INNOVATIVE APPROACHES THROUGH INTERFAITH DIALOGUE FOR RESOLVING FARMERS-HERDERS DISPUTES IN SOUTHWEST NIGERIA’S SELECTED COMMUNITIES

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

20

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

PUBLISHED DATE: - 16-07-2024
DOI: -

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajiir/Volume06Issue07-04

PAGE NO.: - 20-34

INNOVATIVE APPROACHES THROUGH INTERFAITH

DIALOGUE FOR RESOLVING FARMERS-HERDERS

DISPUTES IN SOUTHWEST

NIGERIA’S SELECTED

COMMUNITIES

David O. Alabi

PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji
Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Ubong Iniobong Isaac

Assistant Lecturer, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Joseph

Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji-Arakeji,

Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Solomon Okon Asuquo

Research Consultant at Coachfrika, Nigeria

Goodnews Sunday Akpan

Postgraduate Student, Department of Religious and Cultural Studies,
University of Uyo, Nigeria

John Olufemi Olukunle

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola Univer.sity PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji
Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Olaoluwa Olasehinde Oriowo

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji
Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Emmanuel O. Adetula

PhD in view, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Joseph Ayo

Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji Osun State,

Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Open Access

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

21

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Elisha O. Adeleke

PhD in view, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Joseph Ayo

Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji Osun State,
Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Israel O. Olagunju

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji
Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Tunde A. Olatunde

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji
Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Isaac T. Fakayode

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji

Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

Victor A. Adejo

Postgraduate Student, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies,

Joseph Ayo Babalola University PMB. 5006, KM 36, Akure Ilesa Road, Ikeji

Osun State, Ikeji-Arakeji, Nigeria

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

22

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

INTRODUCTION

The concept of dialogue, rooted in the Greek words

"dia" (two) and "logos" (word or discourse),
signifies the exchange of ideas and perspectives [1].

It's not simply talking, but a process of active
listening and understanding across differences. As

Arinze [2] suggests, dialogue is about seeking

common ground through open communication.
Swidler [1] further emphasizes dialogue as a two-

way communication where participants explore
differing viewpoints to uncover deeper truths. This

fosters a crucial space for learning, change, and
growth, ultimately leading to tolerance and

peaceful relationships. This aligns with the
established role of dialogue in conflict resolution.

From Galtung [3] to Fisher et al. [4], scholars
recognize dialogue's ability to facilitate open

communication and build trust, ultimately creating

a constructive atmosphere for resolving disputes

[5], [6]. Research by Pruitt et al. [7] even highlights
its effectiveness in promoting cooperation and

achieving mutually beneficial outcomes.
The case of the farmers-herders conflict in Nigeria

exemplifies the transformative potential of

dialogue. The once peaceful coexistence between
farmers and herders in Nigeria, particularly in

regions like North-Central and South-Western
Nigeria, has tragically eroded into violent clashes

[8]. This shift from cooperation to conflict has deep

roots, potentially linked to factors like population
growth, increasing pressure on land resources, and

historical grievances. These tensions have
tragically escalated into open hostilities, as

documented by Babalola et al.[8].

Abstract

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

23

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

The consequences of these conflicts are far-

reaching and devastating. Communities are

shattered by internal displacement, as farmers flee
destroyed farmlands and herders are forced to

relocate due to violence. Livelihoods are destroyed,
homes are displaced, kidnapping cases and sexual

assaults have been reported, crops are trampled,
and livestock are killed, plunging families into

economic hardship. Most tragically, these clashes

claim lives on both sides, leaving behind a trail of
grief and vengeance that perpetuates the cycle of

violence. Beyond the immediate human cost, the
social fabric of these communities is at stake.

Traditional trust and cooperation are eroded,
replaced by suspicion and fear. This fractured

social landscape hinders development and creates
a breeding ground for further instability. The

farmer-herder conflict in Nigeria is not merely a
localized issue; it threatens the long-term peace

and prosperity of the entire region.
This study aims to address this critical issue. It will

delve into the background of the farmers-herders
conflict in South-Western Nigeria, highlighting its

profound impact on both communities. But most
importantly, it will advocate for interfaith/inter-

ideological dialogue as a key strategy for resolving
this conflict. By fostering understanding, tolerance,

and mutual respect among the diverse religious
and ethnic groups involved, dialogue has the

potential to bridge divides and build sustainable
peace.
This paper underscores the importance of dialogue

as a tool for conflict resolution. In complex social

contexts like the farmers-herders conflict in
Nigeria, dialogue offers a powerful path towards a

more peaceful and harmonious future.

METHODS

The methodology employed in this study

integrated both secondary and primary sources of
data. Secondary sources such as newspapers,

books, and academic journals were utilized to
provide a comprehensive understanding of the

historical context, underlying factors, and existing
interventions related to farmers-herders conflicts

in Southwest Nigeria. Primary data collection will
involve interviews with stakeholders including

farmers, herders, community leaders, and

interfaith representatives. These interviews aims
to gather firsthand perspectives, experiences, and

insights into the dynamics of the conflicts and the
potential role of interfaith dialogue in conflict

resolution.
This sets the stage for a deeper exploration into the

background of the conflict, highlighting its
importance and the rationale behind adopting an

interfaith dialogue approach. By engaging religious
institutions and stakeholders in meaningful

discourse, we aim to foster understanding,
reconciliation, and ultimately, sustainable peace

between farmers and herders in Southwest
Nigeria.

Literature Review: Overview of Farmers-

Herders Disputes in Nigeria and Previous

Approaches to Resolving Farmers-Herders
Conflicts

Farmers-herders conflicts in Nigeria have a long

and troubled history, marked by violence,
devastating loss of life, and economic disruption.

