Livelihood issues in herdsmen-farmers’ conflict among farming communities in Kogi State, Nigeria

Conflicts between crop farmers and herders are common in nearly every part of Nigeria. It is a formidable challenge to economic development, threat to food security and sustainable livelihood of the agrarian communities. The study assessed the causes and effects of herdsmen-farmers’ conflicts on livelihood of agrarian communities in Kogi State. A total of 135 randomly selected crop farmers was used. Data were collected by use of structured interview and focus group discussion, and analysed using descriptive statistics and factor analysis. The results showed that crop farmers were predominantly male (85.2%), married (85.9%) and with mean age of 51 years. They were small scale farmers with average farm size of 2.9 ha and were engaged in the production of yam (97.8%), cassava (92.6%), maize (92.6%) and other arable crops, mainly for income and household food supply. The farmers indicated that violation of laws/tradition, livelihood interference and cultural factors were the major causes of conflict between crop farmers and herdsmen. Consequently, the socio-economic life, production outcome and settlement of crop farmers are affected, cumulating to breakdown in livelihood assets of farmers. The study recommends that there should be strategic and regular orientation of resource users on the need for co-existence and adherence to regulations regarding use of resources. Multi-stakeholders’ efforts exploring grass root participation should be promoted by government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in policies and strategies for management of conflict. Farmers should be assisted with productive resources and training by extension services to reduce vulnerability and protracted conflict in the farming communities.


