Assessment of government’s intervention policies and its impact on the herder–farmer coexistence in North Central Nigeria

Abstract This research work examines the government intervention policies and how helpful they have been in achieving herder–farmer peaceful coexistence in the North Central part of Nigeria, with a focus on Kogi and Benue States. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a descriptive design with a sample size of 759 respondents, and both univariate analyses, i.e. descriptive statistics, such as frequency distribution in percentage and bivariate Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and regression analysis, were adopted. The results show that the various intervention programmes or policies have not been helpful in improving the coexistence of the herders and farmers in the North Central region and Nigeria at a large scale as perceived by the respondents. The findings of the study show that people perceived the government intervention programme in their locality as not helpful in achieving the goal of herder–farmer peaceful coexistence. The findings also show that the policies of the government have not addressed the root cause of the conflict, making it difficult to have an expected effect on the two conflicting parties. Therefore, the study recommends implementing proper and prompt monitoring and evaluation of policies to determine their impact on the targeted population while conducting more orientation programmes about the intention of the government intervention programmes and policies, with particular emphasis on reaching out to the rural communities and not just focusing on the activities in the media only.


PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
The article is specifically on the assessment of government's intervention policies and their impact on the herder-farmer coexistence in North Central Nigeria.No doubt, several policies and enactments had been rolled out by both the federal and the state governments towards addressing the reoccurring conflict between the herders and farmers especially in the North Central and Nigeria as a whole, but the conflict still persists.The study examined the effectiveness of the policies as perceived by the respondents in the affected area of the study.The findings show that even though the policies are in place, they have limited effect on addressing the constant conflict between the herders and farmers.This is due to the lack of proper monitoring and evaluation of the policies towards addressing their aim and objectives.
parties.Therefore, the study recommends implementing proper and prompt monitoring and evaluation of policies to determine their impact on the targeted population while conducting more orientation programmes about the intention of the government intervention programmes and policies, with particular emphasis on reaching out to the rural communities and not just focusing on the activities in the media only.

Introduction
Nigeria could be referred to as a heterogeneous nation with over 250 ethnic groups speaking no fewer than 500 different languages across the six key geopolitical zones (Olagbaju & Awosusi, 2019).In a cultural and linguistic environment with diverse nationalities, like Nigeria, conflict is a natural phenomenon.This is because it emanates from the differences in individuals' or groups' aspirations, values, or interests (Agaptus et al., 2021).These conflicts, no doubt, portend harmful effects on the country's cultural and social values, ethnic cohesion, social integration, stability, and nation building (Olagbaju & Awosusi, 2019).One major security and developmental challenge that has attracted much national discourse in the recent past is the conflict between herdsmen and farmers in different parts of the country.The violent conflicts between nomadic herders from northern Nigeria and sedentary agrarian communities in the central and southern zones have escalated in recent years and are spreading nationwide, threatening the country's sustainable security.
The Fulani herdsmen crisis remains a major issue in Nigeria, especially in North Central and Southwest regions (John et al., 2023).So far, statistics have shown that thousands have been killed as a result of the conflict and many more have been expelled from their homes, thereby creating a lot of social problems for the government to deal with (Ikezue & Ezeah, 2017).The farmer-herder conflict is a security issue that is complicated by a number of factors, one of which is the perpetual rise in population.As population rises, natural resources (such as land, grasses, water, etc.) that are vital for the survival of local communities are overburdened and face intense competition for the survival of people and animals.These rivalries frequently result in conflicts of many kinds, particularly between farmers and herders, whose way of life and sustenance are dependent on the availability of these resources.Therefore, conflicts over natural resources are widespread in Africa, particularly in Nigeria, where these group of people are found (Gbanite, 2001).Nevertheless, farming and pastoralism have coexisted for generations, with many farming and herding communities grow depending on one another via support and reciprocity.The security of lives and property has been negatively impacted by centuries-old conflicts between farmers and herders (Chabal et al., 2005).
The origin of the herder-farmer communal conflict dates back to the beginning of agriculture in Africa (Saleh, 2022).The notable factors responsible for the recurring conflict between herdsmen and farmers in North Central Nigeria are socio-cultural and linguistic-related differences (Olagbaju & Awosusi, 2019).The most recent and recurring communal violent conflict is the socio-political upsurge in North Central Nigeria, specially in Plateau, Kogi, Nasarawa, and Benue States between the herders and farmers, while Ehindero's (2021) study centered on arms proliferation, climate change, and herder-farmer conflict in the North Central region and its implication for sustainable development in Nigeria.
At various levels, the federal and state governments, communities, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have responded in diverse ways by the formation of different programmes and policies as a way of resolving the crisis between herders and farmers in order to improve their coexistence.Some of these programmes are the creation of the Grazing Reserve in 1965, the establishment of the National Commission for Nomadic Education in 1989, the deployment of security during the hit of conflict, the National Grazing Reserve (establishment) Bill 2016, statelevel legislations prohibiting open grazing, the Great Green Wall Initiative in 2013, the Federal Government's Comprehensive Livestock Development Plan in 2015, etc.
The spade of killings and increase in internally displaced persons brought to mind the need to investigate the various government's efforts to resolve the farmer-herder conflict whether they have been successful in improving their coexistence or not.Every attack and clash between the two land users are frequently accompanied by the deployment of government security personnel to the affected communities, who are quickly withdrawn once the conflict has passed, opening the door for new attacks that are more severe than the previous ones.Also, various policies and programmes of government targeted at bringing a lasting solution to the crisis have either not been implemented or followed up.This research, therefore, seeks to assess the effectiveness of the government's measures for dealing with the herder-farmer disputes.It focused on elucidating the content and applicability of these policies and mechanisms.Study objective: The main objective set for this research work is to examine the effectiveness of the various government intervention programmes or policies in improving the herder-farmer coexistence in North Central Nigeria.

