. This production system leads to overstocking, resulting in soildegradation and destruction of valuable edible plants for animals.

21. The Uses of LivestockAnimals satisfy a wide range of uses in pastoralist societies. The report by Dyson-Hudson andDyson-Hudson (1966) on the Karimojong pastoralists as quoted by Feder et al (1988: 78) holdstrue for pastoralists in Nigeria:

Understanding the Karimojong herding operations means understanding that, to theKarimojong, cattle mean many things. Cattle are property, and accordingly they representvariable degrees of wealth, of social status and of community influence. They are a man'slegacy to his sons. They can be exchanged to symbolize formal contracts of friendshipand mutual assistance. The transfer of cattle from the groom's family to the bride's isneeded to validate a marriage. The sacrifice of cattle is a vital feature of religiousobservances.

Navile Dyson-Hudson (1966: 83) also reports on the importance of cattle to the Karimojong:Milk and blood of cattle are drunk; their meat is eaten; their fat used as food andcosmetics; their urine as cleanser; their hides make sleeping-skins, shoulder capes,anklets; their horns and hooves provide snuffy holders, feather boxes, and foodcontainers; bags are made from scrota; their intestines are used for prophecy, and theirchyme for anointing; their droppings provide fertilizer.

Cattle are prestige-makers in pastoral societies. A Fulani man‘s respect and influence iscommensurate with the size of his livestock possession (Western and Finch 1987).

Animals are barter items or currency, insurance against disasters, and sources of food andlabor (Henriksen 1974; Jacobs 1980; Goldschmidt 1980; Arhem 1989; and Bekure 1983).Having many herds is important for food stability in pastoral societies (Galaty 1980; Salzman1980a; and Cossins 1983a).



21

Pastoralists are becoming increasingly money-minded and, therefore, livestock have become currency. Sheep, goats, and cattle have become the major, and in most pastoralistfamilies, the only form of capital investment. Animals are a walking capital, a convenient way ofstoring wealth (Fricke 1979; Horowitz 1980; Schneider 1981; and Swinton 1988) and servicingsocial relations (Frantz 1978; and Goldschmidt 1980).

A large number of cattle are also insurance against droughts, diseases, bushfires,livestock thefts, and wildlife attacks (Moretimore, 1989). The prevalence of cattle theft andconflict which results in the death of many livestock in Nigeria makes a large herd desirable.Overstocking in favorable periods guarantees that a good number of animals will survive the badtimes (Mackenzie, 1983; Dahl and Hjort, 1979).

Dahl and Hjort (1979) estimate that a typical nomadic family unit needs at least thirty-sixheads of cattle for its annual subsistence. Taking ten as the average household size, a familyrequires 100-150 cattle for nourishment. With fifty cattle, the life of a nomadic family is barelycomfortable (Konczacki 1978). Households with less than fifty cows may starve (Chiasson1987). The loss of a cow in that household may threaten the welfare or survival of the membersand may result in drastic family challenges like divorce, separation, migration, and change of

occupation.Considering the many uses of livestock to the pastoralist therefore, overstocking and itsconsequent overgrazing are inevitable. In Nigeria, experts report that great destruction is caused by the ownership of excessive herd numbers.

22. Tragedy of the Commons

The tragedy of the commons posits that where responsibility is not bestowed upon grazers usingcollective resources, and responsibility for herds is collective and not individual, the pastoraliststend to be selfish about resource use. In other words, everybody‘s responsibility is nobody‘s

responsibility. They overgraze the land for the immediate dividend regardless of the long-termconsequences of their action on everyone else (Oxby, 1975; Barnes 1976; Galaty 1980; Sandford1982; and Gefu 1986). A herdsman will hardly de-stock simply because the land resources will be overstretched (Livingstone and others 1981). Only other factors like the fear of raid, predation, starvation, or shortage of workers will force him to de-stock (Dahl and Hjort 1979).The nature of traditional methods of raising livestock encourages herd maximization.Unfortunately, grazing reserves have pre-determined and limited space that cannot be expandedfor many reasons. Most of the few grazing reserves still existing are facing the problem ofoverstocking.