Early studies like Bala et al. [9] laid the groundwork
by examining the central issue of resource

competition, particularly between Fulani herders

and settled farmers in Northern Nigeria. Their
research highlights the importance of addressing

this competition, alongside historical grievances,
for any hope of effective conflict resolution.
Building on this foundation, Boone [10] delves

deeper, exploring the political economy of land
conflict across Africa. Here, the spotlight falls on

the role of state institutions. Weak or corrupt
governance can exacerbate tensions by failing to

provide fair access to land or enforce regulations

effectively. Boone also emphasizes economic
marginalization, where limited opportunities fuel

competition for scarce resources and create a
volatile environment. These studies by Bala et al.

[9] and Boone [10] offer valuable insights into the
complex interplay of socio-economic and political

factors that fuel these conflicts.
However, a complete understanding necessitates

acknowledging the growing influence of

environmental factors, particularly climate change.

Studies like Boko et al. [11] illuminate the critical
link between climate change and land-use conflicts.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

24

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Droughts, desertification, and unpredictable
weather patterns all contribute to the problem. As

traditional grazing lands diminish, herders are
forced to migrate further south, encroaching on

farmlands and intensifying competition. Adebayo
[12] underscores the additional strain these

conflicts place on food security and sustainable
development efforts in the region. These studies by

Boko et al. [11] and Adebayo [12] emphasize the

urgent need for holistic approaches to conflict
resolution.

By

integrating

environmental

considerations, such as developing adaptation
strategies to climate change, alongside addressing

socio-economic and political issues, a more
sustainable path towards peace can be forged.
Understanding

the

farmer-herder

conflict

necessitates going beyond broad national
narratives and delving into the complexities of

local contexts and community dynamics. Studies

like Bassett13 offer valuable insights into the
specific challenges faced in Nigeria's Middle Belt

region. Examining nomadic pastoralism and
traditional land management practices, Bassett

highlights the need for integrated approaches that
address the unique needs of these communities.

Similarly, Ayayi and Alawa [14] provide crucial
information on Nigeria's pasture and forage

resources, emphasizing their significance for both
farmers and herders. By understanding these local

dynamics, interventions can be tailored to the
specific needs and circumstances of each affected

community.
Moving beyond understanding the local context,

scholars like Osaghae [15] point towards solutions.
Osaghae explores strategies for resolving inter-

group conflicts in Nigeria, emphasizing the
importance of inclusive governance frameworks.

This suggests that ensuring all parties have a voice
and feel represented in decision-making processes

is crucial for building trust and fostering peaceful
coexistence. Koné and Boserup [16] take a more

specific approach, examining the potential role of
pastoralist peace-building initiatives in West

Africa. Their research highlights the value of

empowering these communities to develop their
own solutions. By fostering conflict-sensitive

resource management strategies led by the farmers
and herders themselves, a more sustainable peace

can be achieved. These studies by Osaghae [15],
Koné and Boserup [16], alongside the work on local

dynamics [13], [14], underscore the importance of
both understanding the local context and

empowering communities to be active participants
in finding solutions.
From the above review we can agree here that a

multitude of scholars have delved into

understanding the root causes and consequences
of these conflicts, offering insights into the socio-

economic, political, and environmental factors at
play. However, despite significant research efforts,

effective solutions remain elusive. This study seeks
to bridge existing knowledge gaps by proposing

innovative approaches through interfaith and
inter-ideological dialogue for resolving farmers-

herders disputes in selected communities of
Southwest Nigeria. Addressing farmers-herders

conflicts in Nigeria requires a multidimensional

approach that incorporates insights from various
academic disciplines. By synthesizing existing

research and proposing innovative approaches
through interfaith dialogue, this study aims to

contribute to ongoing efforts to resolve conflicts
and promote peace and stability in Southwest

Nigeria's selected communities. It is hoped that by
bridging

knowledge

gaps

and

fostering

collaboration between stakeholders, sustainable
solutions can be achieved, ensuring a peaceful

coexistence between farmers and herders for
generations to come.

Communities in Southwest Nigeria Entangled in

The Farmers-Herders Conflict.

In Southwest Nigeria, certain communities are

deeply entangled in the farmers-herders conflict.
This section will focus on selected communities in

Southwest Nigeria affected by the ongoing conflict
between farmers and herders. Specifically, we will

examine areas within the states of Kwara, Osun,

Ondo, and Ekiti, where this conflict persists. We
will look at specific communities which have

received reports of these crises as case studies to
delve deeper into the issue.

Kwara

In Odo-owa and Oke-ero communities within

Kwara State, Nigeria, there are notable challenges

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

25

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

concerning conflicts between farmers and herders.
It is reported that the main trigger for recurring

violence between Fulani herdsmen and farmers in
Oke-Ero Local Government Area of Kwara State is

the destruction of crops by livestock. To an extent,
a report stated that cows frequently strayed into

fields and consume crops belonging to local
farmers. Despite the fact that governments have

been recommended at all levels to establish

designated areas for cattle to limit their movement,
thus

fostering

sustainable

agricultural

development; the tension still persists.
As we are aware, cattle hold significant cultural

importance for the Fulani people, with ownership

serving as a status symbol. This most likely leads to
significant tensions between Fulani herders and

local farmers, particularly when farmlands
encroach upon traditional cattle routes and

watering spots. Analysts link this trend to the

worsening desertification, which forces herders to
migrate southwards in search of suitable grazing

areas, often resulting in conflicts with settled
farmers. Therefore, it is essential to understand the

underlying factors contributing to these conflicts
and address them effectively.
Given the severe consequences of conflicts, such as

loss of life, displacement, and economic hardship, it
is crucial to comprehend the principles of conflict

resolution and identify appropriate strategies for

peaceful negotiation. The intensity of the conflict in
Kwara State underscores the urgent need for

corrective measures to reduce the frequency of
conflicts, which often lead to the displacement of

farmers and loss of lives and crops. Media reports
and documentaries highlight the longstanding

divisions between farmers and herders along
ethnic lines, indicating the necessity for

comprehensive solutions, including the creation of
grazing reserves and governmental intervention.