INTRODUCTION
Over time, many herding and farming communities in the same area have developed interdependent relationships through reciprocity, others by exchange and support (Moritz, 2010).Mwamfupe (2015), opines that farmer-herders' relationships are characterized by both conflict and complementarity and are actually two faces of the same coin.According to Hussein (1998), the relationship has always moved between cooperation, competition and *Corresponding author.E-mail: mabeldimelu@gmail.com or mabel.dimelu@unn.edu.ng.
Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License conflicts.Herders graze on farmlands that belong to crop farmers and farmers depend on animal dugs for improving soil fertility.Also pastoralists require the calories produced by crop farmers, much as the crop farmers often require the protein and dairy products produced by pastoralists (Abba and Usman, 2008).However, with decreasing interdependent livelihood activities, the relationship is increasingly characterized by incessant conflicts.Tonah (2006) reports that farmer-herder clashes have only since the 20th century become widespread in the coastal countries of West Africa.It is becoming common in nearly every part of Nigeria.According to Pasquale et al. (2007), pastoralist-crop farmers' conflict is the most predominant type of resource use conflict.In a newspaper study of conflict in Nigeria, Fasona and Omajola (2005) reported that farmer-herdsmen conflict accounted for about 35% of conflicts cases reported in Nigerian newspapers.It is widespread in the country and has been on the increase in recent times.Nweze (2005) reported that between 1996 and 2005, 19 people died and 42 were injured in farmers-herders' conflicts in Imo State.Another study of 27 communities in central Nigeria shows that over 40% of household surveyed had experienced agricultural land-related conflicts, with respondents recalling conflicts that were as far back as 1965 and 2005 (Nyong and Fiki, 2005).In the guinea savannah area of Kwara State, scholars reported that out of about 150 households interviewed, 22 experienced losses of livestock, while eight household reported loss of human lives (Olabode and Ajibade, 2010;Fiki and Lee, 2004).Further study by Ofuoku and Isife (2009) also reveal that in the south-south region of Nigeria, especially in Delta and Edo states, more than 40 million worth of crops are usually lost annually due to invasion of cattle.More recently, documentation from Sunday Trust Newspaper by Okoli and Atelhe (2014), reported about 13 cases of farmer-herdsmen conflicts across states of the federation which claimed 300 lives of the citizens.
In Kogi State, there have been instances of conflict between cattle herders and crop farmers in Igala Mela/Odolo Local Government Area (LGA), Ibaji, and Ofu LGAs over crop destruction by cattle, killing of a herder and stabbing of a farmer, respectively, following reprisal attacks on different occasions (personal communication).Thus, Gbaka (2014), rightly states that significant loss of lives and property has occurred in many parts of Nigeria including Katsina, Plateau, Taraba, Kogi, Kwara, Nasarawa, Adamawa, Gombe, Yobe, Kebbi, Zamfara and Sokoto states in the north; Oyo State in the south west; Abia State in the south east; and Delta and Edo in the south south.In the past eight years, conflict accounted for 615 deaths out of a total of 61,314 fatalities in the Nigeria Watch database (Olayoku, 2014).
Advances in literature have attributed farmer-herdsmen conflict to competition over resource use, particularly land, population growth of herds and human, production system, south ward movement of pastoralists into the humid and sub humid zones, incomparable goals of the disputants and behaviors that undermine the goals of each other (Olabode and Ajibade, 2010;Nyong, 2010;Abbass, 2009;Adebayo and Olaniyi, 2008;Abba and Usman, 2008;Tonah, 2006).On the contrary, Umar (2002), in a study of pastoral agricultural conflict in Zamfara State found that the Hausa farmers and the Fulani herders have some perception for each other and this affects their relationship.While the Fulani see the Hausas as Kado (meaning infidels or unbelievers) whose property they can use without offence to God, the Hausas on their own part see the Fulan i as intruders, uncivilized and uninformed.This perception has been on since the Jihad of Sokoto caliphate and so they have been at loggerhead and hence can be engaged in conflict with slightest provocation.More broadly, other scholars report that climate change, the migration further south, growth of agro-pastoralism, expansion of farming on pastures, invasion of farmlands by cattle, assault on non-Fulani women by herders, blockage of stock routes and water points, freshwater scarcity, burning of rangelands, cattle theft, inadequate animal health care and disease control, overgrazing on fallow lands, defecation on streams and roads by cattle, extensive sedentarisation, ineffective coping strategies, ethnic stereotyping, and the breakdown of conflict intervention mechanisms are the root causes of such violence in rural areas (Ofuoku and Isife, 2009;Adekunle and Adisa, 2010;Blench, 2010;Odoh and Chigozie, 2012;Solagberu, 2012;Audu, 2013;Bello, 2013;McGregor, 2014).
Conflict threatens the livelihood resources of people particularly farming communities due to high dependent on natural resources for survival.Herder-farmer conflicts not only have a direct impact on the lives and livelihoods of those involved, they also disrupt and threaten the sustainability of agricultural and pastoral production in West Africa (Moritz, 2010) and invariably the sustainability of livelihoods of rural communities.Livelihood in this context includes all forms of economic generation and employment that support health and wellbeing such as agriculture, small businesses and manufacturing (United State Agency for International Development (USAID), 2005).According to the report, it comprises means by which households obtain and maintain access to the resources necessary to ensure immediate and long survival.These essential resources can be categorized into physical, natural, human, financial, social and political.Households used these assets to withstand shocks and manage risk that threatens their well-being.According to the report, conflict restricts or blocks access to one or more of these assets and at its instance, people try to find other ways of obtaining those resources, or compensate for the loss of one resource by intensifying their efforts to secure another (USAID, 2005).Furthermore, conflict has the capacity to severely undermine and constrain development efforts by destroying infrastructure, interrupting production system and diverting resources from productive uses (Adetula, 2007).More often, crop farmers are highly vulnerable, perhaps due to the subsistence, small scale, rudimentary system of production and over dependence on natural resources for livelihood.Besides, they have limited resources and are dependent on rainfall, traditional farming implements (hoes and cutlasses), family and hired labour with poor access to institutional and infrastructural facilities (input, advisory services and market information, roads, etc.) (Attah, 2012), which have implications for yield per hectare.An investigation on the livelihood impacts on rural farming communities is crucial for appropriate response and intervention by stakeholders.Besides, it is relevance for informed strategy on effective and sustainable management and resolution of conflict.Thus, the study aimed to: (1) Describe the socioeconomic characteristics of rural crop farmers in Kogi State; (2) Ascertain the perceived causes of conflict between crop farmers and herdsmen and (3) Ascertain the effects of conflict on livelihood of rural crop farmers in Kogi State.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Inter-group conflict according to Beltran (2010) is an incompatibility of goal, beliefs, attitudes or behaviour.The author enumerated common incompatibility of goals that can cause inter-group conflict to include power, economic and value differences.Economic conflict is competition for resources, while power conflict is a situation where a group fights for dominance over one another.Value conflict on the other hand, involves disagreement between group's beliefs or lifestyles.In other words, conflict has various components including differences in tasks, values, attitudes and goals as groups try to gain control over scarce resources.Butera and Marcel (2008) assert that conflicts emerge from a complex sequence of events in which cultural and political factors are always present; while structural theory emphasizes the immediate and underlying factors that could cause conflict, and presents a number of factors that are responsible for the emergence and escalation of conflict.
According to Moritz (2010), explanations of herdmenfarmers' conflicts have generally been structural in nature, invoking factors shared by all members of both communities.The author affirms that the two main theoretical approaches to the study of farmers-herders' conflict in Africa are both structural: environmental security and political ecology.Environmental security scholars, like Thomas Homer-Dixon, emphasize on the role of resource scarcity and increasing competition for these scarce resources as the primary, though not the only reason for more frequent violent conflicts over natural resources (Homer-Dixon, 1999).Political ecologists have challenged Homer-Dixon's thesis that there is a causal link between resource scarcity and violent conflicts (Hartmann, 2001).In another hand, Manu et al. (2014), opines that many factors that contribute to conflicts in Africa have little or no link to environment, natural resources and rural development.These factors include political, religious, ethnic, economics, land tenure system and historical feuds.Moritz (2010) further enumerates several structural factors identified by researchers that contribute to the increasing incidence of conflicts between herders and farmers, namely, resource scarcity, decreasing interdependence of pastoral and agricultural economies, institutional failure to resolve conflicts, the larger political context and historical context or cultural differences between herders and farmers.
The USAID ( 2005) reiterates that even where there are other primary causes of an escalation of tensions, livelihood failure can contribute to the emergence of conflict by weakening the social fabric, making people resort to desperate means to obtain resources, and deepening vulnerability to exploitation by those with an interest in promoting conflict for political or economic gain.Also, as the effects of conflict are increasingly felt at the community and individual levels, the original ideological causes of a conflict will frequently be supplanted by others linked to protection or restoration of livelihoods (USAID, 2005).In another hand, shocks associated with conflicts invariably impact on the livelihood of the disputants and communities at large.