23. Improved Animal Health

Ironically, improved vaccination, enhanced veterinary services, and insect eradication that have boosted ruminant and non-ruminant population in the last twenty years have also strained theresources of the grazing reserves (Waters-Bayer and Taylor-Powell 1986). Several grazingreserves such as the one in Wase in Plateau State and Kachia in Kaduna State have broken downdue to increase in stock pressure.

24. Encroachment

In Nigeria, encroachment by the farmers is by far the most serious impediment to thedevelopment of grazing reserves (Muhammad-Baba, 1987). Complaints of encroachment, if



22

taken to court, are sometimes delayed. Sometimes the aggrieved Fulani take the law into theirown hands.

25. Inadequate ManagementThe management of grazing reserves is grossly inadequate across the country due to under-

staffing. For example, the Kachia grazing reserve in Kaduna State has only a manager and anunarmed security personnel. This shortage of workers makes the management and enforcementof rules governing the use of the range inefficient. In some of the reserves, the ReserveManagement Committee empowered to revoke the right of occupancy of range violators cannot prosecute offenders, who often go unpunished (N.L.P.D. record 1992). In some, the Fulaniaccuse the Committee of conducting its meetings undemocratically. And still in some, the Fulanicomplain that the Reserve Management Committee is unable to acquire the materials to conserveand improve the amenities on the range.

26. Dry season drop in prices of productsDespite the presence of some amenities on the reserves, the herders must drive their herd from

the reserve at the climax of the dry-season because the price of milk on the reserve falls belowthe urban market rate, range management prohibits farming, and human and animal food iscritically scarce and expensive (Fricke 1979; and Awogbade 1982). Amenities on the reservethen fall into disuse during the temporary absence of the Fulani from the reserves.

27. Uncomplimentary Reputation of the Fulani

Rightly or wrongly, the Fulani have had a reputation for obduracy and recalcitrance for a longtime. In the course of the work of the Kaduna State Peace and Reconciliation Committee set up by the late Governor Patrick Yakowa, one of the Committee members of the Fulani stockdistributed a report dated 1920 and allegedly written by one Captain Orr, the Resident of Zaria province, to Sir Frederick Luggard, containing the following impression of the Fulani:

The Fulani are ascetic, kind and generous, but never fight a war (hot or cold) with theFulani because they have:1. No rules of engagement (they just hit again and again)2.

No POWs (they don‘t take prisoners) 3. No mercy (once they pick you out as the enemy)4. No fighting fatigue (they are forever fit and prepared due to their lifestyle)5. No need for adequate provisions and permanent abode (they live on very little and

sleep in the wilderness)6. No end to hostilities (they fight to finish)7. No ignorance of the terrain and location (their lifestyle makes every one of them a

human GPS)

8.

No deterrence due to casualties; they are strategically distributes all over West andCentral Africa and highly mobile)

9. No need for tranquillity (they have no permanent settlements which need peace tothrive)

10. No fear of consequences!!

This document sent jitters into non-Fulani members of the Committee because the memberdistributed it during the course of deliberations on grazing reserves, giving the impression that he



23

was warning the Committee to meet the demands of the Fulani or be ready for the consequences.There has been no documented attempt to debunk this allegation. This reputation is scary tocommunities across Nigeria and I believe that a public renunciation of it in various fora will helpa lot to assuage the fears of Nigerians generally, and particularly in the Middle Belt region.Ezeomah (1987) also noted that:

The typical association of pastoral Fulbe is in small independent and highly mobilegroups. Their relationship with non-pastoralists is seldom of an enduring nature andfrequently loaded with mistrust and suspicion. They avoid contact with Governmentofficials whenever possible and do not take kindly to orders of authority. This is not whatone anticipates they should be in a Grazing Reserve. The socially binding forces of smallgroups of pastoralists will have to be studied and exploited in order to apply them tolarger cooperating groups.18

28. Public Perception of Grazing Reserves A survey of public opinion and reactions to pastoralism and grazing reserves development showsa negative perception and, consequently, rejection (vehement in some instances) of pastoralism

and the idea of grazing reserves and stock routes development. A sample of public opinion andreactions to farmers/pastoralists conflicts gives an idea of the urgency in the find a solution to the practice of pastoralism and the sedentarization of pastoralists. The regular and social media aredaily awash with negative perspectives on pastoralism and the grazing reserve policy. In anarticle in NaijaNet.com on Sunday September 24, 2012, Zacharys Anger Gundu opined that―nomadic pastoralism is not sustainable - not any more.‖

