{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013497652582159625, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.608527131782946, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
New Dimensions to Pastoralists–Farmers Conflicts and Sustainable Agricultural Development in Agadama and Uwheru Communities, Niger Delta

ABSTRACT The Niger Delta in Nigeria is known for conflicts linked with control of oil related natural resources but not with the pastoralists and farmers. Agadama is a coastal agrarian community in the Ughelli North Local Government Area of Delta State, Nigeria. Pastoralists are usually associated with their traditional arid environments in Northern Nigeria. But their recent presence in southern humid environments brought new dimensions to the conflicts with their farming neighbors. The pastoralists–farmers conflicts have a long history in Nigeria, as they are often linked to competition for natural resources like pasture and water. This article is an ethnographic study, which employs qualitative methods of data collection such as participant observation and in-depth and key informant interviews while using Victor Turner’s theory of social drama and symbolic interactionism as a theoretical framework. Data analysis was done using thick descriptions of observed phenomenon. It reveals that the recent invasion by pastoralists into the oil-rich Niger Delta region of Nigeria has altered the peaceful milieu of the agrarian community, thereby leading to a gradual collapse of Agadama’s subsistence base and impeding the growth of sustainable agricultural development in the community. New dimensions to the pastoralists–farmers conflicts in the Niger Delta include the rape of female farmers and shooting anyone found spraying chemicals on grasses/weeds that serve as pastures for cattle. It concludes that the government intervention has been reactionary.