Between Peace and Justice: Dispute Settlement between Karaboro Agriculturalists and Fulbe Agro-Pastoralists in Burkina Faso

(1)

Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology•25

Between Peace and Justice

Dispute Settlement between

Karaboro Agriculturalists and

Fulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Sten Hagberg

Acta UniversitatisUpsaliensis

(2)

(3)

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS Uppsala Studies inCultural Anthropology 25

Distributor: Departmentof Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University, Tradgardsgatan 18, S-753 09 Uppsala. Sweden

Sten

Hagberg

Between Peace and Justice

Dispute Settlement between Karaboro Agriculturalists

and Fulbe

Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Dissertation in Cultural Anthropology to be publicly examined ⁱⁿ Lecture Hall 1022, DepartmentofCultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Tradgardsgatan 18, Uppsala Uni¬

versity.^on September25, 1998, at 10.15 a.m., for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

The examinationwill be conducted inEnglish.

ABSTRACT

Hagberg, Sten, 1998.BetweenPeace and Justice. Dispute Settlement between Karaboro Agriculturalists andFulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso.ActaUniversitatis Upsali-

ensis. Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology 25. 268pp. Uppsala. ISBN91-554-

4247-1.

This study is aboutdispute settlementin the Comoe Province. Burkina Faso. It focuses

on waysin which fourprincipalcategories ofactors—Karaboro agriculturalists, Fulbe agro-pastoralists,Tiefo Masters of the Earth, and local government officials—handle disputes related to landed resources. The ^{study is} based on four years of multi-sited

fieldwork between 1988 and 1996,aswellasstudiesof literature and archival material.

Tounderstand processesofpeace and justiceindispute settlement, the study provides

detailedaccountsof internal socio-political and cultural dynamics within and between

the main groups ofactors aswell as an ethnography of two casesof violent conflict.

The main argument is that dispute settlement prevails ina social fieldof relations and rights. It is,on theonehand,amatterof mobilising key social relationsin ordertopro¬

motepeace, to forgive and make future co-habitation possible. Host-stranger relations

as wellas those ofneighbourhood and friendship are, for example,put tothe fore. On

the otherhand,it is also amatterofclaiming rights and attendto what differentactors perceiveas justice. Rights arearticulated indifferent organisationalstructures such as the Land and Tenure Reorganisation, the Trade Union of Graziers and the Hunting Or¬

ganisation.While external actors claim rightsin public discourse, in practice they are

likelytomobilise relationsto 'arrangeanaffair'. Localactors promoteideologically the

maintenance of social relations (for_peace and prosperity) in dispute settlement, but

look for theirrightsinpractice. Disputesarethus located betweenpeaceandjustice,but

in the shadowof violent conflict. Thestudyconcludes that dispute settlement between

Karaboroagriculturalists and Fulbe agro-pastoralists should notonly be understoodas

apolitical run bydifferentactors togain in disputes, but needstobe situated within the

domain of^what is regarded asmorally and socially 'acceptable' topublic opinion be¬

yond ethnic andsocio-political boundaries.

Sten Hagberg, Department of Cultural Anthropology A Ethnology, Tradgardsgatan 18, S-75309, Uppsala, Sweden

(4)

(5)

ActaUniversitatis Upsaliensis

Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology

25

(6)

(7)

Between Peace and Justice

Dispute Settlement between

Karaboro Agriculturalists and

Fulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Sten

Hagberg

(8)

Dissertation for theDegreeof Doctor of Philosophy in Cultural Anthropology presented

atUppsala University in 1998

ABSTRACT

Hagberg, Sten, 1998. Between Peace and Justice. Dispute Settlementbetween

KaraboroAgriculturalists and Fulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso. Acta

UniversitatisUpsaliensis, Uppsala Studies in Cultural Anthropology 25. 268pp.

Uppsala. ISBN 91-554-4247-1.

Thisstudy is about dispute settlement in the Comoe Province, Burkina Faso. Itfocuses

onways in which four principal categories of actors—Karaboro agriculturalists, Fulbe agro-pastoralists, Tiefo Masters of the Earth, and local governmentofficials—handle disputes related to landed resources. The study is based on four years of multi-sited

fieldwork between 1988 and 1996,aswellasstudies of literature and archivalmaterial.

To understand processes of^peace and justice in dispute settlement, the study provides

detailedaccountsof internal socio-political and cultural dynamics within and between

the main groups ofactorsas well as anethnography of two casesof violent conflict.