Osun

In the southwestern region of Nigeria, particularly

in Osun State, a notable conflict has arisen between

farmers and herders, severely impeding farmers'
ability to engage in peaceful agricultural practices

and livelihoods. The pinnacle of this conflict
occurred in Osun State when a group of cow

herders attacked a government-owned farm

settlement situated between Esa-Oke and Ijebu-
Ijesa, resulting in the destruction of approximately

120 acres of economic crops. Additionally,
significant damage to crops, valued at millions of

naira, has been attributed to herders in two distinct
communities within Osun State [17], [18].
According to a report by Nigeria Tribune dated

Tuesday, December 5, 2023, over 6000 farmers

from AgoOwu Farm settlement, located in the
Ayedaade local government area of Osun, voiced

their grievances at the state government
Secretariat in Osogbo. They protested against the

recurrent and violent attacks perpetrated by
dangerous herdsmen on both themselves and their

farmlands in nearby areas. Accusations were levied
against a monarch for allegedly dispatching

hooligans to intimidate local farmers. The
protesters carried placards bearing various

inscriptions, urging Governor Adeleke to intervene

and prevent a potential crisis.
During discussions with journalists, spokesperson

Mr. AdebanjiObenbe highlighted that the farmers

were allocated the land by the state government
and diligently fulfill their tax obligations. He

recounted instances where armed individuals,
purportedly acting under the instruction of the

monarch, forcefully harvested crops, leading to fear
and distress among the farmers. Concerns were

raised regarding the potential escalation of crises

within the community if the actions of the monarch
were not swiftly addressed by the government.

Farmers implored Governor AdemolaAdeleke to
protect them from ongoing assaults and

intimidation

while

also

addressing

the

encroachment of Fulani herdsmen on agricultural

lands, which results in crop destruction.
In response, Oba Morenigbade denied involvement

in orchestrating attacks on rural individuals and

claimed to be abroad. He encouraged the farmers

to direct their grievances to local law enforcement
authorities. These incidents underscore the

challenges faced by numerous farmers in Osun
State as they endeavor to expand their agricultural

activities amidst the encroachment of herders in
their communities.

Ondo

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

26

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

According to Vanguard, the security organization

in Ondo State, known as Amotekun, has reported a

substantial decrease of 95 percent in conflicts
between farmers and herders over the past two

years across the state. Adeleye made this assertion
during an interactive session sponsored by the

state Correspondent Chapel of the Nigeria Union of
Journalists (NUJ), titled "The Platform". Within a

two-week period, the organization received over

5,000 complaints concerning conflicts between
herders and farmers. Farmers increasingly faced

challenges in accessing their farms due to fears of
harassment, abduction, injury, or even murder by

herders [19].
Furthermore, it had become difficult for civilians to

hail taxis in the city without the risk of being

abducted, assaulted, or robbed, particularly during
the day. Riding motorcycles (Okada) posed the

most significant risk. Initially, Amotekun focused

its efforts on addressing conflicts between herders
and farmers. Adeleye stated, "We launched an

extensive campaign to educate the public that
farmers have the right to cultivate crops and

herders have the right to raise cattle, but they must
not encroach on each other's activities."

Subsequently, meetings were held with the Miyetti
Allah group at both the state and regional levels,

where Amotekun conveyed its position. A deadline
was set, and enforcement measures were

announced.
During initial operations, it was discovered that

over 500 cows were unlawfully taken from a
widow within the Alagbaka GRA, where the

government offices are located. Despite the
widow's persistent efforts over the past five years

to reclaim her cattle, she faced strong resistance
from the herdsmen, who even issued threats of

violence against her.
In another report by Dataphyta, the Okeluse

community mourned the abduction of Mr. Bola Ojo,
the former Chairman of Ose Local Government,

which left residents uncertain about what to
expect. By evening, the community was eerily

quiet, with grief evident throughout. At the time of
reporting, Mr. Ojohad not been freed. Despite the

agricultural nature of communities in Ose Local
Government Area, with residents primarily

engaged in farming activities, including the
cultivation of cocoa, plantain, yam, and cassava,

incidents of robbery had disrupted their
livelihoods. The presence of herders in the Okeluse

community had resulted in significant loss of life.

Ekiti

Several studies have highlighted the significant

impact of agricultural and grazing activities on
Nigeria's land area. Crop cultivation occupies a

substantial portion, approximately 43,778.60
square kilometers, while extensive grazing covers

21,913.75 square kilometers of the country's total
land area. This increase in land use by herders has

led to conflicts, as it encroaches upon farmers' land,

which they perceive as integral to their social,
economic, and spiritual identity. Land disputes, a

common source of conflict in Ekiti, often arise
between Fulani herdsmen and farmers over

grazing land [20].
The persistence of these conflicts can be attributed

to various factors, including the failure of the state

to address the issue of indigene versus settler
status in the Nigerian constitution, unresolved

disputes over grazing land and water sources

crucial for the economic survival of both herders
and farmers, and the implications of the Nigerian

land tenure system on land acquisition by peasants
and lower-class individuals. Additionally, criminal

activities such as kidnapping, cattle rustling, and
terrorism perpetrated by some Fulani groups

exacerbate the situation.
Incidents such as the abduction of Chief Samuel

Oluyemisi Falae by herdsmen in September 2015,

as well as attacks on farmers in various

communities, further escalate tensions. These
conflicts often result in loss of lives, displacement

of villagers, and destruction of property.
Consequently, political figures like Ayodele Fayose

have taken drastic measures, such as enacting anti-
grazing laws, to address the crisis. However, the

effectiveness

of

such

measures

remains

questionable, as evidenced by ongoing conflicts

and the need for local initiatives, such as the
establishment of anti-grazing marshals, to mitigate

the situation. Despite efforts to resolve the conflict,
misunderstandings and tensions persist, fueled by

incendiary remarks and accusations against the

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

27

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

government's handling of the issue.
Aside of the general effects on loss of lives, animals,

farm crops, there are soil erosion, poisoning of

water and displacement of farmers and pastoral

problems. There is usually counter attack in
entirely unaffected places in reaction to the loss

suffered in farmer’s herdsmen clashes elsewhere.