19 He kicked against the Senator ZainabKure sponsored Grazing Reserves Bill being considered by the Nigerian National Assembly because:

The future for livestock farming in Nigeria must be on the farm and ranches speciallydeveloped to accommodate those with animals. People with animals must reside, feedand keep their animals on farms. Fortunately for us, institutions like the National AnimalProduction Institute (NAPRI) in Zaria have developed and tested varieties of pasture thatcan be produced in commercial quantities to support such farms. Contrary to proponentsof the grazing reserves bill, it is ranches and farms that can grow livestock production inthe country and not grazing reserves. Many of the herds grazing indiscriminately acrossthe country belong to the Fulbe siire (Toronkawa) who are rich patrons in the cities. TheFulbe ladde (Fulanin bororo) who tend these herds are merely hired hands. TheToronkawa can afford ranches and farms upon which to keep their cows. They can alsogrow the appropriate pasture for these herds and must be compelled by legislation to dothis. Even though the bororo prefer traditional Fulani education (pulaaku), if they settleon ranches and farms with their herds, it will be easy to integrate their children into thenormal school system, saving the country tons of money which is literally wasted todayin the guise of providing nomadic education. Government at the Federal and State levelsmust muster sufficient courage to let Nigerians who want to keep livestock know that the

18 Cited in Dalli, A.L, (1988). Socio-economic Considerations for Settlement of Pastoralists in Grazing Reserves.

Paper presented at the National Workshop on Guidelines for the Development of Settlements in Grazing Reserves in Nigera. Zaranda Hotel, Bauchi, Nigeria. August 29 – September 1, 1988 19 Zacharys Anger Gundu: ―Tackling the Nomadic Challenge in Nigeria.‖ NaijaNet.com. Sunday September 24,

2012



24

way forward in tackling the nomadic challenge is in ranches and farms not grazing rightsacross the country.20

He advocated that:States who are at the receiving end of the bill must be in the forefront of rejecting this

bill. If passed, it will not only destabilize them, it will also pitch their unsuspectingfarmers against better armed nomads who are bent on imposing an archaic way of life onthe country at all costs. Nomads in places like Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba and Benuestates are also gradually staking political claims to land leading to frictions and bloodletting.21

Gundu also thinks that the creation of Grazing Reserves touches on the indigene/settlercontroversy. Commenting on the Zainab Kure Grazing Reserve Bill, he opined that:

The grazing reserves bill is also against the spirit of true federalism. If Nigerian stateslike Sokoto, Kebbi, Kano, Bornu and Katsina for whatever reasons, would want to allownomads from other countries to graze their states, it will be too much for them to expect

that such nomads and Nigerian nomads must also have free grazing access in other Nigerian states. Other states in the spirit of true federalism must begin to regulatelivestock farming in favour of farms and ranches. If states like Plateau, Benue, Tarabaand Nasarawa had such legislation, the amount of bloodshed and the intensity of conflict between nomads and farmers reported in them would have been significantly reduced.22

Gundu opines that the international nature of Fulani pastoralism has made them no respecters ofregional and international boundaries. He asserts that it is dangerous to carve out lands belongingto Nigerians exclusively for people from countries other than Nigeria.

The lobby of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) andother Fulani groups is nothing more than cheap blackmail. The Association is living inthe past and must wake up to the realities of our time. It is no longer possible to foist aFulani interest on other parts of the country and invite Funalis from all over West Africato benefit from the foisting. The arguments of Fulani apologists to the effect that naturehas consigned the Fulani and his cattle to the bush where he has no option than to fight tothe 'last drop of his blood' to graze uncultivated forests and grass lands on the continent isunacceptable. The Fulani ambition to one day get his herd to drink from the Orange riverin Southern Africa is obscene and is repeated only because of arrant arrogance andextreme disregard for people including national and other boundaries. Fulani cattle haveno 'universal rights' to grazing resources in the country. Staking claims to such imaginaryrights is an ambition that courts chaos which we must avoid by all means.23

Following the attack on some villages by Fulani herdsmen in Benue State, one Frank left thefollowing comment on the news item:

These are the beasts we live with in the name of Nigeria. For how long will they roam the bush destroying land owners livelihood? Their Reps in the house are even advocating