The mainargumentis that dispute settlement prevails ina social field of relations and rights. It is,ontheonehand,amatterof mobilising key social relations in ordertopro¬

motepeace, toforgive and make future co-habitation possible. Flost-stranger relations

as well asthose ofneighbourhood and friendshipare, for example,put tothe fore. On

the otherhand, it is alsoamatterofclaiming rights and attendtowhat differentactors perceive asjustice. Rightsare articulated in different organisational structuressuch as the Land and TenureReorganisation, the Trade Unionof Graziers and the Hunting Or¬

ganisation. While external actorsclaim rights in public discourse, in practice they are

likely tomobilise relations to 'arrange an affair'. Local actors promote ideologically

the maintenance of social relations(forpeaceand prosperity) in dispute settlement, but

look for theirrights in practice. Disputesare thus located betweenpeace and justice,

but in the shadow of violent conflict. The study concludes that dispute settlement be¬

tweenKaraboroagriculturalists and Fulbe agro-pastoralists shouldnot only be under¬

stoodas apolitical run by differentactors togain in disputes, but needs tobe situated

within the domain of what is regarded as morally and socially 'acceptable' to public opinionbeyond ethnic and socio-political boundaries.

Keywords: anthropology, Burkina Faso, ethnicgroups, landtenure,legal pluralism, conflict, dispute settlement, Fulbe, Fulani, Peul, Karaboro, Tiefo.

StenHagberg, Department of Cultural Anthropology & Ethnology, Tradgardsgatan 18, S-753 09, Uppsala, Sweden

©Sten Hagberg 1998

ISBN 91-554-4247-1 ISSN 0348-5099

Typesetting & Layout: Bernhard Helander

Photosby the author

Printed in Sweden by Erlanders Gotab, Stockholm 1998

Distribution:Department of Cultural Anthropology & Ethnology, Tradgardsgatan 18,

S-75309,Uppsala, Sweden (http://www.antro.uu.se)

(9)

ToMinata, Yasmine & Erik

(10)

(11)

Lists

o

f Illustrations

Figures

Figure 1:Tiefo Masterof theEarth 89

Figure 2: Agro-pastoral Management Scheme 100

Figure 3: Karaboro compound 112

Figure 4: Farming 114

Figure 5: Donsoton 122

Figure 6: Karaboro donso 125

Figure 7: Farmer youth 138

Figure 8: Fulbe youth 140

Figure 9: Fulbe herder 142

Figure 10: La Prefecture 161

Figure 11: Manure 203

Figure 12: Milking 206

Figure 13: Neighbours 207

Figure 14: Waterpump 209

Maps

Map 1: Burkina Faso 33

Map 2: Comoe Province, pre-1996 borders 35

Map 3: Comoe Province, post-1996 borders 37

Map 4: Sideradougou Department 78

Map 5: Comoe Province, Tiefo country' 81

Map 6: Comoe Province, 'Karaborocountry' 105

Map 7: Boobola 133

Map 8: Comoe Province, Sideradougou and Mangodara conflicts 175

(15)

A Note

^on

Or

In this study I have triedtocombinecorrectlinguistic principles with pragmatic

modifications to facilitate the reading. All terms in Dyula are transcribed ac¬

cording tothemostcommon rules, someof which areworth mentioning:

'j'=jamana(country) should be readdyamana as 'j' in the English 'jungle'.

'u'=dugu (village) should be read dougouas 'o' in the English 'two'.

'g'= tigi (owner, chief) should be read tiguias 'g' in the English 'gun'.

'c'=ce (man)should be read che 'ch' in theEnglish 'choke'.

However, toponyms, patronyms and other well-established labels do notneces¬

sarily follow these common rules. Sideradougou (Sidaridugu) is an official

name which represents an administrative unit in Burkina Faso. Ouattara (Watara) is a commonpatronymtoday.

For theplural forms I have chosen tosacrifice linguisticperformance for making the study more accessible. I therefore only occasionally add the plural

form in Dyula. I saytwodugukolotigi rather than dugukolotigiw, which would

be the correct Dyula transcription (sing, tigi, plur. tigiw). For pragmatic rea¬

sons, 1 have adopted a similar principle in using Karaboro and Fulbe as labels

for the main disputingparties. The Dyula termKaraboro would be Karaborow

in plural. These people refer to themselves as Kaye, but this label is not very known, albeit used by other than themselves. Thus I adopt the term Karaboro (see also the discussion on this topic in chapter 5). Fulbe is the plural form,

whose singular form is Pullo. For a Fulfulde reader my use of the term Fulbe (both in singular and plural) is inconsistent, but I do believe that it makes reading easier (seealso the discussion in chapter 6). After all, this is an English

text. Thusto work in amulti-ethnic environmentmeans that different labelsare

constantly employed, e.g.peul,jula.

All non-English terms and words, notably Dyula and French, are sys¬

tematicallyput in italics, except for ethnic and other group labels (e.g. Tiefo, Boobolangobe and Haabe). Translations of Dyula and French statements and expressions into English have been done by myself, but, it should be stressed,

with mywife, who is anative Dyula-speaker, as acontinuous advisor.

11

(16)

(17)

Preface

As I look backon what has happened since 1988 when 1 first came to Burkina

Faso Irealise that somanypeople have contributedtothis study.

