Sunday 11 December 2016

Case study: Burkina Faso

Hey guys,

after introducing you to different aspects about this whole topic, I would like to focus on a case study from Burkina Faso. It is about a dam, which has been built in the 1990's, and I want to link it to some of my earlier posts.

The Moussodougou dam (also known as Comoé dam) is a dam on the Comoé river in Moussodougou, Burkina Faso. The dam was built in 1991 and has a capacity of 35,000,000 cubic metres (BAZIN et al. 2011:68). Many different groups used the water of the river before the dam was built and the largest ones were the SN-SOSUCO (sugar production), rice growers, market gardeners, and fruit tree owners. 46 per cent of the sugar consumed in Burkina Faso is nowadays produced in this area, so it is (and was) a very important economic region for Burkina Faso (BAZIN et al. 2011: 68). But there were already some problems even before the dam was built. Due to the production of sugar and the power of SN-SOSUCO, many farmers lost their farmland during the early 1970's. SN-SOSUCO was established in 1965 and nowadays it is the second largest employer after the state in Burkina Faso (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 702).

study area (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 697)


The main reason for the construction of the dam was the economic power of SN-SOSUCO. They wanted to regulate the water flow so that they can increase their production (BAZIN et al. 2011: 70). After the dam was built, the state handed the control over the dam over to SN-SOSUCO and from then on they were responsible for ensuring its maintenance and supervision. The costs for maintenance and so on are actually paid by the state. So, a good deal for SN-SOSUCO (BAZIN et al. 2011: 70).
SN-SOSUCO is, of course, the largest consumer of water from the dam. But for other user groups there have not been an increase in production. The impact on agricultural production is very limited, as there is too less water for irrigation during the dry season (BAZIN et al. 2011: 70). But of course, the dam caused changes in everyday life of the users and thus the number of conflicts in this area increased after the dam was built. The main problem is that conflicts between arable and livestock farmers increased. The livestock farmers use the reservoir as a water source for their cattle but unfortunately there are only a few access routes thus they often cross areas in which arable farmers are growing their products (BAZIN et al. 2011: 72). Of course those conflicts are not very gratifying but as I have shown you before, conflicts on the local level are often solved by local mechanisms or communities. And that is also the case for those conflicts.
Another issue is the relationship between different users of the dam and SN-SOSUCO. As SN-SOSUCO mainly uses the dam for its own purposes, the company is (of course) not really interested in concerns of other users. In 2006 for example, SN-SOSUCO refused to release water out of the dam during the dry season (because the water level was too low) and consequently many farmers lost their harvests. There have also been protest marches in 2008, where farmers tried to show their anger about the water management of SN-SOSUCO (BAZIN et al. 2011: 72).
But the dam also brought some new economic activities and fishing got more and more important in this region (BAZIN et al. 2011: 74). The reservoir is well suited for fishing but so far, this economic activity is monopolised by a small group of people (BAZIN et al. 2011; 75).

As I said in the beginning, I would like to link this case study to some other posts I made so far. Many of you may have recognised the issue about the conflict between arable and livestock farmers. That is a good example for how conflicts are solved on the local level. Often, people know each other and they do not really want to have any trouble, although they also want their idea of living to become true. But local mechanisms, as I have showed earlier, are often very purposeful especially when both parties really depend on a useful outcome.
Another point, which I would like to link to earlier posts is the case about the CLE (Comité Local de l’Eau de la Haute Comoé) (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 706; BAZIN et al. 2011: 76). The CLE is a local water committee and was formed in March 2008. Its main goal is to coordinate water use between the different groups and it is welcomed by most of the water users (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 706). SN-SOSUCO used to make all decisions about the dam on its own and of course, they only focused on their own purposes. The CLE as an official institution tries to pay attention to all water users and each group is represented in the committee (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 707). Unfortunately, the number of representatives differs from group to group and depends on social recognition, and the legitimacy and priority of the claims of single groups. As a result, the fishermen for example only have on representative and it can be doubted that their interests are heard in an appropriate way (although the author does not say how many representatives there are in total) (RONCOLI et al. 2009: 707).

To conclude, this case study shows some interesting points which I have already shown you before in a more theoretical way. Conflicts can have many different faces and sometimes it is a conflcit between local groups, and sometimes it is one between local groups and industries. The establishment of committees (no matter on which scale) is always a good way for paying attention to all users/stakeholders and this way of managing the situation can bring the best result. But there have to be committees or organisations like the CLE, otherwise there will not be a satisfying solution.

No comments:

Post a Comment