Search Climate Insights Directory

The paper examines the systemic vulnerabilities of pastoralists, who manage approximately 25 percent of the world's land area. It argues that conflict in these regions is driven by a combination of ecological shocks, the encroachment of agricultural frontiers, and the political marginalization of herding communities by state governments. Using a sustainable livelihoods framework, the authors identify threats to natural, financial, physical, human, social, and political capital. The document concludes that technical interventions alone are insufficient; sustainable peace requires integrating pastoralists into wider societal and political structures, protecting their mobility and resource access, and empowering their political representation.

The document examines how valuable minerals can finance violence, trigger local conflicts, and weaken state governance through corruption. It provides lessons learned for development interventions, such as empowering local communities, supporting artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM), and promoting corporate responsibility. The toolkit includes a survey instrument for risk assessment and lists USAID contracting mechanisms and international partners to address mineral-related conflict.

The document examines the emergence of the Sabaot Land Defence Force (SLDF) in 2006, which resulted in approximately 600 deaths and the displacement of half the Mount Elgon district's population. It argues that while military intervention routed the militia, lasting peace requires addressing root causes including colonial disinheritance of Sabaot communal lands, inequitable land distribution, and the availability of small arms.

The research paper argues that land in eastern DRC has transitioned from a basis of social identity to a currency of political and economic power, fueling ethnic conflict. It details how colonial 'indirect rule' and post-colonial legislation, such as the 1973 General Property Law, created a dual system of tenure that marginalized rural populations and empowered elites. In Masisi and Ituri, this structural insecurity was manipulated by local and regional actors to trigger mass violence, with land becoming a 'resource' for warlords to consolidate power through the control of 'unfree labour'.

The preface introduces a collaborative research project between the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) and the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) aimed at understanding the links between natural resources, land tenure, and conflict in Africa. It acknowledges the contributions of various researchers, peer reviewers, and informants, specifically noting fieldwork conducted in Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, and Angola. The work was supported by the United States Agency for International Development’s Regional Economic Development and Services Office for Eastern and Southern Africa (REDSO/ESA) and incorporates findings from a December 2004 conference on Land Tenure and Conflict in Africa.

The document examines the evolution of environmental security, critiquing 'statist' models that view environmental scarcity primarily as a threat to the state. It proposes a 'human security' framework, specifically applying a Sustainable Livelihoods approach to understand how land access and tenure systems in Africa influence poverty and conflict. The author highlights that in southern Africa, colonial legacies of land dispossession and current 'opportunistic land grabbing' by elites exacerbate insecurity. The paper concludes that sustainable security requires moving beyond technical fixes to address the underlying power imbalances, governance failures, and social injustices that drive environmental and human insecurity.

The report examines Angola's transition from a war-torn state to a market economy, focusing on the critical role of land tenure. It traces the evolution of land laws from the Portuguese colonial era through the socialist post-independence period to the 2004 Land Act. The author highlights a systemic pattern of 'land grabbing' by political and military elites, the marginalisation of rural peasants and women, and the precarious legal status of peri-urban dwellers. It argues that without transparent, inclusive land administration and the recognition of customary rights, the current legislative trajectory risks exacerbating inequality and triggering new conflicts.

The report examines how insecure land access and the manipulation of land rights contribute to poverty and violent conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa. It highlights the tension between customary and statutory tenure systems and warns that land is often used as a 'resource of conflict' by elites to consolidate power and enforce ethnic divisions. The authors argue for the importance of local governance and field-based empirical research in developing effective land policies and reconciliation efforts.

The report examines how land tenure insecurity, scarcity, and the tension between customary and statutory legal systems contribute to both the structural and proximate causes of conflict in Africa. It argues that poverty and the loss of livelihoods are central to the conflict-underdevelopment cycle, and that land often serves as a tool for political struggle among elites or a source of ethnic mobilisation. Through case studies of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, and Angola, the text highlights the risks of 'formalising' land rights without considering local customs and the importance of multi-sectoral, pro-poor land policies in post-conflict reconstruction.

The report assesses Zambia's stability, noting that while the country has avoided civil war, it faces structural threats from pervasive poverty, neopatrimonial governance, and an imbalance of power between the executive and other state branches. It highlights the risk of political entrepreneurs exploiting ethnic tensions and the potential for social unrest due to economic inequality and a stalled constitutional review process.

