THE IMPACT OF CONFLICT ON THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL HOUSEHOLDS IN THE NIGER DELTA OF NIGERIA

Abstract

This study analysed the impact of conflict on the livelihoods of rural households in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study include: analysing the nature and typology of conflict in the study area and identifying factors that contribute to the sustenance of conflicts, assessing livelihood patterns among rural households in the study area and determining the impact of conflicts on the livelihood systems of rural households based on the sustainable livelihood framework as well as determining the impact of conflict on welfare and prevalence of poverty among rural households. Multi-stage and stratified random and purposive sampling methods were used to select 284 households from 7 communities in the study area, four of the communities were experiencing on-going conflict at the time of the study. Community level data was obtained using the sustainable livelihood assessment methods through focus group discussions (GFD) and Town Hall sessions (THS) while household data were obtained using multi-topic structured questionnaire with both open and close-ended questions specifically designed for the study. The questionnaire was pre-tested and later administered to 284 households to obtain required information. Data analysis was carried out with MS Excel and Minitab 15 application. Descriptive statistics, scenario analysis, conflict intractability, escalatory frameworks and micro-macro linkages were used to analyse conflict. The impact of conflict on the livelihoods of rural households was analysed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques. The Cost of Basic Need (CBN) approach was used to measure household welfare, in terms of per capita consumption while Foster, Greer and Thorbecke (1984) FGT class of poverty index was used to compare the welfare levels of households in conflict with those not in conflict area to establish the impact of conflict on household welfare. In addition, inferential statistics such as Pearson correlation, multiple regression, ANOVA and t-test were used to analyse the data and test for relationships among selected variables. Results from the study showed the impact of conflict on the livelihoods of rural households to include loss of livelihood assets and distortion of livelihood priorities. The study also confirmed that conflict reduces household access to basic social services. Results from t-test showed significant difference in access to healthcare and basic education between households in conflict and those in non-conflict areas at 5% level. Also, teenage boys and young men were found to be the most vulnerable age group in conflict followed by infants and children and then, teenage girls and young women. While young males are vulnerable to militia recruitment, drop-out from school and death during armed conflict, infants and children are vulnerable to mortality, malnutrition, infectious diseases and loss of parents. A poverty line of N18, 108.44 was computed for the study. Results from analysis of poverty showed that households in conflict fell deeper below poverty line and experienced more severe poverty than households in non-conflict area. Although per capita consumption of households in conflict was lower than those in non-conflict area, the difference was not statistically significant at both 5% and 1% levels. The incidence of poverty in conflict area stood at 24.32% compared to 18.80% in non-conflict area. Also, poverty gap index of households in conflict (0.078) was higher than households in non-conflict area (0.033) and the difference is significant at 1% level. Poverty severity was higher among households in conflict (0.00608) compared to 0.00108 for households in non-conflict area and the difference was also significant at 5% level. Results from qualitative poverty self assessment and wealth ranking method showed that households in conflict perceived themselves as poorer than households in non-conflict areas. Five variables responsible for decline in welfare levels among households in conflict were identified in the study as follows: number of dependants, nature of conflict experienced by household, loss of livelihood assets, forced migration and death of household member(s). Household welfare decreases with increasing number of dependants, increasing complexity of conflict experienced as well as increasing magnitude of loss of livelihood assets and death of household members. Per capita consumption of households in conflict was negatively correlated with number of dependants, loss of livelihood assets, forced migration and death of household member respectively. The relationships between per capita consumption and each of the four variables were significant at 0.01 levels. This means per capita consumption of households in conflict, which symbolises household welfare level, decreased with increases in number of dependants, loss of livelihood assets, forced migration and death of household member.