First of all I would like to express my profound gratitude to all infor¬

mants in Burkina Faso who have had the patience and willingness to discuss

the different topics with me. They include Ernest Yao, Kafana and Bibi Dem- bele, the late Moussa Kone, Dori Sidibe, Bamnean Sawadogo and Poniteon

Some in Banfora; and Sosthene and Justine Sore, Roger and Helene Niampa,

Issa Traore, Sayouba Compaore, Koungari Ouattara, Adama Barry, Nambalfo

Yao and Moussa Sawadogo in Sideradougou. In villages where I have carried

out fieldwork, 1 am particularly grateful to the families of El Hadj Sambo

Sidibe and Ali Sidibe in Djalakoro; of Ardjouma Yao, Siaka Yao and Bakary Sory in Tomodjan; of Brahima Kone and Drissa Yao in Koflande; and of Ma- madou Sidibe in Toumousseni. All thesepeople have devoted time andeffortto try to make me understand 'bits andpieces' of what life is about for people in

the Comoe Province.

I am indebted to my field assistants Elisabeth Malo, Daouda Berte and

Mariam Sako for theircapacity and willingness towork under demandingcon¬

ditions.

Since 1995 this work has been generously supported by the Swedish In¬

ternational Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). During the fieldwork in

1996 and onwards I have been institutionallysupported by the CentreNational

de la RechercheScientifique etTechnologique (CNRST) in Ouagadougou. I am

gratefultoMoustapha Gomgnimbou, Nayire Evariste Poda, Moussa Ouedraogo

and Louis Sawadogo. In addition, supportwith practicalitieshas been provided bymanypeople, particularlyMoussa and Helene Traore, and Issoufou and Sali

Sanou as wellas the Traore extendedfamily in Sweden and Burkina.

One important part of the present ethnography derives from fieldwork

carriedoutbetween 1988 and 1992 when I worked for the United Nations De¬

velopmentProgramme (UNDP) in the Forestry Office of the Ministry of Envi¬

ronment and Tourism in Banfora. I want to thank all the staff at the Forestry

Office in Banfora for collaboration, collegiality and friendship during my dif¬

ferentstaysin the province.

At the Department of CulturalAnthropologyand Ethnologyin Uppsala I

have benefitted greatly from the atmosphere of collegiality and therefore want

to thank all teachers, fellow doctoral candidates and administrative personnel.

13

(18)

My supervisor Jan Ovesen has generously shared his broad anthropological knowledge with me. He has encouraged me by professional advice, institu¬

tional supportandpersonal dedication. We have also been able to make inter¬

esting comparison thanks to Jan's research in Lobi rural communities in Burk¬

ina. I am deeply grateful to Bernhard Helander who has been an ongoing dis¬

cussion partner and critical reader since weformulated ourjoint research proj¬

ect in 1994. Thanks toBernhard'sown work in Somalia I have been able toget important theoretical and empirical insights by comparing local conflict resolu¬

tion processes. Moreover, Bernhard has done the tiresome typesetting of the

text. Anita Jacobson-Widding's many comprehensive comments on both meth¬

odologyand ethnographic specificshave been extremelyhelpful throughoutmy work. Similarly, Per Brandstrom's critical reading of the entire textin January 1998,substantially helpedmeto finalise the study. Hugh Beach has been adis¬

cussion partner since 1984, and I am grateful for his comments on draft chap¬

ters. Many fellow doctoral candidates have provided important inputs and have

commented on parts of the study. I particularly want to thank Lars Hagborg, Bjorn Lindgren, Mats Utas, Mike Barrett, Sverker Finnstrom and Chris Coul¬

ter-Calais.

Outside the Department ofCultural Anthropology and Ethnology some

colleagues have read and commented on specific chapters: Sigrun Helmfrid,

Mette Bovin, Per Lindskog, Wilhelm Ostberg and Paul Richards. Michele

Dacher has kindly helpedme to getaccess to unpublished manuscripts and the¬

ses. Thanks alsotomy Dyula teacher Solange BassingaandOla Bergqvist who

has drawn the maps.

This study has been coloured by my specific family ties with Burkina

Faso. My mother-in-law Fatoumata Kini and my father-in-law the late N'Pa

Dao and their children in Yorokoko in Bobo-Dioulasso have contributed by re¬

ceiving meinto the Marka jeli community in general and the Dao family from

Fobiri in particular. In Sweden my parents Ulf Erik and Helena Hagberg have provided a continuous moral, practical as well as financial support. They have

also supported me on a much more deeper level: by always trusting thediffer¬

ent 'projects' that I have undertaken. Thanksare alsoduetomybrother Anders Hagberg andmysister Elisabet Hagberg Hallhage and their respective families.