The conflict between herdsmen and farmers in

Ekiti State has several facets. Until last twenty
years, the disagreements between herders and

farming communities used to be resolved by
negotiations and the baale and herder

communities leaders.

Dialogue in Biblical Perspectives

Dialogue is a tool of peace in the time of crisis and

troubles among men. Human experience has
evidently and apparently revealed that life is in

stages with their attendant challenges, difficulties
and conflict. People want peace but they are taken

aback when they fall into crisis and conflict.
Conflict is a situation where people or groups of

people who are supposed to be at peace with one
another are engaged in serious misunderstanding,

disagreement and are opposing one another. This

conflict or crisis has led to economic, institutional,
material destruction and loses of millions of life

during inter-tribal, same clans, national, civil and
international wars.
Tracing the causes of war, conflicts, troubles and

crises, two important biblical text give us the root
causes of conflict among men. One is the position of

the author of a prominent book in the Jewish
wisdom literature, the book of Job.

“For afflictions does not come from dust, nor

does trouble spring from the ground, yet man

is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward - Job
4: 6-

7”

This wisdom text indicates the seriousness of

trouble among men as the “the sparkles fly

upward”. Unknown to man that the “spark” are

fiery and hot, consuming and destructive if care is

overlooked.
Second, among the general epistles in the New

Testament literature, we find the book of James,

which says

“Where do war and fight come from among

you? Do they not come from your desires for

pleasure that war in your members?

–

James

4:1”

Conflicts rise among us when we cannot curb our

inordinate ambition for power, promotion and

economic or politic superiority. The ancient near
eastern nations engaged in series of wars and

oppressions against one and another that lead to
enslavement, servitude, oppressions, captivity and

annihilations of many clans, families and tribes. In
the midst of these challenges, there is a craving of

peace. Peace from biblical perspective can be an

“instrumentalist” agency, as a means to an end and

at the same time a “functionalist” tool, where it

plays a social function in the society in order to

bring about social order from chaotic situations. In
order to achieve this, a bridge of dialogue is used.
Traces of dialogue are found on the pages of the

biblical texts where dialogue was exploited in

order to achieve peace and avoid wars, crises and
conflicts. Fortunate enough, the first traces of

dialogue found in the biblical text was the herder’s

conflicts among the hirelings of Abraham and lot on

the struggle for pasture for their animals. The
Genesis accounts in gen13:5-11 buttressed the

prosperity, progress and productivity of the
businesses of both Abraham and lot in the area of

flocks and herds. The fruitfulness of the flocks and

herds of both called for more pastures in order to
feed them and there was scarcity and need for

expansion, hence crises ensued.
Abraham knew the implication of the crisis and

being experienced, engaged and approach a

dialogue with lot, the owner of the flocks and herd
and employers of the laborers who wanted to

foment troubles for both. The understanding that
there would be losses of the fruit of their age

investment, the flocks and herds, if there was a

crises and the hirelings would eventually flee away
when things felt out of hand called for the applied

wisdom of dialogue from Abraham.
The inference from this texts shows that people in

the ancient counted their loses, should they engage

in war or destructive conflicts. It is highly good to
engage in direct dialogue with the people

concerned directly and face reality on ground.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

28

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Sincerity of approach and dialogue are seen in the
biblical perspectives of dialogue such as the case of

Abraham and lot. If there will be meaningful

solutions to the farmer’s and herder’s a conflicts in

the land, both parties must be avoiding wanton
destruction of farm produce, setting the farm

plantation on fire and harming one another.
Implications on fighting, harming and killing one

another In the name of animals should be weighed

before embarking on this.
Acting as a leader, father, elder statesman and

progenitor Abraham stood for live safety and

property protection rather than their destruction.
This is a major biblical perspective on dialogue and

its advantages. “It is good to save live than to
destroy life”, to quote the words of Jesus Christ in

another form (cf.MK.3:4). Though under pretense
the Gibeonites realized that it was important for

them to be servants and alive than to become dead

through swords, they pleaded for a treaty, a league,
and a covenant to live with Joshua (cf. jos.9:3-26).

The approach of their dialogue with Joshua led to
their living. The goal of this approach was to live

and the Gibeonites.
The case of strife between the house of Saul and

David in 2samuel 2 opens our eyes to political

crises and unrest today and the urgent need to
sheath the ambitions of individuals could lead to

bloodletting and they had do so. The struggles for

supremacy and claim to the throne in the United
Kingdom, loyalty to individual parties- Saul

dynasty through his chief of army- Abner and David
dynasty through his chief of army

–

Joab were the

bones of contention. After hundreds of foot soldiers
had died, Abner realized the need for dialogue. He

initiated and carried out the dialogue.
This perspective of dialogue opens up a line of the

solutions to political thuggery, fighting, maiming,

and killings of innocent lives. Through a reasonable

dialogue Abner called for sheathing the sword and
Joab consented that it was unnecessary that the

both parties should continue to kill one another.
Due to this adopted dialogue approach by Abner,

Joab realized that war should not continue but stop.
Unwanted killings of soldiers and innocent lives

came to an end. This informs us that biblical
approach to dialogue leads to safety of life. A

theological import of 2 Samuel 2 also extends to the
fact that political killing and rivalry can be ended

through dialogue.
A dialogue Jesus had with the Samaritan in john4 is

another dimension of biblical perspective on the
importance of dialogue. It portends that through a

reasonable dialogue gender biases, ethnicism and
religious polarization can be ended. Jesus used

dialogue approach to put the wall of gender barrier
down between the Jews and the Samaritans.