The document argues that post-conflict recovery requires a shift from short-term humanitarian relief to a sustainable livelihoods approach that addresses the root causes of conflict, such as poverty, powerlessness, and the loss of assets. It examines the 'deadly triad' of food insecurity, HIV/AIDS, and conflict, and provides frameworks for analyzing household vulnerability and the political economy of war. Case studies from Angola, Sudan, Mozambique, and Uganda illustrate the importance of integrating emergency relief with long-term developmental support, particularly for internally displaced persons (IDPs) and the urban poor.

The report argues that traditional state-led security policies in Kenya, which focus on coercive disarmament and supply-side regulation, are ineffective in 'borderlands' where government presence is limited. Instead, it highlights the success of community-based organizations (CBOs) and NGOs in reducing the demand for small arms and light weapons (SALW) by addressing root causes such as poverty, resource competition, and identity-based conflict. Through case studies in Nairobi, Marsabit, Isiolo, the Northeastern Province, Tana River, and the North Rift, the author demonstrates that integrating development, education, and customary law into security frameworks can shrink gun markets from the bottom up.

The community audit of the Sendou coal-fired power plant in Bargny, Senegal, reveals significant violations of environmental and human rights. Key findings include the discharge of hydrocarbon-contaminated wastewater into Lake Khouloup, air pollution from unconfined coal and ash piles, and the expropriation of land previously designated for victims of coastal erosion without just compensation. The report also highlights the disruption of local economic activities, specifically fish processing at Khelcom, and the restriction of access to a sacred baobab tree, violating religious freedoms.

The fact sheet describes Biocultural Community Protocols (BCPs) as endogenous, inclusive tools used by indigenous and local communities to define their rights and responsibilities under customary, state, and international law. It details how BCPs facilitate proactive responses to threats like illegal mining and infrastructure projects, and how they support the protection of traditional knowledge and biodiversity. The document provides several case studies from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and promotes a toolkit and website for community facilitators to develop and implement these protocols.

The document outlines a multi-step process for creating biocultural community protocols, starting with an assessment of appropriateness and moving through the 'mapping' of community identity, natural foundations, sociocultural aspects, economic principles, and political and legal frameworks. It emphasizes community-led decision-making, the protection of sensitive traditional knowledge, and the strategic consolidation of findings into a format that communicates clear messages to external decision-makers to achieve legal and political goals.

The document outlines strategies for using biocultural community protocols to establish dialogue with external stakeholders, raise awareness internally and externally, and participate in legal and administrative decision-making processes. It emphasizes the use of participatory communication tools—such as video, photography, and community mapping—to balance power dynamics and ensure Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). The guide also provides practical advice on navigating national and international legal frameworks, negotiating binding agreements, and resolving conflicts through non-violent, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

The document outlines a three-part process for managing biocultural community protocols: intrinsic analysis of community changes, extrinsic analysis of interactions with external actors, and the subsequent evaluation and revision of the protocol itself. It emphasizes participatory methods, such as the 'Most Significant Change' technique, to capture qualitative impacts on community wellbeing and gender roles. The guide also stresses the importance of keeping both internal community members and external stakeholders informed through diverse communication tools to maintain transparency and trust.

The document defines biocultural community protocols as participatory instruments used by Indigenous and local communities to document their customary laws, values, and decision-making processes. These protocols aim to bridge the gap between community worldviews and external actors—such as governments and companies—to prevent resource exploitation and ensure the respect of customary stewardship. The toolkit outlines a four-part process: understanding the community, documenting the protocol, using it for engagement, and reflecting on outcomes. It provides a wide array of participatory tools, including community sketch maps, trend line analysis, and participatory theatre, to empower communities through legal awareness and social mobilization.

The document outlines a three-stage process for creating biocultural community protocols: deciding on the appropriateness of a protocol, mapping the community's foundations (identity, natural, social-cultural, economic, political, and legal), and consolidating this information into a strategic tool for external engagement. It emphasizes that protocols are context-dependent and should be community-led, avoiding external coercion. The guide provides specific tools and questions to document traditional knowledge, customary laws, and biodiversity, while cautioning facilitators to safeguard sensitive information. It concludes that while individual protocols offer self-affirmation and local change, their collective aggregation can drive broader structural and legal shifts.

The document outlines a framework for the ongoing management of biocultural community protocols, focusing on 'Looking Inwards' to assess community changes, 'Looking Outwards' to evaluate external partnerships, and 'Revisiting and Revising' the protocol as a living instrument. It emphasizes qualitative tools like 'Most Significant Change' stories and participatory methods to measure wellbeing and impact.