I dedicate this study to my beloved wife Minata Dao Hagberg and our wonderful children Yasmine Helena and Erik Ibrahim. I particularly want to thank all three of you for your love, patience and understanding during the

whole process that has led towards this book. Minatahas givenme so many in¬

sights into what life is about in western Burkina that I cannotpossibly appreci¬

ate enough her contributiontomy ownunderstanding of Burkinabe society. She

has also performed the hard and time-consuming work of transcribing all my

taped interviews. Andto Yasmine and Erik, "Dad is ready with his book now".

N b 'awfe!

(19)

1. Introduction

Over thepast 30yearsthere has been an increasing immigration of Fulbe agro-

pastoralists into the Comoe Province and otherparts ofsouthern BurkinaFaso.

Todaymany villages in the province host a Fulbe camp. Itis a commonly held opinion that this migratory movement towards the south is caused mainly by

recurrentdroughts and consequentland degradation in the central andnorthern

parts of the country which are the traditional Fulbe areas. Although the rela¬

tively permanent residence of Fulbe groups in the Comoe Province is a fairly

recentphenomenon, thefrequentpassageofFulbe cattle towards the south, and

the presence of Fulbegroups inthe region is nothingnew.

Most Fulbe families practise transhumant cattle herding supplemented by small-scale subsistence farming. They differ from the various local groups ofagriculturalists in theareanotonly intermsof subsistence economy,but also

with respect to factors like the use of space, religious affiliation and socio¬

political organisation. The Fulbe are thus strangers to the social and cultural

environment of the agriculturalists, but at the same time they become neigh¬

bours who reside on the fringes of the villages, and with whom the agricul¬

turalists engagein various social, economic and political relations.

The coexistence of various agricultural groups and agro-pastoral Fulbe

has becomeincreasingly problematic in the province. Most frequentreasons for dispute are Fulbe cattle causingcropdamage of farmers' fields. If this leads to quarrels, farmers may wound animals, and sometimes people. Farmers who

wound cattle argue that cattle have trespassed fields. Fulbe agro-pastoralists

hold that fields often are cleared on cattle-tracks and around water-courses.

Suchquarrelsmaydevelop intoaviolent conflictinvolvingentire communities,

or at worst, ethnic _groups. Since the 1980s, the Comoe Province has experi¬

encedtwo outbreaks of violence in which alarge numberof Karaboro agricul¬

turalists 'rebelled' and went out to kill any Fulbe they happened to encounter.

From an argument between two individuals on the border of a sorghum field,

tensions may escalate into a village quarrel and eventually develop into an armed, ethnicconflict. A dispute may escalate into violence, but it mayalso be

'cooled' down. The outcome depends to a large extent on how people try to handle the conflict situation. There are a wide range of actors, who not only

seek to settle a particular dispute, but also take advantage of it. Intervention

may serve socio-political, financial and other interests far beyond the actual dispute.

15

(20)

Disputes between groupsof farmers and Fulbeagro-pastoralists involve

manydifferent actors. In 1989 Iwas told by several informants aboutadispute

that had occurred between a Karaboro farmer and aFulbe agro-pastoralistina

village in Comoe Province. It startedas a quarrel between two individuals, but

soon escalated into a crisis that not only involved the whole village, but also neighbouring villages and the state administration in the provincial capital of

Banfora.

A Karaboro man (T) claimed thata Fulbeagro-pastoralist (S) had let his cattle

tocausecrop damage in T's vegetable garden. T demanded compensation, but

Srefused to compensate him [he didnotrecognise his fault?]. They startedto argue, and during the quarrel S was said to have brought up his knife. He

wounded T and bloodpouredon the Earth. The quarrel wasended atthis mo¬

ment,and thetwoantagonistswent totheir respective homesteads.

But the shedding of human blood on the Earth will offend the spirits, and it

was thus necessarytoask forgiveness by means ofa sacrifice to the spirits of

the Earth and the ancestors. This sacrifice was to be executed in the nameof the personthat caused the bloodshed (in thiscaseS). But S refusedto make the

sacrifice. Karaboro villagers then made it themselves because otherwise all people would be in danger.

The Karaboroarefirstcomersin thisvillage, upholding the position asMasters

of the Earth—that is, the eldest living male descendant on the agnatic line of

the first settler of the site is aKaraboro. The Karaboro thus made thesacrifice, butthey forbade S tocontinueto farm on the territoryof the village. And they

said that if S would insist and farm anyhow, he would die (spirits would kill him). The Administrative Representativeof the village, i.e. the one who isrec¬

ognised by thestate administration,wasduring that time called the delegue. He

was aKaraboro andsupported the decisiontohinder S from farming.

However, a former Karaboro village leader told S that the decision to forbid

him to farmwasjust a fake, a way tochase S from the village. He told S that

he could farm without any problem. S also contacted the state administration

and gave his version to some state agents in Banfora. Agents of the state ad¬

ministration then sentthe police to the village and arrested the delegue. They

took him to the provincial capital of Banfora. But many Karaboro villagers proceeded to Banfora and manifested their angeroutside prison. The delegue

wasreleased after threedays, and all returnedtothe village.