Enmities of hundreds of years came to an end due
to Jesus dialogue with the woman. Jesus took a

positive and loving approached to address the
seemingly written of condition of the woman and

he ga

ve her “life” and “meanings” to her existence

and living. The men of Samaritans came out to hear,

and believe in Jesus due to his approach to new life
of love, forgiveness, renewed of hope, no

condemnation

but

fair

treatment,

real

encouragement and unity without barriers or

“ethnicism”.

Pauline dialogue with the Athenians shows

tolerance to people who hold different political
views, religious ideologies, opinions and stands

apart from our dogmatic convictions and
particularity. He was able to bring some to the

savvy knowledge of the lord Jesus Christ and
Christianity.
In a nutshell, biblical perspectives on dialogue yield

safety of life, avoidance of bloodletting, end to

political

killings,

ethnicism,

nepotism,

discrimination and safety of property as in the case

of Abraham, the Gibeonites, Abner and Joab and an
apostle Paul.

Interfaith Dialogue as Framework

The situation in southwest Nigeria preempts an

intentional and deliberate interfaith and inter-

ideological dialogue, most especially when
recognizing the deeply rooted religious affiliations

within both farming and herding communities. (i.e.
Yoruba Christians

or Yoruba traditional

worshippers and the Fulani Muslims or Fulani
traditionalists versus).
It is on this backdrop that interfaith dialogue, as

conceptualized by Leonard Swidler's Decalogue of

Dialogue, offers a robust framework for addressing

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

29

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

the complex and longstanding conflict between
farmers and herders in South West Nigeria. For

Swidler, the primary goal of dialogue is to learn,
that is, to change and grow in the perception and

understanding of reality and then to act
accordingly. The two parties involved needs this

basic understanding
From this study we have come to understand that

this conflict, marked by recurring violence and
economic losses, stems from competition over land

resources, exacerbated by ethnic and religious
differences. By applying Swidler's principles, this

session explores how interfaith dialogue can
facilitate understanding, reconciliation, and

sustainable peace-building among the affected
communities.

Basic to these principles are; Leonard Swidler’s

Dialogue Decalogue

In his work "What is Dialogue?", Swidler [1] spells

out ten rules that should guide any dialogue
enterprise. Though these principles were primarily

designed for Interreligious and inter-ideological
dialogue, it could still be helpful in our discourse on

herdsmen conflicts. The principles are as follows:

First Rule

: The primary purpose of dialogue is to

learn, that is, to change and grow in the perception
and understanding of reality and then to act

accordingly. Minimally, the very fact that I learn
that my dialogu

e partner believes “this” rather than

“that” proportionally changes my attitude towards

him; and a change in my attitude is a significant

change in me. We enter into dialogue so that we can
learn, change and grow, not so we can force change

on the other, as one hopes to do in debate

–

a hope

realized in inverse proportion to the frequency and
ferocity with which debate is entered into. On the

other hand, because, in dialogue, each partner
comes with the intention of learning and changing

themselves, one’s p

artner, infact, will also change.

Second Rule

: Interreligious and inter-ideological

dialogue must be a two-sided project-within each

religious or ideological community and between
religious or ideological communities. Since the

primary goal of dialogue is that each partner learns

and changes themselves, it is also necessary that
each participant enters into dialogue, not only with

their partner across the faith line

–

the Catholic

with the Protestant, for example

–

but also with

their co-religionist, to share with them the fruits of
the interreligious dialogue. It is in this way that the

whole community will eventually learn and change,
move towards an ever- more perceptive insight

into reality.

Third Rule

: Each participant must come to the

dialogue with complete honesty and sincerity. In
other word partners in dialogue must be truthful

and be willing to discuss the truth about religion
how best they know it and not trying to add or

subtract from what the religion holds in order to
gain superiority of their religion. In addition to this,

trustworthiness is expected from partners
involved and failure to trust any partner will hinder

dialogue from taking place.

Fourth Rule

: In interreligious, inter-ideological

dialogue, we must not compare our ideals with our

partner’s practice, but rather our ideals with our

partner’s ideals, our practice with our partner’s

practice.

Fifth Rule

: Each participant must define her

–

or

himself. Only a Muslim, for example can define

what it means to be a Muslim. The rest can only
describe what it looks like from the outside.

Moreover, because, dialogue is dynamic, as each
participant learns, they will change, and hence

continually deepen, expand and modify their self-
definition as a Muslim-being careful to remain in

constant dialogue with fellow Muslim. Thus, it is
mandatory that each dialogue partner defines what

it means to be an authentic member of their own
tradition. Conversely, the interpreted must be able

to recognize themselves in the interpretation. This
is the golden rule of inter-religious hermeneutics,

as has been often reiterated by the “apostle of

interreligious dialogue", RamundoPanikkar.

Sixth Rule

: Each participant must come to the

dialogue with no hard fast assumptions as where

the points of disagreement are: rather, each
partner should not just listen to the other partner

with openness and sympathy, but also attempt to
agree with the dialogue partner, as far as it is

possible, while still maintaining integrity with their
own tradition; where they absolutely can agree no

further without violating their own integrity,

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

30

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

precisely that is the real point of disagreement that
was falsely assumed ahead of time.

Seventh Rule

: Dialogue can take place only

between equals, or Par cum pari as Vatican II put it.

Both must come to learn from each other. This for
instance means that there can be no authentic

dialogue between a learned scholar and an
uninformed person but at most a gathering of

information. Also, if for example the Muslim views
Christian as inferior, or if the Christian views Islam

as inferior, there will be no dialogue. If authentic
interreligious, interideological dialogue between

Muslims and Christians is to occur, then, both the
Muslim and the Christian must come mainly to

learn from each other; only then w

ill be “equal with

equal, per cum pari.

