THE SETTING OF THE CHOTIARI RESERVOIR: LOW SUCCESS IN TERMS OF WATER STORAGE BUT BIG ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN IMPACTS

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Dynamics of conflict analysis

In general, issues are different from grassroots to national level, but it is crucial to identify appropriate focus on conflict analysis. Moreover, conflicts are not static situations, some conflicts seem to be straightforward and easy to deal with, while the others not (Swanström and Weissmann, 2005). Similarly, it will become more complicated when any other party tells the story of its side, which may create difficulties in first party’s interpretations, and it becomes difficult to judge whether, who is right or who is wrong? Unfortunately, such misleading and deceptive conducts push the actual situation too far from mediation.
However, the opportunity windows can be identified by the help of understanding dynamics of conflict concepts, through which we can assess different possible developments and think through appropriate responses. Conflict analysis occupies an important place in social science literature (Caron and Torre, 2006) and is subjected to a systematic study of the causes, actors, conflict profile and its dynamics. In this regard it is important to understand the conflict concept (see figure 3), its various components, situations of actors evolved and their perceptions, to move towards integration of these perceptions for further analytical treatments.

Land use conflict identification

Conflicts always vary in terms of their legal, political and institutional framework, economic constraints and pressures, social structure, stakeholder’s interest, environmental situation, history behind the conflict (Jones et al., 2005) and for their geographical location. Land use conflicts may also be of different types according to the involvement of stakeholders and their temporal and spatial scale: their spatial and social concern may vary related to the involvement of local actors and to their ability to recruit new participants or supporters in the upcoming stages. Broadly speaking, the conflicts can be compound and complex, but they can be categorized as; the conflicts related to personal differences or preferences with small individual actions (interpersonal conflicts) and the conflicts related to distribution of power among groups (structural conflicts), which are strongly linked to public decisions with a great social impact (Hirschman, 1970).
The interpersonal conflict is the situation in which actors are experiencing difficulty in using the same resource or working with each other. Such types of conflicts usually occur due to incompatibility in personal needs or goals, with small and of a light duration. On the other hand, the structural conflict is output of tensions, which arises when groups began competing for scarce resources or concerning great public decisions (Huggins et al., 2005).
The theory of structural conflict has its own usefulness because it provides a conceivable explanation for a large agglomeration of economic, social, and politic vectors that influences groups, which eventually be clashed in conflict (Carle and Ross, 2006). For example, see table 1, in which relations between structural conflicts related to land use conflicts are highlighted.

Methodological considerations

To deal with the issues and to explore land use conflict incidences, the data were collected through various secondary sources. In order to extract true picture of the tension and conflict situations with their causes and consequences, the information was gathered through national and international dailies of the respected countries. Although, this data collection technique is rarely applied (Torre et al., 2010; Awakul and Ogunlana, 2002), but in land use conflict analysis it is an imperative source to understand public voices on pre, during and post conflict situation. In fact, information on conflicts of land use is very sensitive, thus during analysis of daily press, an important care has been taken to avoid unreliable information. Therefore, in order to compare the originality and reliability of the facts (McCarthy et al., 1996) we have also collected information through published material from various public and private, national and international organizations.

Descriptive evidences

In this subsection we are highlighting the incidences of conflicts on land use in developing countries. Unfortunately, large number of displacements have been recognized due to some blemished projects in Pakistan, where water and power development authority (WAPDA) has constructed left bank outfall drain (LBOD) and right bank outfall drain (RBOD), which are located on right and left side of Indus River. The main aim of these projects were to drain out agricultural effluents in Arabian Sea from various districts of Sindh province, but they have created frustrations in rural masses (see box 1) rather than the prosperity.

Resolution and prevention strategy of land use conflicts

In order to define or identify successful resolution of conflicts and implementation of preventive measures, it is important to be aware of their concepts (Burton, 1993) and of the different existing types, otherwise some inherent characteristics may create difficulties (Mann and Jeanneaux, 2009) while dealing with. Conflict resolution is defined as a social situation where the conflict parties may agree voluntarily to resolve their discrepancies on land use and to live peacefully (Wallensteen, 2007). As suggested by Nawaz and Sattar (2008) that resolution can only be possible by presentation of the information in a systematic manner that can permit the consideration of the conflict as a whole, rather than as a collection of discrete facts.
Fundamentally, conflict prevention is defined as a range of actions or a set of instruments undertaken by an organization to prevent a potential tension, before it turns into a conflict or violence (Bercivitch and Jackson, 2009; Clément, 1997). The term conflict prevention is not only referred to an action undertaken to reduce future tensions, but also includes short term responses and long term engagement towards the outbreak or reoccurrence of any conflict at any piece of land due to its economic, social cultural or religious uses (Daniel, 2010). Moreover, Swanström and Weissmann (2005) have defined that any measurement tool, which strengthens the capacity of concerned actors to act structurally and to reduce the possibility of disagreements, will prevent the conflicts. Conclusively, land use conflict prevention is a tool to undertake for reduction of future tensions and to prevent the eruption of conflicts from the region, beyond short term actions, which includes the notion of long-term engagement.
Regardless of whether it is defined broadly or narrowly, it is essential to develop categories of guidelines in order to provide more accurate and practical measures towards conflict prevention over the use of natural resources. For example, to intervene for support; to promote culture of justice, good governance towards human and property rights with their ownership protections (Rooij, 2007), to uphold the rule of law and respect pride of inhabitants (Schlager and Ostrom, 1992) and to promote socio-economic development before the hostilities of land use conflicts. According to Wehrmann (2008), the prevention from land use conflicts can be achieved only by a combination of correcting institutional weaknesses and introducing good governance.