When Karaboro villagers realised that the former village leader had allowed S

to farm, they accused him as well as the state administration of having been

bribedby S. But the fact that the former village leader had allowed S tofarm

made himself rather than S responsible toward the spirits of the Earth and

hence the ancestors. The former Karaboro village leaderwas marginalised by

his fellow Karaboro villagers. Nobodywent to seehim. Aftera few weeks, he

fell sick and died. Onlyhis closest relatives participated in his burial. But S (the Fulbe agro-pastoralist) remained in the village, and at least some years later he still resided and farmed there.

This dispute was often discussed in neighbouring villages in the months to

come. Farmers saw it as a proof that the state administration had supported

Fulbe against farmers. During the heat of the dispute, aKaraboro informant of

the actual village clearly expressed that the legitimacy of the state administra¬

tionwasin question: "Ifanystate agent comes tothe village and wants towork

with _{us, we}willnotcollaborate".

This specific dispute presents the main actors involved in most dispute

settlements between farmers and agro-pastoralists in the Comoe Province:

(21)

farmers, agro-pastoralists, local government officials and Masters ofthe Earth.

It further demonstrates thataspecific dispute is likelyto be referredto in other

contexts; the dispute becomes part of the larger conflict of interests between

farmers and agro-pastoralists in the department, the province and the region.

Although these disputes which are related tolanded resources displaycommon features, each dispute is embedded in specific local contexts. Hence a dispute

may bounce back and forth between the specific claims for compensation of

crop damage and/or wounded cattle and the socio-political struggles related to underlying conflicts of interests. Most of these social actors seek to take ad¬

vantageof this bouncing back andforthbetweenlevels of conflict.

Local

Dispute Settlement

This is a study of the settlement of disputes between Karaboro agriculturalists

and Fulbeagro-pastoralists in the Comoe Province in Burkina Faso. It focuses

on ways in which different individuals and social groups handle disputes re¬

lated to landedresources.The aim is to understand how peopleact in such dis¬

putes through an analysis of principles and practices among four principal categoriesofactors: 1) Masters ofthe Earth, mostof whom belong tothe Tiefo

ethnic group in the main area of study (the Sideradougou Department), 2)

Karaboro agriculturalists, 3) Fulbe agro-pastoralists and 4) Focal Government

Officials. The specific relations between actors of different social categories in dispute settlementare important forunderstanding theways in whichconflict is defined, how it is managed and by what means reconciliation ofthe parties is sought.

A point of departure is my conviction that local dispute settlement

should beapproachedas asocial field in which different actions areundertaken

and interpreted on the one hand, and where socio-economic interests and cul¬

tural conceptions interact and sometimes clashonthe other. This places the lo¬

cus ofanalysis on inter-ethnic relations rather than on onesingle ethnic group.

But relations between Karaboro agriculturalists and Fulbe agro-pastoralists

should not only be analysed in terms of the boundary that defines the group (Barth 1969), but also in terms of the 'cultural stuff' that it encloses. To under¬

stand the social processes of dispute settlement we have to pay attention not only to inter-group relations of various groups but to intra-group relations as well.

This study seeks tounderstand the social fabric ofpeace and conflict in

a situation of social change. I startwith localpeople's own perceptions of dis¬

putes and violent conflicts in order to locate the handling of disputes in an

analytical framework that is informed by my ethnography. Various causes of

conflict are here primarilydealt with as entry-points to analyse 'what the con¬

flict is about' for different social actors. My research questions are therefore geared towards eliciting the nature of disputes/conflicts and the means and

mechanisms that exist tosettle/resolve them: How are disputes settled locally?

Where and by whom? How do people among the differentcategories of social

17

2Between_peaceandjustice

(22)

actors act to avoid conflict situations? If conflict situations emerge, what do

these actors do todefuse the conflict situations and avoid violence? If violence breaks out,how dopeopleact to stopit?

There are two main reasons to approach dispute settlement through multipleperspectives of the different parties indispute. Firstly, problems ofco¬

habitation between agriculturalists and agro-pastoralists are not only of aca¬

demic interest but also present important challenges to people living in the

Comoe Province. It is important formost actors to understand the social proc¬

esses that are articulated in dispute settlement. In March 1996 the weekly

newspaper Le Matin published an article in which the Comoe Province was said to prepare itself for an ethnic war, like that in Rwanda or Burundi.