Eighth Rule

: Dialogue can take place only on the

basis of mutual trust. Although interreligious,

interidelogical dialogue must occur with some kind

of “corporate” dimension, that is, the participants

must be involved as members of a religious or
ideological community-for instance, as Marxists or

Taoists

–

it is also fundamentally true that it is only

persons who can enter into dialogue. A dialogue

among persons can be built only on personal trust.
Hence, it is wise not to tackle the most difficult

problems in the beginning, but rather to approach
first those issues most likely to provide some

common ground, thereby establishing the basis of

human trust. Gradually, as this personal trust
deepens and expands, the more thorny matters can

be undertaken. As in learning, we move from the
known to the unknown, so in dialogue we proceed

from commonly held matters

–

which given our

mutual ignorance resulting from centuries of

hostility will take us quite some time to discover
fully

–

to discuss matters of disagreement.

Ninth Rule

: As we enter into interreligious and

interideological dialogue, we must learn to be at

least minimally self-critical of both ourselves and
our religious or ideological tradition. A lack of such

self-cri

ticism implies that one’s own tradition

already has all the correct answers. Such an

attitude makes dialogue not only unnecessary, but
even impossible, since we enter into dialogue

primarily so we can learn-which obviously is
impossible if our tradition has all the right answers.

In interreligious and interideological dialogue, one
must stand within a religious or ideological

tradition with integrity and conviction, but such
integrity and conviction must include, not exclude,

a healthy self-criticism for without it, there can be
no dialogue.

Tenth Rule

: Each participant eventually must

attempt to experience the partner’s religions or

ideology “from within”, for a religion or ideology is

not merely something of the head, but also of the

spirit, heart, and “whole being” individual and

communal. In this case, a Christian will never fully

understand Hinduism if he/she is not, in one way
or another connected to Hinduism. Nor will a Hindu

ever fully understand Christianity unless he/she, in
one way or another, becomes Christian.

Application of Swidler's Decalogue of Dialogue

to Farmers- Herders Conflicts in South Western

Nigeria.

Leonard Swidler's Decalogue of Dialogue offers a

valuable framework for resolving farmers-herders

conflicts

in

Nigeria

by

fostering

open

communication, mutual understanding, and

cooperative problem-solving. The following

principles have been adopted and applied to
farmers-herders' conflicts in South-Western

Nigeria:
In Swidler's first rule, the primary purpose of

dialogue is to learn, change and grow in perception

about the other party. Dialogue offers an
opportunity to clear doubts and suspicions held

against the "other". It has been observed that there
is an unhealthy rivalry between herders and

farmers

in

South-Western

States

which

predisposes them to frequent clashes with each
other. This tension could be reduced if they initiate

honest conversations with each other, promote the
understanding that both groups are Nigerians who

can co-exist to do their business. Farmers and
herders are to be encouraged to engage in direct,

open, and truthful communication. Listen
attentively to each other's concerns, needs, and

fears to build trust and understanding. They are to
approach dialogue with a willingness to learn from

each other. Recognize that each party has unique
knowledge, skills, and experiences that can benefit

the other. Both parties to identify areas of

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

31

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

commonality and shared interests. Collaborate to
find mutually beneficial solutions, recognizing that

their interests are interconnected.
The second rule emphasizes the importance of

equality. Mutual regard for each would aid effective
dialogue. If the both parties see themselves as

business men and women, who need to earn a
living from their various investments, they would

promote the understanding that they are equals
trying to earn a living. Hence, no one is superior to

the other. Each person's perspectives should be
respected and both parties can work out modalities

to safeguard their means of livelihood.More so,
there should be an understanding that both crops

and livestock are people's investments and should
be safeguarded.
Swidler's sixth principle of dialogue highlights a

crucial element for fostering peace in the farmer-

herder conflict: approaching dialogue with an open
mind and avoiding pre-conceived notions. This

principle goes beyond simply listening. It
emphasizes the need to actively challenge

assumptions and stereotypes that fuel mistrust.
Imagine a farmer who believes all herders are

careless and destructive. This assumption can
easily escalate a minor incident into a major

confrontation. Similarly, a herder who assumes all
farmers are hostile and unwilling to compromise is

unlikely to seek peaceful solutions. These ingrained

assumptions create a self-fulfilling prophecy,
hindering any chance of productive dialogue.
Swidler's

framework

encourages

open

communication and a willingness to "let go and
forge ahead." This means acknowledging past hurts

and grievances openly during dialogue. However,
the focus should not be on assigning blame, but on

understanding the roots of the conflict. By asking
clarifying questions and actively listening to each

other's perspectives, both parties can begin to

dismantle the walls of prejudice. Instead of
dwelling on differences, dialogue can explore

common ground. Both farmers and herders have a
stake in a peaceful and prosperous region. Finding

shared goals, such as ensuring food security or
protecting the environment, can foster a sense of

collaboration.
Dialogue provides a platform to challenge pre-

conceived notions. Farmers might learn that
herders are taking steps to minimize crop damage,

while herders might discover that farmers are open
to designated grazing areas. Instead of making

assumptions about intentions, open-minded
dialogue encourages asking questions. "Why do

you think this happened?" or "What are your
concerns about this proposal?" can lead to a deeper

understanding and potential solutions. By

following Swidler's principle of open-mindedness,
dialogue can become a powerful tool for healing

past wounds and building trust. This, in turn, paves
the way for practical solutions that address the

core issues of the farmer-herder conflict, leading to
a more peaceful and sustainable future for all

communities involved.
In the ninth rule, Swidler harps on self-criticism.

One must be self critical about hi/herself and

group, as in the case of farmers and headers.

Accepting faults and apologizing for previous
wrongful acts can fast-track reconciliation and

healing process, as well as build lasting peace. Each
party approaching dialogue should do so with the

mindset of being responsible for previous conflicts,
where necessary and looking forward to build a

peaceful future. Leonard Swidler's Decalogue of
Dialogue provides an essential framework for

addressing the farmers-herders conflict in South
West Nigeria through interfaith dialogue. The

principles outlined in the Decalogue emphasize the
importance of setting a clear agenda for dialogue,

committing to truth, searching for common ground,
embracing constructive tension, making dialogue a

way of life, and balancing action and reflection. By

adhering to these principles, stakeholders can
transcend ethno-religious divides and work

towards sustainable peace and development in the
region. It is essential to institutionalize interfaith

dialogue through interfaith councils, community
forums, and educational initiatives to promote

tolerance

and

understanding.