Land use conflict resolution strategies in the developing countries: some useful tools

Conflict occurs in many different spheres -geographic, economic, political, and/or social-between individuals, groups or states, and at different levels from the personal to the global. In fact, conflicts are mostly resolved by participatory compensatory strategies or bilateral arrangements (Rauschmayer and Wittmer, 2006). This is obvious that neither all strategies are always suitable for resolution of all types of conflicts, nor conflicts can always be resolved with the use of a single resolution strategy (Henle et al., 2003).
Consequently, in suppressed societies6 of developing nations, the political leaders are often provocative and manipulative (Nauman, 2003). While their interests are to use society’s land resources by misused power, which is the reflection of accumulated antagonism to the society (Bredariol and Magrini, 2003). Thus, the person in position of power is motivated largely by their own selfish interests (Eitzen and Zinn, 1990), i.e., powerful belongs to a group or categories of people that include high ranking politicians, civil servants, the military, the police, companies, rich and influential individuals or groups. However, the conflict related to the gap between powerful land predators and powerless small land owners is the result of weak land tenure security. Such conflicts teach about the relationship between governance, legal institutions and local power configurations. Therefore, the references to their resolution should mainly be drawn on political, anthropological and ethnical analysis of the dispute.
On the basis of available information on current land use conflicts prevailing in the developing world, we can begin to determine the causes and consequences of land use conflict (by conflict tree approach) and relationship between conflict actors (by conflict map approach) to design resolution strategies that may have a higher probability of success.

The two dimensions of land use conflict prevention

Normally, land use conflict prevention has two dimensions (Swanström and Weissmann, 2005; Ackermann, 2003), which consist of operational prevention, i.e., immediate measures applicable in the face of crisis, and structural prevention, i.e., measures to ensure that crises do not arise in the first place or if they do that they do not repeat. Similarly, these two main dimensions can further be distinguished as:
 operational or direct conflict prevention that measures to address the immediate crisis or tension. For example, sending a diplomatic mission to mediate between actors, by using economic tools such as; counseling for mutual understanding towards resource use, compensations of losses and demobilizing the antagonism among actors (Jones et al., 2005).
 structural prevention or root-cause prevention addresses the basic causes of the conflict on which the conflict can be structurally prevented by promotion of rules of laws and the development in the region, thus a broad-based economic growth could also be achieved (Swanström and Weissmann, 2005). For example: promoting democratic governance so that opposing actors may state their views without any fear, resolving differences through cooperative dialogues or ensuring legislation should not discriminate against one sector of the society (Jakobsen and Thruelsen, 2009).
Thus, the goals are the same no matter conflict is prevented through operational or structural method. As for as the cases of land use conflicts in developing countries are concerned, at first the operational or direct methods would be applied to control over the sudden violence and vehemence before their maturity, where structural method should not be ignored. These two methods are radically different, where one is focusing on short-term targeted approaches, while the other requires a longer-term and more comprehensive approach.

Enhancing economic and natural resource development

Economic development and integration may be an effective conflict preventive tool, to the extent it makes wealthier regions and helps to build stronger institutions, because these approaches consider both the interests of self as well as the interests of others (Owen et al., 2000). Perhaps, the development efforts can significantly contribute to conflict prevention, particularly if they are implemented in a conflict-sensitive manner. Because any decisions made beyond the conflict sensitivity will lead to deep understanding of the conflict dynamics, which will further potentially contribute in its factual prevention (Woodrow and Diana, 2009).
In addition to planning for a useful land use conflict preventive actions in any region, it is imperative to develop assumptions for flawed decisions during project effectuation, which will help in setting ground for consensus (Owen et al., 2000). The natural environmental conditions and cultural development processes determine the spatial distribution of land and at which the intensity of agriculture and environment has been influenced by human activity. The reasons behind the actual delimitation of the land use conflicts and public policy failures are manifold: for instance, high value is given to other than agricultural sectors for economic, social, and cultural reasons or conversely, the lack of economic interest that was attributed to their use in the past (Daniel and Perraud, 2009).
Land use conflict prevention reflects that if once the potential cause of conflict has been identified that can facilitate to analyze negative reinforcing cycles in different uses of land and which will also help to understand the dynamics of future conflict preventive measures by window opportunities of current conflict trends. Therefore, there are some precise assumptions for development (see table 2) on the basis of public voices published in regional press (quoted in boxes 1-5) on currently prevailing conflicts of land use in developing countries.