Through illegal traffic of fire-arms, autochthonous peoples and Fulbe were re¬

ported to have startedan arms race against each other (Le Matin 21-27 March 1996:7). The second reason for multiple perspectives is that most modern an¬

thropological studies carried out in Burkina Faso (and to a large extent else¬

where in West Africa) focus on one single ethnic group (e.g. the Gouin, the

Turka, the Nuna, the Bobo, the Bwa), or on a family of groups (e.g. the Lobi branch). With some important

exceptions1,

few works putan analytical empha¬

sis on inter-ethnic relations. Yet I would argue that to understand central di¬

mensions of social life in the Comoe Province these relations need to be taken into account. Although social identities other than ethnicities are important (e.g. those based on religious belonging and locality), dispute settlement is a

specific social field in which inter-ethnic relations are articulated and rede¬

fined.

The articulation ofa socialidentity is situational, relational and contex¬

tual. It is, firstly, situational in the sense that it depends on the situation in

which social identity is expressed. Secondly, the articulation ofa socialidentity

is relational, because it relies on the relation to whom the _person identifies

him/herself.Thirdly, it is contextual in the sense that the context in which the

social identity is articulated is likely to be important. Whilst a man belongs to the Karaboro ethnic group, the peasant identitymay come to the fore in a case of crop damage. Similarly, whilst the identityofgraziers is advocated in village cooperatives (groupements d'eleveurs), the Fulbe identity of the members is officiallyplayed down.

Disputes occur between parties whose social identities are differently

articulated according to the situation, the relation and the context. Parties may thus be classified in different ways, but any classification should be handled

with great care, because a simplified, unreflected classification may easily be¬

come partof how the dispute is understood. One common classification is that

of graziers (eleveurs) versus farmers (cultivateurs). Whereas graziers practise

transhumance, farmers are relatively sedentary. Yet, most graziers also farm

and farmers keep domestic animals and practise shifting cultivation, implying

at least potentialmovements. The spatial dimension would classify the parties

1Somerecentworks focusonthe relational and dialecticalaspectsof identity construction in various partsof West Africa (Amselle 1990; Amselle & M'Bokolo 1985; Bierschenk &LeMeur 1997; Burn- ham 1996; deBruijn &vanDijk 1997b; Launay 1982).

(23)

as sedentary and transhumance groups. Transhumance is often advanced as a main cause of conflict by government officials; according to them transhu-

mants should be transformed intosedentary cattle ranchers.

Another classification is that of herders (bergers) versus farmers, high¬

lighting thefunctions around which disputesoccur. Yet, even iftheherder may be responsible for herds destroying crops in a field, he is not necessarily the

herd-owner. The herd-owner is often held responsible for the herder's badcon¬

duct or error, which could eventually lead to a break ofthe herder's contract.

Herders are keyactors, but are,at least nottoday in BurkinaFaso,officially de¬

fined as main actors in dispute settlement. A related classification is that of agro-pastoralists versus agriculturalists, often used in policy documents and consultancy reports. But it could be argued that both groups are agro-

pastoralists; mostagriculturalists have,or aspiretohave, cattle.

Then there is the ethnically defined classification. The agriculturalists belong to one ethnic group, the Karaboro, whereas graziers are Fulbe. The

Karaboro, who consider themselves to belong to the large group of Senufo

peoples2,

represent together with otheragricultural groups a completely differ¬

ent socio-cultural reality than Fulbe communities. Karaboro often find Fulbe

arrogantand uselabels as traitors andfaux types todescribe them. Farmers of¬

ten tend to accuse Fulbe for bribing government officials; thestate administra¬

tion is said to support the Fulbe. In all instances of life, the Fulbe emphasise,

on the other hand, their difference compared to Haabe (sing. Kaado). This is a Fulfuldetermgenerally usedto describenon-Fulbe Blacks, i.e. all the other Af¬

ricans except the Tuaregs, Moors and Arabs (see Riesman 1974:119). Fulbe agro-pastoralists tend tosee the government of Burkina Faso as Haabe; itsup¬

portsthe farmers and marginalise the ideal Fulbe pastoral wayof life. As I will

demonstrate, the Karaboro and the Fulbe employ a wide range of ethnic-

stereotypes to represent the othergroup.

A final classification concerns the idea of origin, of being first. Here

'autochthonous' populations regard themselves as firstcomers, but see theirpo¬

sition threatened by the arrival of latecomers as the Fulbe and the Mossi. The

distinction between autochthonous firstcomers and latecoming strangers is highly relative. Karaboro farmers see themselves as autochthonous to the province, but in the Sideradougou Department they are latecomers; the Tiefo

are heldtobe firstcomers there. Thus,both Karaboroand Fulbeare latecomers,

or accordingtolocal idioms 'strangers'.

In this study I have generally chosen to label the main groups Fulbe agro-pastoralists and Karaboro agriculturalists. The advantage is that these

labels recognise both economic and ethnic dimensions. These dimensions are interlinked; while Fulbe have ^a strong pastoralist ethos, Karaboro are proud

2The very name 'Senufo' isaDyula phrase, siena fo, 'to speak Sienafr]' (Launay 1992). Sienar is the language family ofawiderange ofgroups in Mali, Burkina Faso and the Ivory Coast. For instance,

some main Senufo groupsin Burkina Faso call themselves the Tagwa and the Nanergue, but consider themselves₃ tobe Senufo(seealso chapter 4).