Moreover,

stakeholders should adopt a participatory and

iterative approach to adapt strategies based on
feedback and lessons learned, ensuring their

relevance and effectiveness over time. By
implementing Swidler's Decalogue, stakeholders

can create a culture of peace and resilience against
future conflicts.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

32

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Other Innovative Solutions and Opportunities

for Scaling up Interfaith Dialogue Initiatives

It is important to also outline other innovative

solutions as well as the opportunities we can stand

to gain in scaling up interfaith dialogue.

Cultivating a Culture of Dialogue

Establishing regular and structured dialogue

sessions between farmers and herders is a crucial

first step. These sessions, facilitated by interfaith

leaders and community organizers, can provide a
safe space for open communication, conflict

resolution, and joint problem-solving. As noted by
AbubakarBello, a community organizer (personal

communication, April 20, 2023), these sessions are
essential for building trust over time. By

institutionalizing these meetings, stakeholders can
engage in proactive identification of emerging

issues, enabling communities to address them
before they escalate into violence. Monitoring

progress towards peace-building goals becomes
possible through the continuous communication

fostered by these dialogue sessions.

Shared

Economic

Benefits:

Educating

Stakeholders

Effective interfaith dialogue initiatives must

incorporate educational components aimed at

raising awareness among herders and farmers
about the economic ramifications of the conflict.

Workshops, seminars, and information campaigns

delivered in local languages can highlight the
shared economic losses incurred due to violence,

crop destruction, livestock theft, and market
disruptions.

BabalolaSunday

(personal

communication, April 2, 2023), a local farmer,
emphasizes the importance of such education.

When stakeholders on both sides understand the
economic toll of the conflict, they are more likely to

embrace peaceful solutions. Furthermore,
dialogue can emphasize the potential economic

gains from peaceful coexistence. Increased
productivity, improved market access, and

investment opportunities in both agriculture and
livestock sectors become achievable when farmers

and herders collaborate.

Sustainable Practices: Exploring New Forms of

Cattle Rearing

Interfaith dialogue platforms can serve as forums

for sharing knowledge and best practices on

modern and sustainable methods of cattle rearing
(Magareth Oseni, personal communication, March

20, 2023). Promoting techniques such as ranching,
agroforestry, and rotational grazing can minimize

environmental degradation, optimize land use, and
improve livestock health and productivity. By

embracing innovation in livestock management,

herders can adapt to changing environmental
conditions and market demands. This, in turn, can

mitigate conflicts with farmers over limited grazing
lands.

Finding Common Ground: Exploring New

Perspectives on Grazing

Dialogue initiatives should encourage farmers and

herders to explore alternative perspectives on
grazing practices and land use (Idris Ahmed,

personal communication, May 22, 2023). A critical
aspect of this approach involves recognizing the

cultural and economic significance of cattle in
pastoral communities while also respecting the

rights and livelihoods of sedentary farmers. By
promoting dialogue around land tenure, resource

sharing, and conflict resolution mechanisms,
stakeholders can co-create sustainable grazing

policies. These policies should accommodate
diverse interests and promote social cohesion,

ensuring a peaceful future for both farmers and

herders.

Building Bridges: Bridging the Social Distance

Interfaith dialogue plays a crucial role in bridging

the social distance and fostering empathy between

farmers and herders. Cultural exchange programs,

joint community projects, and interfaith festivals
can

facilitate

interactions

and

mutual

understanding among diverse groups. These
interactions help to break down stereotypes and

prejudices that often fuel conflict. Additionally,
dialogue initiatives should prioritize inclusive

participation, ensuring that marginalized voices,
including women and youth, are represented and

empowered to contribute to decision-making
processes.

Shared Humanity: Promoting Sympathy and

Mutual Respect

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

33

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Building empathy and solidarity between farmers

and herders requires promoting a culture of

mutual respect and understanding of each other's
livelihoods and challenges. Storytelling sessions,

community exchanges, and interfaith prayers can
facilitate emotional connections and promote

compassion towards the hardships faced by both
groups. By fostering a sense of shared humanity,

interfaith dialogue initiatives can transcend ethnic

and religious divides. This shared sense of
humanity lays the groundwork for sustainable

peace and reconciliation, enabling farmers and
herders to move towards a future of cooperation

and mutual prosperity.
In conclusion, farmer-herder conflicts in Southwest

Nigeria are complex and require multifaceted

solutions, and it is on this back drop that Interfaith
dialogue offers a powerful tool to cultivate

understanding, collaboration, and a shared vision

for a peaceful future. Implementing the strategies
outlined above within a framework of interfaith

dialogue, we believe, could foster healing from past
divisions and build a more prosperous future for

the affected parties.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, scaling up interfaith dialogue

initiatives in addressing the farmers-herders
conflict requires a multifaceted approach that

combines regular dialogue sessions, economic
education, innovation in livestock management,

perspective-shifting, social bridging efforts, and
empathy-building activities. By harnessing the

power of dialogue to promote understanding,
cooperation, and shared prosperity, stakeholders

can create lasting solutions to complex conflicts
and pave the way for a more peaceful and inclusive

society.
Moving forward, it is recommended to

institutionalize interfaith dialogue platforms,
integrate economic education into conflict

resolution efforts, foster innovation in livestock
management,

promote

cross-cultural

understanding and empathy, and empower
marginalized voices in peace-building efforts.

These recommendations must be taken to the
doorsteps of farmers, herders, community leaders,

policymakers, and other stakeholders involved in

the conflict to ensure their meaningful
implementation and impact.
Future research should focus on evaluating the

effectiveness of these recommendations in real-

world

contexts,

identifying

barriers

to

implementation,

and

exploring

additional

strategies for enhancing interfaith dialogue and
conflict resolution efforts in diverse cultural and

socio-economic settings. By building upon the
findings of this study, scholars and practitioners

can continue to refine and expand the toolkit of
interfaith dialogue for addressing complex

conflicts and fostering inclusive and resilient
society.