METHODOLOGY
The study was carried out in Kogi State.The state lies between latitudes 6° 33 1 and 7°49 1 N and longitudes 6°45 1 and 7° 49 1 E. It has a population of 3,278,487 inhabitants (National Population Commission, 2006) with large expanse of fadama lowlands in the river basins and stretches of tropical rainforest in the south and western belt of the state.Agriculture is the principal means of livelihood of about 85% of the population, and the dominant crops are yam, maize, cassava and cocoyam and tree crops.Other occupations of the inhabitants of the state include fishing done by communities living along the river banks and trading (Onucheyo, 1999).The livestock kept include cattle, sheep, goats and chicken on free range basis.
The population of the study constituted all crop farmers in the state.A survey design in a multistage sampling technique was used.Out of the 21 Local Government Areas (LGAs) in the state, 16 are mostly associated with farmer-herder conflict.Nine were purposively selected, representing the three agricultural zones in the state.In each of the selected LGAs, three farming village communities were purposively selected because of the high incidence of crop farmers-herders' conflict making a total of 27 villages.Five crop farmers were randomly selected from list of crop farmers in each of the 27 villages, thus giving a total of 135 crop farmers used for the study.
The respondents were requested to indicate their sex, age in years, marital status, educational qualification, farm size in hectare, the crops grown, production motives, source of labour, membership of organizations and income (naira/year).To identify factors responsible for conflict, respondents indicated on a four point Likert type scale of very great extent (4); great extent (3); some extent (2); no extent (1), the extent to which the listed factors contributed to outbreak of conflict in their communities.Some of the items listed included: damage to the crops by cattle, blockage of the cattle routes with crop farms, pollution of source of water by the herders, etc.
Information on the effects of conflict on agricultural production and livelihood was elicited.The crop farmers indicated from the list of possible effects, the perceived seriousness of the items using four point Likert type-scale of very serious = 4, serious = 3, not very serious = 2, not serious = 1.Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and exploratory factor analysis using principal component method with varimax rotation of Kaiser normalization.Factor analysis is used mainly when one is interested in knowing whether some underlying pattern or relationship exist among variables; discovering a new set of factors; or confirming existing factors as being the true factors (Kleinbaum and Kupper, 1978).The factor loading high under each factor variable (Beta weight) represents a correlation of variables to the identified factors and has the same interpretation as any correlation coefficient.However, only variables with loading of 0.40 and above (10% overlapping variance), (Chukwuone et al., 2006) were used in naming factors.Also factors that loaded in more than one places were discarded.