Theoretical approaches to the herder-farmer conflicts in Nigeria
The herder-farmer conflicts have generated different theoretical postulations in the extant literature of conflict studies.Some of these theories provide deep insights into the predisposing factors that ignited herder-farmer conflicts, despite the merit of different contending theories, which do not sufficiently dissect the impact of government's policies in addressing the herder-farmer conflicts within the context of Nigerian socio-cultural landscape.The study adopts the dual concern model theory to illuminate the impact of government's intervention policies in resolving herder-farmer conflicts in the North Central region.The prevalence of socio-cultural impact arising from the clashes between the herders and farmers is anchored on the competition for the scarce resources (arable land in this context) and the various intervention policies and programmes with focus on resolving the conflict between the herders and farmers are better explained by Dual Concern Model theory.
The Dual Concern Model is a conflict resolution model or theory that determines how to prioritize fulfilling one's goals while also considering the concerns of others and keeping good connections in the conflict.Each orientation is concerned with unique and diverse ways of "to a high or low degree of self or others" (Moghadam, 2019)."Forcing, evading, obliging, compromising, and problem-solving" are some of them.Sorenso et al. (1999) adopted this model to explain that the "concern about self and concern for other" will motivate individual's or group's choice of the kind of conflict-handling style.The dual model is explained in terms of styles as follows: The first is the avoiding style, which represents a low level of concern for both self and others; the second style is dominating (or competing) style, which represents a high level of concern for self but a low level of concern for others; the third is the accommodating (or accommodating) style that denotes a low level of concern for self and a high level of concern for others; the fourth is integrating (or collaborating or problem-solving) style, which denotes a high level of concern for both self and others; and the fifth style is the compromising style, which denotes a moderate level of concern for both self and others (Schreiner, 2010).
Competing and avoiding styles are uncooperative, whereas collaborating and accommodating styles are cooperative, and compromising style is in the middle.In the same way, competing and collaborating styles are assertive, while avoiding and accommodating styles are unassertive but cooperative, and compromising style is somewhere in the middle.This theory explained that the application of any policy in resolving conflict must be situation-driven.This theory is relevant to this research work because it gives a balanced view of resolution approach to the conflict between the herder and farmer.This theory can be inferred that policy applied to solve the crisis in one area may not be applicable in another area although with similar conflict situations.