Authors Contributions

The entire work was compiled and organized by

the corresponding author, Ubong Isaac. David O.

Alabi provided a biblical perspective on dialogue,
while Ubong Iniobong Isaac, Solomon Okon

Asuquo, and Goodnews Sunday Akpan focused on
dialogue as a framework for resolving the farmer-

herder crisis. John Olufemi Olukunle, Olaoluwa
Olasehinde Oriowo, Emmanuel O. Adetula, Elisha O.

Adeleke, Israel O. Olagunju, Tunde A. Olatunde,

Isaac T. Fakayode, and Victor A. Adejo contributed
to the survey study of the communities affected by

the crisis.

Funding Information

This research was funded by the authors

themselves. There is no external sponsor to
disclose.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. This

statement clarifies that the authors have no

personal or financial ties that could influence their
research findings or interpretations.

REFERENCES
1.

Swidler, L., The Ten Principles of Interreligious

Dialogue (Orbis Books, 2017).

2.

Arinze, F. A., Interreligious Dialogue:

Theological Reflections on Interreligious
Encounter (Oxford University Press, 1999).

3.

Galtung, J., ‘Violence, Peace, and Human Needs’,

Journal of Peace Research, 6/3 (1969), 90-110.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

VOLUME 06 ISSUE07

34

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

4.

Fisher, R., Ury, W., and Patton, B., Getting to Yes:

Negotiating Agreement Without Giving

In(Penguin Books, 1991).

5.

Rothman, J., ‘Toward a Theory of Intergroup

Conflict Resolution: Contested Resources and

Conflicting Worldviews’, inM. Deutsch and P.

Coleman(eds.), The Handbook of Conflict
Resolution: Theory and Practice, 3-25(Jossey-

Bass, 1992).

6.

Kelman, H. C., ‘Interact

ive Problem-Solving or

TransformingRelationships? An Exploration of

Third-PartyIntervention

in

InternationalConflicts’[International journal],

51/4 (1996), 513-32.

7.

Pruitt, D. G., Carnevale, P. J., and Kimmel, S.,

Communication

and

Negotiation

in

SocialConflict(Scott:Foresman, 1986).

8.

Babalola, S. F., Alabi, D. O., Isaac, U. I., et al.,

‘Farmers

-Herders

Conflict

in

Selected

Communities in Southwestern Nigeria: Seeking
for Livelihood or Land-

Grabbing?’, in

International Journal of Novelty Research and
Development (IJNRD), 9/1/January | ISSN:

2456-4184 (2024), a873-a92.

9.

Bala, A., Usman, B., and Bahago, Y. G., 14/4

(1996). Fulani/settler conflicts in Nigeria: A

historical perspective[Development policy
review], 347-64.

10.

Boone, C., ‘Political Clientelism, Land Conf

licts,

and Social Capital in Africa’, World

Development, 35/4 (2007), 603-15.

11.

Boko, M., Diallo, M., and Mahamane, S., Climate

Change and Conflict in the Sahel: Rethinking

Adaptation Strategies. Accord (Agency for

Cooperation and Research in Development),
(2007).

12.

Adebayo, A. A., ‘The Farmer

-Herder Conflict

and Food Security in Nigeria: A Critical Review’,

International

Journal

of

Peace

and

Development Studies, 8/2 (2016), 1-12.

13.

Bassett, T. J., ‘Conflict and Negotiation over

Land in West Africa’, Development

and Change,

40/3 (2009), 863-92.

14.

Ayayi, S. E. and Alawa, J. O., ‘Assessment of the

Carrying Capacity of Guinea savanna for
Livestock

Production

in

Southwestern

Nigeria’,Journal of Agriculture and Social

Sciences, 6/2 (2010), 148-53.

15.

Osaghae, E. E., ‘Interg

roup Conflicts and

Governance in Nigeria’,Journal of Asian and

African Studies, 40/3-4 (2005), 285-308.

16.

Koné, B. and Boserup, R., ‘Rethinking

Pastoralist Peace-building in West Africa: From

Top-Down Interventions to Bottom-Up

Agency’, Journal of Modern Afr

ican Studies,

57/2 (2019), 223-45.

17.

Aliyu, H., ‘The Farmer

-HerderConflict in Osun

State, Nigeria: Causes and Solutions’,Journal of

Sustainable Development in Africa, 17/2

(2015), 182-93.

18.

Alao, A., Afolabi, A., and Odeyemi, O., ‘The

Farmer-Herder Conflict in Nigeria: Exploring

the

RootCauses

and

ProfferingSolutions’,International Journal of

Agricultural Research and Innovation, 8/2

(2019), 187-97.

19.

Akanle, O., Adejare, G. S., Adewusi, A. O., et al.,

‘Farmers

-HerdersConflict: Amotekun Records

95% Reduction in O

ndo’, Vanguard[Newspaper

article] (2021).

20.

Aremu, P. I., ‘Farmers

-

Herders ‘Conflict in Ekiti

State, Nigeria: A Critical Review’,International

Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6/2
(2016), 187-99.

Further Reading

1. ‘Nigeria Tribune’, Osun Farmers P

rotest

AgainstAttacks by Herders [Newspaper article]

(2023, December 5).

2. Swidler, L. “What is Dialogue?” in Swidler,

Leonard, Khalid Duran, and Reuven Firestone

(eds.), Trialogue: Jews, Christians and Muslims in
Dialogue, Philadelphia: Ecumenical Press (2007).
3. Swidler, L. Club Modernity for Reluctant

Christians, Philadelphia: Ecumenical Press (2011).
4. Swidler, L. Understanding Dialogue in Inter Faith

Dialogue at the Grass Roots, Philadelphia:
Ecumenical Press, (2008).