Socio-economic characteristics of respondents
Table 1 indicates that 85.2% of crop farmers were males, married (85.9%) with average household size of 12 persons.Crop farmers have a large household size which may have resulted from the need for family labour with the consequence of more dependant family members.The average age of the respondents was about 51 years.Majority (52.2%) of the farmers were below the mean age indicating that the farmers are still in their active and productive years.Consequently, they may respond violently to conflict or aggression from herdsmen due to youthful exuberance.Also, the results show the dominance of males in farming probably because men are more energetic and capable of involving in tedious production activities associated with farming than women (Adesiji et al., 2012).However, it is surprising because women are presently taking up several agricultural activities including the ones traditionally accepted as male roles, perhaps due to continuous exodus of ablebodied rural male folk to peri-urban and urban areas in search of greener pasture.
About 70% of the crop farmers had formal education.Though, the respondents are literate but the educational level attained is relatively low.Only 29.6 and 22% had first school leaving certificate and senior school certificate, respectively.This could negatively affect the farmers' perception of conflict situation and subsequently their behavior and altitude to conflict.This might be one of the reasons why farmer-herders' conflict has remained unabated and a regular phenomenon in the state.The respondents are subsistence farmers with average farm size of 2.9 ha.The major crops grown were maize (92.6%), yam (97.8%), cassava (92.6%) and legume (48.2%).These are among the most common staple food crops in most rural communities in Nigeria.According to Olabode and Ajibade (2010) some of these crops (yam, maize, and guinea corn) are of nutritional value and attractive to cattle.Consequently, the farms could be a source of conflict as herds get attracted to the crops during grazing.Farming was done purposely for income and consumption (88.2%).This confirms Adisa and Adekunle (2010) who reported that the motive for farming was majorly for income generation in North Central Nigeria.
The average annual income of farmers was N190,545.This is far below one dollar per day, showing the level of poverty in the farming communities.Thus, attacks on the farms could attract serious dispute with opponents, being the major means of livelihood.Hence, farmer-herders' conflict are often a consequence of struggle for survival.A significant proportion (59.7%) of the respondents belonged to organizations.This is not only a veritable tool for enhancing production through economy of scale, but more importantly, an instrument for conflict resolution and sustainable peace when effectively harnessed.According to Ekong (2010) membership of social organization in the rural areas is of immense value if such organizations could help members accomplish tasks an individual cannot achieve alone.

Perceived causes of conflict between herdsmen and farmers
Table 2 shows the results of rotated matrix indicating the extracted factors based on the responses of rural crop farmers.Three major causal issues were identified namely violation of agreements, livelihood interference and cultural factors.