Methodology
The study employs a flexible research design using a modified case study approach.The research questions focus on issues to clarify the practicability of the various intervention programmes or policies in finding solution to the issues of conflict between herder and farmer (herder-farmer conflicts) in North Central Nigeria and thereby improving their coexistence.Specifically, the study employed an exploratory survey which was descriptive in nature, using both quantitative and qualitative research methods to achieve a rich conclusion.The qualitative aspect was found through in-depth interviews.The research equally carried out literature review on the various intervention programmes or policies in resolving conflict between the herders and farmers in Nigeria.Materials for literature review have been drawn from library and archives in Nigeria, academic and other resources available on the internet, and local publications are used to gather data.Also, administering of questionnaires, personal and phone interviews, e-mail exchanges and internet research were done to compile information regarding the historical development of herder-farmer crisis in Nigeria as well as current peace building efforts within Nigeria.
A number of non-probability sampling procedures were utilized for the purpose of this study, allowing the researcher to successfully pick respondents from the study's population.Purposive, convenient, and snowball sampling procedures were utilized as non-probability sampling strategies.Purposive sampling is the process of selecting certain elements that meet the pre-determined criteria (Moser & Korstjens, 2018;Nworgu, 1991).
Eight local government areas were purposively selected from the two states in North Central, that is Kogi and Benue States, four local government areas each.The eight local government areas which were selected cut across not only the three senatorial districts of the states under study, but also ethnic and cultural divide and where the conflict between farmers and herders is frequent in the states.Respondents were purposively selected based on their knowledge of the conflict, availability, convenience, consent and the various roles they played during the conflict.A total of 759 questionnaires were administered.Yamane (1967) sampling formula was used as indicated below with a 95% confidence level and P = 0.5.
where n is the sample size, N is the population size, and e is the level of precision (0.05).The calculated figure was adopted as the sample size for the study.
• Benue State Projected Population (2019) = 5,741,800 The data analyses were done using the percentage method to help in presenting the information gathered through the questionnaires administered.For the data presentation and analysis, frequency count and percentages methods were used, while the results were presented using tables and other graphical representations.Content analysis was done for the qualitative data generated to corroborate the findings of the quantitative data.

Result and discussion
Table 1 below shows the scientific calculation of sample size for the study.The result as shown on Table 2 revealed that a greater percentage of the respondents (32.7%) do not believe in the effectiveness of the policies in fostering the coexistence of herders and farmers.
In corroborating the above analysis through an in-depth interview, most of the interviewed farmers and herders reported that some of the intervention programmes are either not effective or fairly help to address the conflict and improve the coexistence of the herders and farmers in some areas.F 1 and F 2 made some profound statements of the effectiveness of the intervention policies and programmes to improve the coexistence which were narrated as follows: "If the so-called intervention policies and programmes are effective why has the number of killings of our people been on the increase?The programmes in addressing the conflict are not effective as the majority of the policies or programmes are only satisfying the interest of the people in power and not the common masses.Even though to me I see as fairly helpful, that is due to the havoc it could have caused if the policies are not introduced" (F 1 , A Farmer in Agatu LGA)  "Most of the time I wonder if people in government feel the pains of the common people, how policies or programmes can be designed to support some group for their business to continue to thrive at the detriment of the other.We have many families that have been displaced and the intervention programmes had not been able to bring them to their original communities.The measurement of the effectiveness of the intervention programmes or policies should be in line with this" (F 2 , A Farmer in Guma LGA) Table 3 revealed that the ethnocentric nature of the policies implemented by the government have been an hindrance to achieving the aims and intention of the government towards peaceful coexistence of herders and farmers.
Table 4 revealed that the policies implemented by the government are not addressing the root cause of the conflict which makes it difficult for complete eradication of such conflict but rather provide partial result which could turn out into a series of conflict when triggered.A larger percentage of the respondents believe that the policies are not addressing the immediate cause of the conflict, then such conflict will always reoccur until the cause is fully addressed.This result was also buttressed by the response of Indepth interview which asserted that I heard that government is trying to come up with the programmes or policies that will help us live peaceably in our community but how government will achieve this I don't know.For example, how will government come up with RUGA program that will take some portion of land from the community people and give such to total strangers and expect the people to be happy and support such program.(F 4 , A Farmer in Guma LGA) Another IDI respondents further noted that  How can you say a programme or policies designed by the government who only rely on information on the media address the fundamental causes of the conflict between the herders and farmers.Most of the underlining cause of the herders-farmers conflict are usually omitted when media are reporting.Government should get the local people involved when they want to address the issue of crisis in the locality.(F 1 , A Herder in Agatu LGA)

Hypothesis testing
H0: Government intervention policies have no effect on the improvement of herder-farmer coexistence in Nigeria.