20 Ibid21 Ibid22 Ibid23 Ibid



25

grazing zones for them all over the country instead of paradigm shift to modern farmingmethods. Can any of them bequeath cattle herding to their children in the 21st Century? Ifwe must live in unity they should embrace modern way of life or restrict themselves totheir own lands.24

Lemchi reads an ethnic agenda in the Fulani attacks across the country and blamed the impunityon Government ineptitude:It is good these are all coming to the fore at this time. All this while, these Hausa Fulanishave been killing people at random and destroying their farmlands in the name of doingtheir own business (cattle rearing), and the governments at all levels seem to keep quiet. Ihave never learnt or heard of any other class of people, tribe or religion in Nigeria thattakes pleasure in killing others and destroy their livelihood means in order to carry outtheir business except the Hausa-Fulanis. The South-South and South-East communitieshave had chilling tales of killings and burning of houses by these cattle rearers, andnothing has been done till date to call them to order. Every person has one business or theother for livelihood. If we all start killing and destroying the livelihood means of others

so as to carry out our businesses, I don‘t know where this will lead the country. The Lawmakers, the security agencies, and the government at all levels should please dosomething before this fast gets out of hand.25

In reaction to the killings and destruction visited on the Attakar villagers of Kaduna State byFulani pastoralists in April 2013, one Gabriel went quite emotional and provocative:

Can‘t all these Hausa-Fulanis go to their own state and settle there? I‘m tired of every

time these Hausa-Hulani killings. I think it is time everybody faces them squarely sincethe govt is not ready to do anything about the issue. But the most surprising thing is their big men purchased for them sophisticated weapons that nobody can dare them.26

Tunde‘s reaction to the same story is as below:

How can a whole thirty souls be cruelly terminated because of two dead cows for God‘ssake. With the frequent rise of Fulani and community crises all over Nigeria, I think it istime for a law that will restrict cattle movement. The cattle ownership is their agriculturalrights and business, just like every other business. So they should be confined by law to buy lands from their proceeds like any other business individual does. Period. This iswhat is obtainable all over the world.27

Bonat Zuwaqhu asserts that:What of the Fulani from Niger, Mali, Chad, the Futa Djallon in Guinea and Senegal thathave been drafted into Nigeria by Fulani groups and organizations to fight our people

over our land in the Middle Belt? We are being told that Nigerian ―Fulani‖, who had for

24 Frank left this comment on a news story about the Fulani attack on Communities in Benue State as reported by the

State Governor in The Nation, May 9, 2013 25 Lemchi Jones left this comment on a news story about the Fulani attack on Communities in Benue State as

reported by the State Governor in The Nation, May 9, 2013 26 Comment on the story, ―Gunmen kill 19 in Kaduna, 4,000 others displaced. Thisday, Tuesday April 2, 2013

27 Comment on the story, ―Gunmen kill 19 in Kaduna, 4,000 others displaced‖. The Nation, Wednesday April 3,

2013



26

decades lived in relative peace with their host communities to the extent of being givenland to settle, are those who are attacking and driving out the original land owningcommunities. The Fulani marauders have been attacking and massacring villagecommunities, with apparent impunity. They ―justify‖ the attacks by falsely claiming that

their cattle have been stolen. Their latest victims are the Attakar of Kaduna State, whom

the Fulani are relentlessly attacking for purchasing and rearing cattle on their own land.

28

Honorable Simon Mwadkwon, representative of the Barakin Ladi-Riyom Federal Constituencyof Plateau State in the House of Representatives, reads an ethno-religious agenda bordering onexpansionism in the grazing reserves policy. In an interview in BESTNAIRA, he alleged that:

It is also unfortunate that in the 21st Century, the Fulani and Hausa people believe thatthey must rule the people at all cost and must not allow other people to have control overtheir destiny. They have tried by all means using the international media, the Hausasection of the BBC and the Voice of America, to paint the Plateau person in bad light tothe world, even when it is clearly known that they are the aggressors.29

In another interview in the Tribune of June 11, 2012 on the incessant killings between the Fulani pastoralists and the indigenous peoples of his constituency, Mwadkwon said:The cause of the incessant hostilities in this constituency can be attributed to the Fulani‘s

expansionist tendency, which started with the Usman Dan Fodio jihad of 1804. It has been their agenda since 1804 to capture the Middle Belt region and use it as a launch padto capture the South. It is their belief that once the northern minorities are captured, theywould be willing tools for the capture of the South. Another reason is the quest forgrazing reserves and that was why the House of Representatives killed the bill on grazingreserves (in 2008) because it would have caused a lot of havoc in the country. The Fulanicannot lay claim to any village, as they do not have any, but are tenants who pay royaltyto the people.