Iusetheterm 'autochthonous' instead of'indigenous' or'native' ^astoindicate the criteria for be¬

longingtoland; thetermautochthonous originates from the Greek word khtdn (land, earth).

19

(24)

food growers. Whenappropriate, however,I shall usethe emic labels employed by theactors themselves.

On another level of analysis, the labelling of disputing parties depends

upon the definition of the conflict/dispute. Definitions of 'what the conflict is

about'—i.e. the ways in which a dispute is defined by different actors—have implications for how it is settled. Struggles over definitions are carried out by parties, and by various actors external to the setting. For instance, in develop¬

ment discourse relationships between conflict and environmental stress are

highlighted, but the nature of such relationships cannot be regarded as clear-

cut.The definition of 'what the conflict is about' is partoftheconflict, because

ifseen as a 'land conflict' by external actors,butas aculturaldivide or astrug¬

gle for political strength byconflicting parties, the definition oftheconflict has definitely a direct implication for the ways by which it is settled. Ifa herding

group is striving for political influence over a farming group, the state's de¬

limitation of pastoral zones could be a partial solution for them, but farmers

wouldseeitas asocio-political discrimination.

Tostudy local dispute settlementwethereforeneed torejectany attempt

tocircumscribe 'resource conflict' as something entirelydifferent from 'ethnic rivalry' or 'political struggle'. Various definitions may provide entry-points for analysing discourses of conflicts, but do not explain 'what the conflict is

about'. How are various actions interpreted? What are the actors' respective perceptionsofthe other party? How aredifferent definitions handled by various

actors? Such questions remain important for the understanding of how actors' position themselves in conflict. In this study, I use dispute as the concrete manifestation ofadisagreement betweenatleast twoparties insideor outsidea court of state law. I employ conflict in a more general sense for describing a

struggleovervalues and claimsto status, powerandscarce resources. Conflict

may therefore refer both to an open and explicit conflict situation, and to an

underlying conflict of interests. The dispute could merely be regarded as the

articulation of a conflict of interests in a concrete disagreement between two parties. But if the dispute escalates and turns into violence far away from the

actual dispute setting in the village, I here refertoitas outbreaks ofviolence or violent conflict. The point is that in such situations the actual dispute and its

settlement become issues of secondary importance. People then tend to forget

what hadprovoked the dispute in the firstplace.

In any dispute settlement between Karaboro agriculturalists and Fulbe agro-pastoralists, there is a wide range of actors that become more or less in¬

volved. Forinstance, a caseof_crop damage thatisbrought tothe Departmental

Court in Sideradougou directly involve atleast 10 persons: the field-owner, the

herder, the herd-owner, the Village Administrative Representative, the Agri¬

culture Extension Worker, the Prefet, the Police and/or Gendarmerie, and the

members of the Court. If the dispute is not settled—e.g. the herd-owner does

not turnup, refuses topay, ordenies that his cattle have causedcrop damage—

actors external to the local setting of the Sideradougou Department may be¬

come involved. Such external actors may be politicians eager to maintain and gainsupport in their electoral constituencies. Externalactors may also besocio-

(25)

political leaders whose legitimacy is grounded eitheron traditional oron mod¬

ern spheres of life, or on both. Other external actors are those in charge within

stateadministration,_e.g.PoliceorGendarmerie inoutbreaks of violence or rep¬

resentatives of different line ministries. With some notable exceptions, e.g. the president of the hunting organisation and the Fulbe chief in Bobo-Dioulasso,

such external actors are likely to be perceived as 'intellectuals', a label that

echoes the colonialevolues4 It refers to people who have attended school and

maintain more or less strong attachments to state administration. They may

originate from the village, but have 'made the bench' (i.e. gone to school) and

are working for the state or in the private sector. Sometimes the intellectuals

support their village in various ways through the means ofa formal organisa¬

tion (Association des Ressortissants). it is not uncommon that intellectuals

from a village may be mobilised by political parties to rally political cam¬

paigns. Here theterm external actors is a descriptive rather than an analytical

label, becausemost actors involved havemore orless strong local connections.

However, external actors are distinguished from localactorsin that they arenot immediately involved in disputes or stake-holders in the conflict over landed

resources. Local actors refer to those actors that reside more or less perma¬

nently in the Sideradougou Department. Local government officials constitute

ananomalouscategorybetween localand externalactorsas actorsin-between.