H1:
Government intervention policies have effect on herder-farmer coexistence in Nigeria.
To test this hypothesis, items from the section B of the questionnaire were considered.A onesample t-test analysis was carried out to show the relationship between intervention policies and herders-farmers coexistence.
Table 5 shows the impact of intervention policies on the improvement of herder-farmer coexistence in the study area.R in the model shows the strength of the relationship.The value of R is 0.664.This suggests that the significant relationship between government intervention programmes or policies on herder-farmer coexistence in the study area is high.The R square in Table 5 depicts that the proportion of the variance on the improvement of coexistence is predictable from the provision of the intervention programme.The R square value is 0. 441 or 44.1% if expressed in percentage.This is an indication that 44.1% of the variance in the improvement of the herder-farmer coexistence can be explained by the variance in the intervention policies.
Anova state that when p-value is below 0.05, the null hypothesis should be rejected, but if it is above 0.05, it should be accepted.Following the p-value of 0.000 which is less than 0.05 threshold, coupled with the fact that the F value is 596.222 at 0.000 significant level as shown in Table 6 below shows that there is a significant relationship between the government intervention policies on the level of herder-farmer coexistence.
The coefficient as shown in Table 7 shows the model that expresses the extent to which the intervention policies impact on herder-farmer coexistence in the study area.The significance level  below 0.05 implies statistical confidence at 95%.This suggests that the government intervention policies or programmes have a significant relationship with the improvement of the herder-farmer coexistence in the study area.Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative was accepted.It can be found that the various intervention programmes or policies have a significant relationship on the level of peaceful coexistence of the herders and farmers in the study area.

Discussion of findings
The findings of this study on the effect of the government intervention policies in the herderfarmer conflict shows a positive relationship between policies of the government and peaceful coexistence of the herder-farmer.The various intervention policies or programmes in tackling the herder-farmer crisis and improving the coexistence have not been helpful.When compared with the resources committed to the programmes and the reoccurrence of conflict among the herderfarmer, the effect has not been really felt and significant.A total of 32.7% categorically declared that the intervention programmes are not helpful while 24.1% of the respondents are not even sure if the policies or programmes are helpful or not in ensuring herder-farmer peaceful coexistence.This finding is corroborated by a similar study by Gukas (2019) in the Plateau state which revealed that both government and NGOs have intervened in peace-building among herders and farmers, but the interventions by the government have not yielded a significant impact.The study further buttresses their findings by suggesting that government should intensify its efforts in building peace between herders and farmers in the state through collaborative programmes with community leaders and NGOs operating in such areas, the government should ensure that the security operative deploys to maintain peace in herders and farmers rated communities adhere strictly to rules of engagement, and that government should establish a department for ethnic and religious affairs in all local government areas in the state.
The result obtained also tally with Duru (2016) report that a gruesome attack on Agatu local government area of Benue State in February 2016 in which about 7000 people were driven from six villages by the Fulani herdsmen.The author further stated that despite heavy gunshots by the herdsmen, no military or security presence was felt.Over 200 persons were killed and houses were razed.The result obtained also agreed with the study conducted by Azaigba (2017) where he identifies two major prescriptive policy options contending as remedies to the problem, namely, the resuscitation of grazing reserves/grazing routes and the establishment of ranches.But it was found out that these options do not have an axiomatic effect in terms of workability given the widening dynamics of the conflict.This suggests that simplistic solutions will not mitigate the recurrent fratricidal conflict between herders and farming communities in the North Central region and Nigeria at a large scale.The study further recommends that critical thinking is required to evolve a strategy that takes into cognizance demographic dynamics, environmental exigencies, political sentiments as well as investment requirements.Ranching is proposed as a more promising option but its efficacy depends on the quantum of financial investments in the strategy as well as the political sentiments of the federating ethnic communities.
Reviewing the effectiveness of the intervention programmes, Olagbaju & Awonusi, (2019) reported that notable among the factors responsible for the recurring conflict between herdsmen and farmers in North Central Nigeria are socio-cultural and linguistic-related differences.Previous attempts to solve these incessant clashes have largely focused on communication, compensation, creation of cattle colony, proclamation of bans on grazing and so on.It was found out by the study that these approaches have left out the choice of language of mediation as a key part to be considered.This agreed with the findings of this study that emphasize the need for the domestication of the various intervention programmes or policies to fit in to the socio-cultural beliefs of the communities affected by this conflicting situation.Dimelu et al. (2017) in their study recommended that there should be a strategic and regular orientation of resource users on the need for co-existence and adherence to regulations regarding the use of resources.Multi-stakeholders efforts exploring grass root participation should be promoted by government and NGOs in policies and strategies for the management of conflict.The result from the study supported this finding since a large percentage of the respondents agreed to the fact that involvement of the community people in the formation of the intervention will go a long way in helping to solve the crisis thereby improving the herder's-farmer's coexistence.
The findings of the study coupled with the previous findings of a similar study indicated that there is still a challenge with regard to the various intervention policies in addressing the herderfarmer conflict, and so there is a need for deliberate effort in addressing the gap with respect to the people's perspective of the policies or programmes which has been ethnocentric in nature.The data generated revealed that 51% of the respondents see the policies or programmes designed to achieve an ethnic agenda rather than an intervention programme to help improve the herderfarmer coexistence.This is validated by the social conflict theory which has the major belief that the bourgeoises (powerful people, the rich) use policies and programmes as another form of exploitation of the proletariat (the have not).In this wise, the sentiment injected into the formation of the policies or programmes which seem to favour a particular ethnic group against the other should be addressed if the purpose of using such programmes or policies is to help improve the peaceful coexistence of the herders and farmers is to be achieved.

