Conflict frames associated with state compulsory acquisition of lands in Barekese, Ghana

Evans Owusu ¹ Alex Owusu Amoakoh ^2,3*

• ¹ Ministry of Environment Science Technology and Innovation, Accra, Ghana
• ² Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, United Kingdom
• ³ Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, North West England, United Kingdom

Compulsory land acquisition by the state, while intended to serve the public interest, frequently ignites conflicts due to perceived injustices in compensation, lack of transparency, and challenges to the legitimacy of the public purpose. The 1965 state-led compulsory land acquisition for the construction of the Barekese dam in Ghana exemplifies such a conflict that has been in existence for more than four decades. This study investigates the perspectives and framing strategies used by various actors involved in the conflict, including government officials, local communities, and non-governmental organizations. Using conflict-frame theory and Glasl's conflict escalation model, the research employed a qualitative methodology involving key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and field observations. Data were analysed using thematic analysis with NVivo software to uncover underlying frames and perceptions. The findings identified four main conflict frames: delayed crop compensation, failed government promises, property destruction, and inaccuracies in documentation. These frames reflect diverse perceptions and grievances, with incompatible frames among stakeholders leading to miscommunication, mistrust, and escalation.Affected communities framed the conflict around themes of injustice, betrayal, and neglect, while government officials focused on administrative challenges and legal processes. The study revealed that these divergent frames hinder effective dialogue and conflict resolution efforts. This research contributes to the literature on framing strategies in prolonged land acquisition disputes by offering practical insights for policymakers and practitioners. By recognising and addressing diverse stakeholder frames, and facilitating reframing through inclusive dialogue, there is potential to transform conflict and develop more equitable and sustainable solutions.