Violation of agreements/traditions
The causative variables were sedentarization of herders on farm land without permission (0.84), herders assuming grazing right without the consent of farmers in the area (0.62), little respect for traditional grazing custom (0.61), population growth (0.59), and herders' claim of land as common property (0.59) (Table 2).Others included noncompliance with laid down rules (0.46), sexual harassment (0.43), and uncontrolled grazing (0.42).The migratory and sedentary patterns of pastoralists influence their belief and altitude to land ownership and use.In most communities in Nigeria, herders are given temporary settlement right which they often over-stay and subsequently demand equal right of tenure and exploitation.Moreover, the Fulani herders believe that land is a common property that should be used without permission from anybody.This explains the regular violation and non-compliance to traditional laws guiding land ownership and grazing of livestock.Moreover, the more sedentarized the herdsmen are on farmers' farmland, the less available land for farming and this could increase potentials for conflict between crop farmers and herdsmen.Besides, the disputants are from different ethnic groups with varying values, belief which affect conflict behavior; and invariably acceptance and compliance to existing laws.Furthermore, growth in human population increases pressure on land, as both actors strive to meet the food needs of the population.This could compel farmers to increase their farm size including marginal land areas and cattle routes/fadama land.Invariably, this reduces rangeland for gazing and sometimes interferes with livestock route.According to Ayih (2003) in Okoli and Altehe (2014), people tend to move from Northern and Southern Nigeria into the Middle Belt region where population is relatively low and where there is availability of vast arable land, increasing competition over farmland.With this development, grazing areas that were hitherto abundant are being taken over by scattered small farms, making grazing difficult.
Grazing rights assumed by herders without farmers' consent means disregard to grazing custom with erroneous perception of land as a common property.Furthermore, farmers' non-compliance with grazing routes could be responsible for the uncontrolled grazing of cattle by herders.Farmers are often attracted to farmland across livestock routes, perhaps due to high quantity of organic manure on the route or for dry season vegetable production, for example use of fadama shallow aquifer for crop production possess negative consequences for pastoralists who depend on such facilities for dry season grazing.Pastoralists consider where they traditionally graze herd to be their land, while farmers on the other hand, view any undeveloped land as available for cultivation, probably with permission from the traditional authority in the area.Consequently, as a way of showing disapproval of farmers' action, herders often allow animals to graze uncontrollably on the crops, exacerbating potential for conflicts.

Livelihood interference
This includes factors that negate livelihood activities of farming communities.They include burning of range land (0.71), pollution of community water source (0.69), pilfering from farms (0.57), cattle herders not obeying the elders (0.56), destruction of farmland (0.55), and herder's over stay in a location (0.48) (Table 2).This is in congruence with Ofem and Inyang (2014), who reported that burning of range land, pollution of water source, disrespect for traditional leaders, and destruction of farmland were the major causes of conflict between herders and farmers.Similarly, Adebayo and Olaniyi (2008), further reported grazing on harvested crops, theft of farmers' produce by herders and pulverization of soil, among others as causes of conflict between crop farmers and herders.The traditional practice of burning range land is common among herders and is carried out to stimulate early sprouting of fresh pastures as the dry vegetation get burnt.Often in the process of burning, fire spreads into adjourning farms destroying farms, stored food stuff in the bans and farm implements.Also, it adversely affects soil biomass, conservation and sustainability of the environment.Over-stay in a location by herdsmen could result to destruction of farm land, pilfering from farms and burning of rangeland.As herders stay long in an area, the hoof of animal irreversibly hardens the soil upon which they pass and makes cultivation extremely difficult.In most communities in Nigeria, herders are given temporal settlement right which they often over-stay and subsequently demand equal right of tenure and exploitation.This largely accounts for greater conflict situations in almost all states of the federation.
In the case of water pollution particularly along fadama areas, traditionally used for dry season grazing, herds-men often lead their cattle into water sources to drink and in the process they defecate and urinate inside.This could trigger open fight between youths in such communities and the herdsmen.The communities are denied access to safe drinking water and environment.Above all, Fulani herdsmen wonder into fields during growing season while their herds eat or trample on crops due to lack of attention or the cattle's stray movement resulting to tension in communities (Haro and Dayo, 2005).