The distinction betweenlocal and external actorshighlights the fact that although disputes are locally embedded, they mobilise social networks that

transgress the local setting. Information about events and actions circulate in¬

tensely both locally and regionally. Interpretations of such information are al¬

mostas important as actualeventsand actions. Such interpretations are usedas arguments in specific disputes and as incentives for mobilisation ofresources, whether financial or political. The politico-administrative organisation of the

modern state further indicate the need of considering seriously encounters of

different societal levels, or 'interfaces' (Long 1989). A dispute is a disagree¬

ment between two parties in a specific setting, but it is also the localarticula¬

tion ofa conflict ofinterests. Attempts to settle disputes, e.g. crop damage, do

not necessarily seek to approach the underlying conflict of interests, e.g. com¬

petitionover scarce resources. Similarly, local 'resolutions' ofaconflict do not always face the 'problems' that are perceived by actors external to the local setting.

Analytical Framework

In this section I shall first discuss the analytical framework which will be used

to structure the ethnography, and then briefly the methodological strategy to

4The term evolueswaswidely used in French colonial administrationto oppose those described as primitifs. For instance, the Dyula traderswerethe evolues and the Gouin farmers the primitifs(Dacher

& Lallemand 1992:9). Such oppositionalclassifications ofpeople were commoninboth French and

British coloniallegislation. Therewasadivisionbetween the citizen (citoyen)—linkedtothetown, to Western education andgranted civil rights—and the subject (sujet), whowasattachedtothecountrysi¬

de and submittedtoforms of indirect rule(Mamdani1996:17).

21

(26)

render this framework operational. In the subsequent section I shall reflect

upon the different fieldwork contexts within which I have worked in the Co-

moe Province. Toreiterate, the overall aim of this study is to understand how people act, interpret and conceive dispute settlements between Karaboro agri¬

culturalists and Fulbe agro-pastoralists both in specific disputes and in under¬

lying conflicts of interests. In particular, the interplay between principles and practices withinand between four main categories ofactors—Tiefo Masters of

the Earth, Karaboro agriculturalists, Fulbe agro-pastoralists and Local Gov¬

ernmentOfficials—provides alocusof analysis.

The analytical framework which will be used to structure the ethno¬

graphic account of dispute settlement in the Comoe Province is what I label a social field of 'relations' and 'rights'. Theconcepts 'relations' and 'rights' are

groundedonstatementsoften made by different actorsin the province. The im¬

portance of relationsare repeatedly pronounced by people in anykind of situa¬

tion. To claim the rights is to disrupt the social relation and instead refer to higher moral or legal principles. In this vein, rights are situated outside rela¬

tions, and becomepronounced when relationsarethreatened.

The conceptof relations here referstothe Burkinabe French conceptfor key social relations, including relations between kin, friends, neighbours, ^or

any kind of social relation born from daily interaction. Tobe human isto culti¬

vate relations; skilful cultivation is seen as an asset.For those standing outside

aspecific social relation, relations may be seen as leading to unfair settlement

ofadispute. Even though the conceptof relations is hard toexpress in Dyula,

all actors—even those that do not speak French—would agree that relations

may be advantageous in dispute settlement. Three possible Dyula expressions

of the concept relations seem to prevail: 1) o ce kadi, i.e. it is good between

them [two persons]; 2) o beni lo, i.e. they understand each other; and 3)

mogoya b'a ra, i.e. he has the way of people, of 'peopleness' [he is nice and

social with people]. While the first twoexpressions are merely descriptions of

the social relation between two persons, the third one refers to the capacity or the skill ofapersonto create andmaintain good relations with people. But, as I

will demonstrate, relations ^areinherently ambiguous; whatisseen as sociability by one person may be understoodas corruption by another. Ideologically, rela¬

tions are defended as means to promote 'peace' (here in Dyula) and harmony.

The concept of relations therefore summarises publicly stated ambitions for

peace, and refers tothe mobilisation, useand perception of social relations for handling disputes, e.g. neighbourhood, kinship, friendship. The recourse tore¬

lations in dispute settlement translates notions of maintaining or restoring

peace.

The concept of rights—droits in French but difficult to express in Dyula—refers toperceivedor establishedclaims attachedto orappropriated by

an actor. The perceived right to act in a specific way is often defended. Here rights may be legal, but they may also merely be loaded with moral and sym¬

bolic value. For instance, the principle of precedence implies that firstcomers

haverights overlatercomers, and that latercomershave rightsoverlatestcomers (Kopytoff 1987). Rightsare claimedin the social processesinvolved in dispute

Between Peace and Justice: Dispute Settlement between Karaboro Agriculturalists and Fulbe Agro-Pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Between Peace and Justice

Dispute Settlement between

Karaboro Agriculturalists and

Fulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Sten Hagberg

Hagberg

Dispute Settlement between Karaboro Agriculturalists

Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Between Peace and Justice

Dispute Settlement between

Karaboro Agriculturalists and

Fulbe Agro-pastoralists in Burkina Faso

Hagberg

Contents

Lists

f Illustrations

Figures

Maps

A Note

Or

Preface

1. Introduction

Dispute Settlement

exceptions1,

peoples2,

Analytical Framework