Table of contents :

PART I LAND USE CONFLICTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: RESOLUTION AND PREVENTION STRATEGIES
INTRODUCTION
I. TODAY’S LAND USE CONFLICTS IN DEVELOPING WORLD
I.1. Defining tensions and conflicts
I.1.1. Dynamics of conflict analysis
I.2. Defining land use conflicts
I.2.1. Land use conflict identification
I.3. Land use conflicts in developing countries: main features
I.3.1. Research questions and hypothesis
I.3.2. Methodological considerations
I.3.3. Descriptive evidences
I.3.4. Land use conflict features in the light of regional press
II. THE COMMON APPROACHES OF CONFLICTS: RESOLUTION AND PREVENTION
II.1. Resolution and prevention strategy of land use conflicts
II.2. Land use conflict resolution strategies in the developing countries: some useful tools
II.2.1. Conflict tree
II.2.2. Conflict map
II.3. Conflict preventive measures in developing countries
II.3.1. The two dimensions of land use conflict prevention
II.3.2. Enhancing economic and natural resource development
III. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
PART II FLAWED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH NEGATIVE SOCIO ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: THE CASE OF THE CHOTIARI RESERVOIR IN SINDH PROVINCE, PAKISTAN *
INTRODUCTION
I. BRIEF SKETCH OF THE STUDY AREA AND LAND DISTRIBUTION
I.1. Characteristics of the study area
I.2. Land use distribution
II. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
II.1. Population distribution
II.2. Level of education among local settlers
II.3. Economic activities, income sources and livelihood
III. THE SETTING OF THE CHOTIARI RESERVOIR: LOW SUCCESS IN TERMS OF WATER STORAGE BUT BIG ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN IMPACTS
III.1. The role played by national and international agencies
III.2. The contrasted and deceptive impacts of flooding
III.3. Affected communities
III.4. Environmental devaluation
IV. THE CONFLICTS LINKED WITH THE CHOTIARI PROJECT: ROOT CAUSES AND MANIFESTATIONS
IV.1. Conflict causes generated by inappropriate behaviors of public authorities .
IV.1.1. Compensation and resettlement issues
IV.1.2. Environmental and ecological issues
IV.2. Controversies and oppositions
IV.2.1. The arguments and the complaints
IVI.2.2. The action of community based organizations
V. GOVERNANCE AND DECENTRALIZATION
V.1. Roles, responsibilities and effectiveness
VI. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
PART III SOCIAL NETWORK LEGITIMACY AND PROPERTY RIGHT LOOPHOLES: EVIDENCES FROM AN INFRASTRUCTURAL WATER PROJECT IN PAKISTAN
INTRODUCTION
I. OUTLINE OF THE CASE STUDY AREA AND ACTORS INVOLVED
II.METHODS: DATA COLLECTION
III. FINDINGS
III.1. Principle controversies
III.2. Consequences of Chotiari reservoir project
IV. THE NETWORK DYNAMICS OF STAKEHOLDERS
IV.1. Social networks of local actors
IV.2. Actors with favor and opposition
IV.3. Factors created conflicts in Chotiari project
V. THE QUESTION OF PROPERTY IN LAND USE CONFLICTS
V.1. Land use under weak property regime
V.2. Property right loopholes and institutional inconsistencies: case study
VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
PART IV INEFFICIENT MULTILEVEL-GOVERNANCE AND SOCIO-SPATIAL DISREGARDS A PROXIMITY ANALYSIS: EVIDENCES, EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DRAWN FROM THE EXAMPLE OF CHOTIARI RESERVOIR IN PAKISTAN
INTRODUCTION
I. STUDY BACKGROUND AND DATA COLLECTION
I.1. Case study description
I.2. Data collection and analyses
II. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
II.1. Chotiari reservoir project: decision and superposition
II.2. Actors network and governance structure
II.2.1. Community to regional
II.2.2. Regional to international
II.3. International rules and laws: obligations and violations
III. AN ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF PROXIMITY DYNAMICS
III.1. Basic findings
III.1.1. Geographical proximity
III.1.2. Organized Proximity
III.2. Proximity Dynamics in the case of Chotiari reservoir
III.2.1. Geographical proximity
III.2.2. Organized proximity
IV. LAND USE CONFLICT PREVENTION RECOMMENDATIONS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
IV.1. Land use conflict resolution measures: case study
IV.1.1. Consultation and follow-up procedure
IV.1.2. Expropriation, compensation and accountability
IV.1.3. Different possible land use options other than reservoir
IV.2. Land use conflict prevention recommendation for infrastructural projects in developing countries
IV.2.1. How to mobilize virtuous proximities and to avoid negative effects
IV.2.2. Technical tools and devices
V. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
GENERAL CONCLUSION
REFERENCES

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT