ABSTRACT
Violent and protracted conflicts, such as those that affected Mozambique and Angola (both
countries with a Lusophone colonial heritage), have had severe consequences in terms of
wartime dislocation and destruction, especially in rural areas. Land issues per se are not
endogenously conflictive, but in post-conflict settings, the scramble for access to the assets
necessary to (re-)establish livelihoods for large numbers of people, as well as the pursuit of
land access by large-scale commercial interests who capitalise on a fluid land tenure
situation to acquire resources, may occur.
A nuanced and comparative study of Mozambique and Angola is undertaken that explores
the relationship between violence, resources and the environment. It asks two questions: i)
What accounts for the relationship between violence (evidenced in both brutal physical acts,
threats and increasing vulnerabilities) and land as a resource? ii) Are there lessons to be
learnt from these findings that are particular to countries emerging from protracted civil
wars? The thesis explores the changing discourses around the concepts of human security
and environmental security, and the pressing land issues confronting the African continent. It
highlights the complexity of issues – political, social and economic – and the necessity for a
theoretical shift away from the popular approaches towards alternative ways of
understanding the connections between the environment, violence and resources. It examines
the specific dynamics of a post-conflict environment, an area that has received little
attention, despite its potential for playing a significant role in ensuring broad-based
development and in peace-building. A modified livelihoods framework is also used to
analyse land issues on the basis that land is an element of a wider livelihoods approach with
a focus on poverty alleviation and wealth creation.
Findings mirror those of other international researchers who have found that conflicts over
land often have less to do with resource scarcity, but that “violence is more likely when
resources are in great abundance or have great economic and strategic value” (Peluso and
Watts, 2001: 5). Furthermore, findings support the calls for taking a more inclusive concept
of violence and non-violence that recognises that the outward manifestation of disputes may
not be violence in the form of civil war, but social disruptions (Liotta, 2005). The value of a
post-structuralist political ecology for analysing these various connections is demonstrated in
the research findings. It is one which does not search for ‘environmental triggers’ of violent
conflicts, but looks at the reciprocal relationship between nature and humans. Both countries
are confronting many of the land issues that are common to Africa and which suggest an
important new phase in the politics of land. In Angola land tenure and shelter are now
insecure for many in both rural and urban areas, while in both countries there is mounting
competition and conflict over land and landed resources. There are increasing threats of
exclusionary practices and land grabs, but also the more subtle, ‘non-traditional’ security
threats of the destruction and damage to livelihoods, of deepening impoverishment, evident
in "creeping vulnerabilities”. The findings of the research confirm that in dealing with both
equity and efficiency issues, and environmental sustainability and political stability, land
policies need to be well integrated into wider social, economic and environmental planning –
at various levels, local to global – to strengthen sustainable security.
vi
Land conflicts are generally contained as local-level disputes, often camouflaged by
government or suppressed. While conflict theory points to apparent triggers – differential
impacts and political mobilisation – it must be acknowledged that these tensions are more
often than not politically sustainable, as leaders justify overriding the interests of the poor in
the interests of growth. Furthermore, peace is not the default mode of society: conflicts are at
times an integral part of the transformation of land tenures systems and not necessarily
destructive in themselves. Concerns need to focus, rather, on those cases where inequity and
violence are politically sustainable, and what this means for human security. It is this issue
that is recommended for further research.
“In contrast to thinking about violent conflict, a human-centred
conceptualisation of environmental security asserts the need for
cooperation and inclusion to manage the environment for the
equal benefit of all people and future generations” (Barnett,
2001: 128).
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:wits/oai:wiredspace.wits.ac.za:10539/6953 |
| Date | 19 May 2009 |
| Creators | Clover, Jeanette Lee |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds