–
Government policies and biased local governance systems: pastoralists under-represented
There is meagre representation by pastoralist and specifically the Fulani at the level of the policy-making institutions in Burkina Faso. Pastoralists’ political representation is weak or non-existent. In the past, this under-representation and marginalisation of pastoralist communities led to ill-informed and poorly designed resource governance as well as pastoral development programmes – often with a strong sedentary focus – by the Burkinabe government and international development agencies.
–
Unequal access to pastoral resources
Pastoralists in Burkina Faso compete with farmers on an unequal playing field regarding access to land and resources, since policies and attitudes affecting pastoral resources have been largely exclusionary. While national laws recognise pastoral zones and the importance of pastoral mobility, they are rarely enforced at the local level, leading to the steady expansion of the agricultural frontier into pasturelands. The discrepancy between national law and local implementation and enforcement to protect pastoralists’ access rights translates into customary systems that similarly are to the detriment of pastoralists. While both farmers and pastoralists hold grievances regarding access to natural resources and land, farmers are mostly satisfied with the current distribution of resources while pastoralists feel overwhelmingly dissatisfied.
–
Pastoral livelihoods under stress
Pastoralists face different challenges to their livelihoods, driven by a structural change to the economic modes of production. From an economic perspective, pastoralists face many barriers hampering their integration in a sector that is being pushed towards becoming increasingly commercially oriented. Even though the market is growing and is powered by an increasing demand for meat in the region, so far pastoralists have not been the ones to benefit from regional integration efforts. This new economic reality entails changes to the local political economy which is increasingly to the detriment of pastoralists. Amongst many – largely Mossi – leaders, there is a persistent perception that pastoralism is an archaic way of life that at best should become sedentary (e.g., through intensive ranching systems) in order to meet market demands. However, this overlooks the fact that the production method of pastoralism is considerably more suitable for the challenges of global warming and environmental conservation than sedentary production.
Mobility as a key resilience and adaptation mechanism is not only essential for the quality of animal production but is also part and parcel of pastoralist production more generally. Currently, cattle movements are being constrained due to internal processes of farmland encroachment, the closure of longstanding transhumant and grazing trails and corridors and increasing security concerns. While different coping mechanisms have proved this system’s resilience, its viability in the face of current conflict dynamics is uncertain, which might have serious repercussions for the livestock sector. Additionally, when rendered immobile, the increased and more permanent cohabitation of pastoralists and farmers will affect the playing field of resource governance at the local level, potentially creating or increasing intercommunal tensions.
–
Exclusionary governance practices in villages and conflict: the pastoral trap
Shattered intercommunal trust and social cohesion present opportunities for extremist groups to tap into these local grievances in order to exploit deepening social divisions between pastoralists and other groups. VEOs exploit the stigmatization of pastoralists to spur recruitment and are deliberately targeting local chiefs, taking out local sources of authority and governance in an attempt to further stoke intercommunal violence. They use the state’s weakness in governing and providing justice to their advantage and exploit rural tensions, for example feelings of injustice linked to land disputes. They play into pastoralists’ financial and socio-political grievances to recruit militants, specifically targeting their sermons at those deprived of access to water, land or pastures. Other than promising financial incentives to join their ranks, VEOs also tap into feelings of revenge amongst those that have been harassed or attacked by state forces and self-defence groups.
The result is a power vacuum and the breakdown of local conflict resolution mechanisms, which are filled in by vigilante groups – often with an ethnic base – such as the Koglweogo. This group aims to fill the vacuum left by the state in protecting the people, animals, and the natural resources of their local community. They increasingly assume powers that used to be under state control, such as taxation, policing and justice, thereby undermining the state and traditional authorities. Koglweogo militias have taken law enforcement and justice into their own hands in several parts of Burkina Faso. By taking on police and security prerogatives, they have either wilfully or unwittingly become accomplices in settling scores, often concerning land disputes which have particularly been to the detriment of the Fulani community who they perceive as extremists and it is this community that has become their primary target.
Taking a militarized approach, national security forces have become more active in addressing conflicts involving pastoralists. So far, the response by the state has fallen short and indeed contributed to the deterioration of the security situation. Security forces have been accused of extorting herders and disputes often result in excessive fines or punishment. Seen by many as hostile troops that are not there to protect the population, this has led to pastoralists increasingly relying on extra-legal actors such as the Rouga to settle disputes, sometimes violently. Additionally, the state’s recent call for volunteers to fight VEOs will potentially amplify this vicious cycle of violence, since it exercises limited control over such self-defence groups and might further push the groups that are targeted into the arms of extremist groups. This escalating security situation increasingly threatens the livelihoods of local communities, reinforces their need for protection, and further endangers social cohesion.
