Water Resource Conflict in Kenya

Abstract

Despite the many recent studies on resource conflict, its effect on community livelihoods, relations and security, these studies, mainly, focus on the link between conflict and the consequent inefficient natural resource utilization, dismal economic development as well as the decline of state hegemony in matters security. The current project was, fundamentally, consistent to this trend, given that its aim was to augment the extant understanding of resource-based conflicts, intercommunity relations and state patronage. The study examined the Pokot-Turkana inter-ethnic relations using the Turkwel Hydro-electric Dam (THD) as the central arena to illustrate the relationship binary of conflict and cooperation between the two neighbouring communities. Consequently, in this project, I argue that, before the dam, Pokot and Turkana only fought between the months of April and June. This is the period each community has enough pasture and healthy livestock. The study refers to it as the rain period. Secondly, as its immediate impacts, the construction of the Turkwel Hydroelectric dam dried up the river in the downstream; it displaced many people1although in the same period it created casual or short term manual jobs for the locals and thirdly, both locally and internationally, the dam became a new field in Kenya on which there featured hydro-politics, state patronage and conflict which was later influenced by the installation of the Safaricom communication booster for staff and locals but instead embraced by the ngoroko (warriors from both Turkana and Pokot) to acquire more mulika mwizi (simple mobile phone). The research concludes that the state hegemony was missing in the region. Despite the fact that the Pokot and Turkana areas such as Turkwel, Kakong, Ombolion, Kasei, Kainuk, Lami nyeusi and Lorogon were regarded as insecure, people relied on the ngoroko for protection and security. The irony is that ngoroko were blamed by state and some faction of local people for chaos and insecurity in the region. I further conclude that in academic sector, it is the Catholic Church which took over the provision of basic needs to the Pokot and Turkana people. In essence this took away the two communities sovereignty and instead created dependant mentality on the church to provide education and food while the ngoroko provided security. Therefore, due to the breadth of this debate in regard to the cooperation and conflict over resources, there is need for more studies to shed light on possible answers to the challenges the two communities face