Cultural factors
Cultural differences among resource users promote conflict situation in communities.These are issues associated with language barrier (0.83), proximity of disputants (0.78), cultural differences (0.77), and destruction of irrigation equipment by herders (0.42) (Table 2).In an environment with cultural variations, sometimes evidence from differences in language, values, belief, livelihood strategies and practices, there are possibilities of misunderstanding between individuals in such communities, which could translate to conflict with little provocation.Conflict arises from inconsistencies of needs of members, inefficient communication between groups with different languages and culture.Crop farmers come near herders as they expand farms and rotate production due to declining soil fertility and search for marginal lands; and farmers with farms close to cattle routes or camps are likely to be in regular conflict with herdsmen.Proximity to disputant increases potential for conflict because according to realistic theory of conflict, when competition over resource is present, proximity and contact increase inter-group hostility.Also, Hewstone and Greenland (2000), stated that the incompatibility of goals and competition for scarce resources make the source of conflict to be realistic.The incompatibility of goals, belief, values associated with differences in culture explain the attitude, behaviour and responses to conflict.
Overall, the results of factor analysis present combination of factors as causes of conflict among resource users.The respondents recognized the existence of underlying structural factors livelihood issues linked to either competition over resource, livelihood failure and protection.This supports Maiese (2003) that there can be rarely any clear cut single source of event that can precipitate conflict, but rather combination of interdependent factors.Farmers and herders live in common geographic areas with scarce natural resources particularly land and water, which are dependent on environmental changes as basic livelihood assets, hence the incompatibility of goals and the resultant conflict between the group.The results show the preponderance of the actions that are linked to livelihood failure and competition; and responses of group in conflict to attempts by the other group to undermine their livelihood

Effects of conflict on the livelihood of crop farmers
Principal component analysis indicated that conflict affects socio-economic, production output and security of life of crop farmers (Table 3).

Socio-economic factors
Table 3 shows that conflict between crop farmers and herders resulted to outbreak of hunger and diseases (0.75), insufficient food supply to the farming community (0.72), longer time spent in the farm (0.69), decrease in farm output (0.67), suspicion along ethnic and religious divide (0.66), poor harvest (0.62), lost of income (0.58) and sustains injuries (0.54).Some variables like outbreak of hunger and diseases, injuries, loss of income, suspicion along religion and ethnic divide and poor harvest have positive relationship, which means that conflict increases the aforementioned conditions of life and is as well exacerbated by these conditions.Similar studies also reported loss of a whole farm of standing crops, loss of human lives, quality of relationship and material resources (Fiki and Lee, 2004;Adisa and Adekunle, 2010).Conflict significantly affects both physical and financial livelihood assets of farmers.Destruction of crop in farms could cause poor harvest, insufficient food supply, loss of productive resource culminating to poor income, outbreak of hunger, nutrition related diseases and poverty.This could influence farmers to resort to unsustainable livelihood options, spend more time on the farm so as to make up for supply deficit; and others might increase dependent on neighbours and relations for survival leading to vicious cycle of poverty among households.On another hand, when crops are destroyed and the farming environments become unsafe that farmers abandon crops in the farms; it could lead to loss of biodiversity and poor access to human and financial assets.Abba and Usman (2008) also reported that farmers abandon the cultivation of some crops to avert conflict with herdsmen.
Above all, conflict leads to breakdown of social system evidence as ethnic and religious divide, insecurity of life, hunger and poverty.It destroys or/and weakens the social assets of rural communities.Farmers witnessed destruction of mutual trust and intensification of suspicious along ethnic and religious groups, and general breakdown of laws and order in communities.Invariably, this affects the social and political assets of farmers because members of communities can hardly come together with common voice on issues that require public intervention.