However, there have been some emotionally tampered reactions to the persistent deadly clashes between Fulani herders and crop farming communities. In its Editorial on January 29, 2012, the Punch newpaper said that:

At present, the grazing system is still at its primeval stage and largely driven by culture.The cattle husbandry of the herdsmen rests on behavioural techniques that have been longeradicated in many countries. ... The consequences are grave, not just on the crops, but onthe environment as experts say improper grazing management reduces plant tolerance tostress, cold, drought and disease.

It suggested that if the grazing reserves policy must be sustained, ―government needs to come out

with a clear-cut policy on providing more grazing reserves and migratory routes which arecrucial to resolving the perennial clashes. One option lies in the European practice of controllingcattle primarily by physical means like fences.‖ The paper went further to suggest that:

28 Interview with Bonat Zuwaqhu, Director, Centre for Population and Development, Kaduna. June 2, 2013

29 Quoted in ―Dissecting the National Grazing Reserve Bill‖, in Jos Plateau Affairs, Wednesday February 6, 2013

http://josplateauaffairs.blogspot.com. Accessed August 14, 2013

http://josplateauaffairs.blogspot.com/





27

Close control of livestock grazing has become imperative. Controlling livestock behaviour improves animal distribution and plant use. Fencing, salt/mineral placement,herding, and water development are used to influence where animals graze and what theygraze on. ... Local governments should monitor happenings in their areas to nip in the bud

potentially ―combustible‖ situations and assist in bringing to book those found to have perpetrated lawless activities. Traditional rulers should justify their relevance bymonitoring the activities of cattle rearers in their localities. ... Governments should deviseways of keeping records of the ubiquitous pastoralists to facilitate crime detection and putan end to lawlessness.

It also stressed the importance of education for the pastoralist for better relations with farmers. Itnoted, however, that the Federal Government‘s nomadic education program ―which was

inaugurated in 1986 and commenced in 1990 has not made the desired impact.‖

On his own part, Abubakar‘s reaction to the ransacking of the Attakar villages in KadunaState in April 2013 went thus:

We need a comprehensive solution to this problem, one that is free of sentiment. One that

recognizes the right of indigenes and those of nomads. I am not one of those that supportremoving indigenisation. I think one of the main root causes of Nigerian problems is thesense of insecurity that each and every tribe feels. So it is important to ensure that everytribe feels secure where they call home. The tribes of Southern Kaduna and Plateaushould feel safe and in control of their ancestral lands, but they should also make roomfor those that have been traversing these forests for generations as well as those that havesettled amongst them. There should be no place for ethnic cleansing, but the locals shouldnot be squeezed either. I hope (the Kaduna State Governor) consults and listens to formerGov. Makarfi.30

Measures will have to be taken to assuage these widespread fears if the grazing reserves policy isto be sustained as is.

OVERARCHING RECOMMENDATIONSThis paper only makes certain observations that are central to decision making on the grazingreserves issue. However, I hasten to make the following three overarching recommendations.

1. A Reconciliation Programme

Before implementing the recommendations of the Presidential Committee on Grazing ReservesDevelopment and Settlement of Pastoralists (trusting that they will be practicable andimplementable), there should be a professionally facilitated Reconciliation Programme in themost volatile areas with regards to pastoralists and farming communities like in Benue, Nasarawa, Plateau, Kaduna, Oyo, Kogi, Jigawa and Zamfara states. This programme will go along way in softening the grounds for implementing the recommendations of the Committeesince, if any additional grazing reserves will be created, they are most likely to be in those states.This may be an expensive venture, but if peace is expensive, let‘s count the costs of conflict andcrisis.