Concluding reflections
The study analyses the impact of government intervention programmes and policies in improving the herder-farmer coexistence in North Central Nigeria.The study concludes that even though policies are enacted by the government towards ensuring peaceful coexistence between herders and farmers, people's perception of the various government intervention programmes in their locality has shown that the policies are not helpful in addressing the root cause of the conflict.Where people in the community are not sure of how helpful the policies are in addressing the conflict between herders and farmers could be seen as not helpful as people within the locality would see.Also, prompt intervention and proper monitoring and evaluation on the impact of government policies should be of priority towards assessing the areas of concern and where necessary.
The following policy-based recommendations are suggested for proper conflict resolutions between the herders and farmers in North Central Nigeria: (a) Going by the findings of this research work, it is recommended that more orientation programmes about the various government intervention programmes/policies in resolving the herder-farmer conflict in the North Central Nigeria need to be done with particular emphasis on reaching out to the rural communities and not just focus on the activities on the media only.It is recommended that traditional channels of communication be adopted in creating the awareness as well as the intent of the various intervention programmes/ policies for proper understanding of the locales as suggested by Sobowale (1983), i.e. the illiterate herders and farmers who are the major players in the conflict situation.
(b) It is recommended that a periodic review of the various intervention programmes/policies needs to be done to examine whether the implemented programme or policy is achieving its purpose of resolving the conflicting situation or not.The various stakeholders in the implementation of the intervention programmes or policies must be dynamic to understand the best programme/policy to adopt in various situations.
(c) The study equally recommends adopting a government intervention programme/policy in any conflicting situation and getting the involvement of the community people for such policy to work.It was revealed that one of the major challenges to the effectiveness of the intervention programme is the lack of involvement of the community's people in the formation and implementation and therefore the people see the programmes or policies as alien, and, in most cases, they want to fight it against working with the government for the success of the programme.

Table 1 . Calculation of sample size using Taro Yamane Formula
• Benue State Projected Population = 5,741,800• Kogi State Projected Population = 4,473,500

Table 2 . Descriptive statistics of respondents on effectiveness of the various intervention policies in improving the herder-farmer coexistence Variable Frequency Percentage To what extent do you believe that the government intervention policies have helped to improve coexistence of herder-farmer?
Source: Researcher's fieldwork (2022).

Table 4 . Descriptive statistics of respondents on the effectiveness of the various intervention policies in addressing the causes of the conflict Variable Frequency Percentage
Source: Researcher's fieldwork (2022).