Production losses
Conflict in agrarian communities results to rottening of crops in ban and other storage places (0.83), lack of proper care of crops in the field (0.82), abandonment of crop in the farm (0.79), absence of agricultural labour force (0.78), and late planting (0.70) (Table 3).This entails losses along production process, ranging from production, harvesting, preservation and marketing.This is because herder-farmers' conflict creates an atmosphere of uncertainty, insecurity, breakdown of economic activities and migration of people to safer places.Farmers compromise many production activities resulting to low yield, poor economic return and loss of planting materials.Similarly, agricultural labour usually supplied by rural youths/households is seriously affected due to loss of life and displacement.Most youths migrate to more peaceful locations, thereby creating labour scarcity in the conflict-stricken zones.This negatively impacts on human capital formation as well as agricultural productivity, and subsequently farm decision and livelihood activities.

Farmers' displacement
Herdsmen-farmers' conflict leads to forced relocation of farmers (0.77), increased number of widows and orphan (0.90), migration to marginal areas (0.55) and unsafe environment for farming (0.53) (Table 3).The result confirms Olabode and Ajibade (2010) who reported a wide spread displacement of farmers from their farms following destruction of farms by the invading pastoralist and subsequently a fall in farm yield as farmers abandoned their more fertile farm land in avoidance of conflict.Natural resources including land are the major source of livelihood for rural communities; and availability and accessibility to such resources enable farmers to maintain their wellbeing and livelihoods.Forced relocation and migration of farmers could cause scarcity and intensify competition over resources due to over concentration of displaced persons in a particular area.Increased number of widows suggests losses of life associated with conflict and subsequent drain on the human capital accumulation of households and communities.Seddon and Hussein (2002) reiterated that the loss of a household member through death may be a critical economic loss particularly, if that person was a major contributor to the household's livelihood.Availability and cost of labour is affected because many rural households depend on cheap family labour.Furthermore, availability and access to social amenities like education, workshops, trainings, cooperatives, and financial institutions which are pivotal to sustainable livelihood are hampered due to insecurity of the environment.

Conclusion
Conflict in agrarian communities largely revolves on livelihood issues.The results show that in addition to some structural factors, conflicts are associated with livelihood pressure and competition between crop farmers and herdsmen.Specifically, the dominant composite causes revealed in the study are violation of agreement/laws, interference on livelihood sources, and cultural differences.Consequently, this impacts on the social, economic and political lives of crop farmers and subsequently, the entire livelihood assets of crop farmers ranging from physical, natural, human, financial, and social to political assets.
The livelihood structure, food security and wellbeing of farmers are threatened and compromised which contribute to poverty, food and nutrition insecurity and poor health of farming communities, and further escalation of conflicts.Therefore, sustainably addressing conflict in farming communities is critical to achieving economic, agricultural development and sustainable livelihood.Strategies by government, NGOs and communities that target conflict management or resolution should promote support for sustainable livelihood.In other words, provision of grazing land, pasture route, use of formal and informal security outfits and institutions should be accompanied with efforts that support and strengthens diversified livelihood capacity ranging from entrepreneurship training, provision of social, infrastructural facilities and interventions in agricultural sectors with competitive advantage for communities.Farmers should be assisted with productive resources like improved seeds, technologies and other agro inputs by the government to reduce vulnerability and protracted conflict in communities.
There should be strategic and regular orientation of resource users and citizens on the need for co-existence and adherence to regulations regarding use of resources by development agencies including extension organizations.Above all, multi-stakeholders' efforts exploring grass root alliance and commitment should be promoted by government, policy makers and NGOs in policies and strategies for management of conflict and establishment of compliance to laws and regulation of instituted rural authorities.

Table 1 .
Percentage distribution of crop farmers by socio-economic characteristics.

Table 2 .
Factor analysis of causes of conflict as perceived by crop farmers.

Table 3 .
Factor analysis of perceived effects of conflict on crop farmers.