30 Comment on the story - Gunmen kill 19 in Kaduna, 4,000 others displaced‖ by ―Abubakar‖- Thisday, Tuesday

April 2, 2013



28

Reconciliation is a goal and a process. As a goal, it is something to achieve: moving asociety from a divided imperfect past to a shared perfect future. This is both ambitious anddesirable. As a process, reconciliation is long-term, deep and broad. Long-term: There is no quick-fix to reconciliation. It takes time. However, if it does not matterwhen a reconciliation (or any other conflict resolution) process is concluded, then it should not

matter whether or not it is embarked upon. This is particularly so for the Peace andReconciliation projects in Central Nigeria because there is an urgency to it. Deep: Reconciliation involves a coming to terms with an imperfect reality which demandschanges in our attitudes, our aspirations, our emotions, our feelings, and perhaps even our beliefs. Such changes are profound and often painful, and, therefore, cannot be rushed orimposed. They are, however, highly desirable. Broad: Reconciliation is not just a process for perpetrators and victims of suffering, but itapplies to everyone. The attitudes, stereotypes, prejudices about ―the enemy‖ and the belief

systems that underpin violent conflict spread much more generally through a community andmust be addressed at that broad level. The ―enemy‖ is rarely limited to the few off enders; itencompasses the entire community, regime, etc to which the perpetrators belong, including those

who have suffered or benefited little from the past or prevailing reality because they have alsoabsorbed the beliefs and the culture of their community. Reconciliation must, therefore, beinclusive of the many and various interests and experiences across the society.

What Reconciliation is NotPlease note the following quick takes on what Reconciliation is not.

1. Reconciliation is not about forgetting. It is about letting go.2. Reconciliation is not about right or wrong. It‘s about finding common ground. 3. Reconciliation is not about guilty or innocent. It‘s about all conflict parties owning a

conflict and seeing it as a joint responsibility to mutually agree on its resolution.4. Reconciliation is not about saving costs in time, money, emotions, etc. You cannot put a

price on peace. If you think the search for peace is costly, try violence. We know thatalready in Nigeria.

5. Reconciliation is not about individual guilt. It is about collective guilt. Everyone has hurteveryone. If everyone will have to get justice, everyone will have to give away somethingin reparation or be in jail or have life snuffed out of them. This is because we will have togo back in time. How far back in time do we go? Whatever anyone or group sufferedmoments, days, months or a few years back, someone else or some group else hassuffered it decades, centuries or millennia ago. And vice versa.

6. Reconciliation is not about retributive justice. An eye for an eye will get all of us blind.And with no more eyes to take, we will go for limbs. With no more limps left, we will gofor something else, and so on until we eventually go for life itself. And there will be noone to fight anyone. Extinction is the only permanent solution to conflict since it isinevitable.

2. A National Consultative ForumWhile most Nigerians seem to be favourably disposed to pastoralist sedentarization as a conflictresolution and pastoral development mechanism, I believe that the issue goes beyond aCommittee of a few selected Nigerians no matter how well grounded they are in issues of pastoralism and agricultural development generally. To my mind, the political and socio-cultural



29

issues accompanying pastoralism and, specifically, sedentarization are more challenging. To me,the issue of sedentarization touches on federal restructuring as it will result in a reconfigurationof the political geography and the populations of Nigeria. Charting a more durable way forwardon these issues, therefore, is an assignment for THE NIGERIAN PEOPLE because it is an issuethat needs a consensus of the Nigerian people. Consequently, I strongly recommend that

recommendations of the Committee be subjected to the acceptance of Nigerians in a NationalConsultative Forum of all key stakeholders. The polity is particularly so heated up now that itappears not auspicious a time for a Committee of only a few Nigerians to be saddled with anassignment as important as suggesting solutions to the creation of grazing reserves.

3. Conflict Sensitive Programming (Conflict Sensitive Development)The recommendations of the National Consultative Forum must be conflict sensitive inconceptualization and realization. The creation of grazing reserves or execution of any otheralternative projects, for example, must be done in such a way as not to create further conflicts orexacerbate existing ones. Conflict Sensitivity has to do with (i) understanding the context inwhich one is intervening by doing a conflict analysis and updating it regularly; (ii) understanding

the interaction between one‘s intervention and the context by linking the conflict analysis withthe programming cycle of planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation; (iii) andacting upon the understanding of this interaction in order to avoid negative impacts andmaximize positive impacts by planning, implementing monitoring and evaluating theintervention in a conflict-sensitive manner (including redesigning intervention when necessary).Simply put, conflict sensitivity means carrying the host community of a project along inconceptualizing and execution of the project.

Conflict Sensitive PlanningPlanning is the process through which certain problems are identified, their causal linkagesanalysed, and effective solutions developed. The result of this process is often embodied in a programme designed with predetermined objectives, activities, implementation process andveritable indicators of progress. Conflict sensitive planning incorporates the conflict analysis(profile, causes, actors and dynamics of a conflict) into traditional planning. The intention is tohave a constructive impact on the context to avoid further deterioration and promote more peaceful and effective solutions.

Conflict Sensitive ImplementationImplementation is the process for realising objectives by enacting the activities designed in the planning process – the operationalization of the proposal. Implementation involves regular progress reviews to enable plans to be adjusted if necessary. Conflict sensitive implementationinvolves close scrutiny of the operational context through regularly updating the conflictanalysis, in order to avoid negative impacts and maximise positive impacts on the context.

Conflict Sensitive Monitoring

Monitoring is the regular process of examining a project‘s actual outputs and impacts. Carriedout during the implementation phase, monitoring seeks to provide the project team with currentinformation that will allow them to assess progress in meeting project objectives, and to adjustimplementation activities if necessary. Additionally, monitoring generates data that can be usedfor evaluation purposes. Conflict sensitive monitoring incorporates an understanding of conflict



profile, actors, causes and dynamics into traditional monitoring processes and activities, with theintention of better understanding the context and the intervention, as well as the interaction between the two. Conflict sensitive monitoring is used to inform adjustments and changes to project or programme activities so that the intervention has the optimum impact on conflictdynamics.

Conflict Sensitive EvaluationConflict sensitive evaluation seeks to ―incorporate a detailed understanding of the operatingcontext in terms of historical, actual or potential conflict into traditional evaluation activities and processes. Conflict sensitive evaluations are used to understand the overall impact a givenintervention has had on this context, the impact the context has had on the intervention, and theextent to which the interaction between the two has informed conflict sensitive programming.This evaluation can then be used to adjust subsequent phases of an ongoing initiative, or gainlessons for future initiatives."31

Thank you. God bless Nigeria.

Joseph Tanko ATANG

Mr. Atang is the Foundation Secretary of the Centre for Peace and Strategic Studies of the University of

Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. He is currently a Ph.D candidate in Peace and Development Studiesat the Centre. He holds a Master’s degree in Conflict Resolution from the University of Massachusetts,

Boston, USA; a B.A (Upper Second) in English Language from A.B.U Zaria; and a Graduate Certificatein Public Information from the National Institute for Public Information, Kaduna.

Mr. Atang was a member of the Kaduna State Peace and Reconciliation Committee which was

inaugurated by the late Governor of Kaduna State, Sir Patrick Yakowa, on January 25, 2012. He was amember of the Report Drafting Sub-Committee, Editorial Sub-Committee, and Final Report Writing Sub-

Committee. The Committee submitted its report in May 2013. He was a Technical Resource Person to the Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission (popularly referred to as the Oputa Panel); andSpecial Assistant to the Chairman of the Ogoni/SHELL Presidential Reconciliation Commission (Bishop

Matthew Kukah). He is a Member and the Vice Chairman of the Kwara State Chapter of the Society for Peace Studies and Practice. Mr. Atang is a Certified Mediator of the District Court of the State of

Massachusetts, U.S.A. Mr. Atang has done consultancy work for the United Nations Development Project(UNDP) and Search for Common Ground, an international Conflict Resolution NGO based in the USA.

Mr. Atang has published four book chapters, presented conference papers, given professional lecturesand published over 80 newspaper/magazine opinion articles. Academic laurels he has received are The

Donald Paulson Award of the Department of Conflict Resolution, Human Security and Global

Governance, University of Massachusetts, Boston, U.S.A; Graduate Research Assistantship in the Department of Conflict Resolution, Human Security and Global Governance at UMASS, Boston; and Best Final Year Student in French, Government Secondary School, Kagoro, Kaduna State, Nigeria.

31 www.saferworld.org.uk/downloads/pubdocs/chapter_3__267.pdf. Accessed May 14, 2013

http://www.saferworld.org.uk/downloads/pubdocs/chapter_3__267.pdf.%20Accessed%20May%2014




before the grazing reserves and stock routes are created - email broadcast version

Documents