Developing competence for communities impacted by dam construction

This paper contributes to the discussion on community competence by focusing on thirteen communities near Bui dam and Bui National Park, Ghana to address the impacts of Bui Dam construction and related resettlements through analysis of community competence. For each of these questions, further analysis was undertaken to assess the role of resettlement, ethnicity, age, livelihood type and gender. Data was gathered through multiple methods. In the design of a survey, administered to 339 respondents across the thirteen communities, document analysis and interviews were conducted to provide inputs for the survey. Community competence for this study was defined to have 4 dimensions: governance training; sustainability training; training to plan and implement; and training for participatory enabling strategies. Overall, respondents indicated low level of support for each aspect of community competence training. Villages not relocated tended to perceive these impacts less negatively, as did people of Nafana ethnicity, and people relying mainly on a farming livelihood. Age and gender had little impact. Further analysis through regression analysis was undertaken to determine the relative influence of each of these predictor variables on community competency. The multiple regression analysis indicated that regarding governance training, only one predictor variable was significant: “livelihood type” (beta = 0.296), and the overall R squared was low (0.080), but significant. Regarding sustainability training, only “livelihood type” was a significant predictor (beta = 0.310), and the overall R squared was low (0.085) but significant. Regarding capacity to plan and implement, two predictor variables were significant: livelihood type (beta=0.167), and relocate (beta=0.213). R squared was low (0.048) but significant. Regarding participatory enabling strategies, only livelihood type was significant (beta=0.070), and the overall R squared was low (0.086) but significant. It is concluded that training opportunities provided for dam impacted communities did not meet the core needs and focus of the impacted communities; because the number of training modules were few; training modules failed to focus on the core skills domains (e.g. governance, sustainability, capacity to plan and implement, and participatory enabling activities). The study showed that people perceive community competence to be decreasing on many spheres, but there is variability between households in the perceived impacts.


INTRODUCTION
The struggle to address poverty persists in many developing countries (West et al., 2006;International Monetary Fund, 2012;Muruvi and Reid, 2012).However, reducing poverty is a complex undertaking.One critical but not well understood issue is the response of communities to shocks that impact on community livelihoods: such as hunger, drought, floods, and construction of dams and associated resettlements (Bennett et al., 2012).This paper explores these issues through a study of Bui dam, Ghana, and focuses on the impact of the dam on surrounding communities, and the influence of community competence on these processes.The purpose of the paper is to understand how community competence (influences on ability of different communities to adjust to "shocks" such as dam construction) can provide support to overcome the impacts of dams and associated resettlements on livelihoods of people living near protected areas.The study focused on training because evidence (Environmental Resource Management (ERM), 2007) shows that the perceived challenges from the Bui dam and associated resettlements were new to people within the dam impacted areas.Therefore, providing training in the perceived potential challenges was the alternative for preparing people to overcome the impacts of Bui dam and related resettlements on community livelihoods.
The study covers communities near Bui National Park (BNP), Ghana perceived to be impacted by the Bui dam.BNP was formed to protect riverine vegetation around the Banda gorge, and also protect eighty species of wildlife, including 305 hippopotamus considered red-listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and of global conservation concern (GoG, 1961;Ofori-Amanfo, 2005;IUCN, 2010).The park is one of the least developed parks in Ghana and also, the only protected area in Ghana that contains a large component of relatively undisturbed riverine forest associated with wooded savannah (IUCN, 2010).BNP is rated the third largest Protected Area (PA) in Ghana, covers approximately 1812 km 2 (IUCN, 2010), and is located at 8°00´-8°25'N, 2°15'-2°30'W.
In 2007, the government of Ghana established Bui Power authority (BPA) to oversee the construction of Bui dam (Government of Ghana, 2007;Ampratwum-Mensah, 2013).At full capacity, the Bui dam is expected to impact greatly on the nature and content of natural resources; inundate 21% of Bui National Park, destroy 85 km of the bank of the Black Volta River (dammed at Bui), create 36 Islands and a 500 km reservoir shoreline; and destroy 50% of grassland, 20% of savannah woodland and 25% of the water and riverine gallery forest (ERM, 2007;Ghana News Agency, 2012).
The study therefore seeks to provide a better understanding of how community competence might provide support to overcome the impacts of dams and associated resettlements on livelihoods of people living near protected areas.The study focused on training because evidence (ERM, 2007) shows that the perceived challenges from the Bui dam and associated resettlements were new to people within the dam impacted areas.Therefore, providing training in the perceived potential challenges was the alternative for preparing people to overcome the impacts of Bui dam and related resettlements on community livelihoods.
The study therefore addresses the research objectives: i) Examine whether communities near Bui dam perceive the impacts of Bui Dam on community competency; ii) Assess the perceived impacts of Bui Dam on community competency influenced by age, gender, ethnicity, type of livelihood, and whether communities have been relocated; iii) Investigate the impacts of Bui Dam on the relationship between Bui National Park and nearby communities (Figure 1).

METHODOLOGY
The study area is located in the Districts of Banda and Bole in the Brong Ahafo and Northern regions, respectively (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014a;2014b).Bole town with a population of 61,593 and an area of 4000 sq km is the largest town in the Bole District (Ghana Statistical Service, 2012).The Banda, Bamboi and Bole Paramount Chiefs are responsible for villages within the study area (ERM, 2007).The Banda District Assembly has 45,000 people in 33 communities.The governing systems in the area are government institutions; Chieftaincy systems; and Community Based Organizations (CBOs).CBOs include informal groups such as livelihood and cultural based groups that support socio-cultural networks in the area.But in many of the communities in the two districts, traditional leadership plays important roles in the management of people and to some extent, the regulation of basic livelihoods such as fishing and farming in the communities.
Other stakeholders such as Bui National Park (BNP) and Bui Power Authority (BPA) are responsible for managing Bui National Park and Bui Power Authority, respectively.Communities selected for the study (resettled and non-resettled) are impacted by the dam and also located in the two districts.
Many communities in the region are multi-ethnic but, the dominant people in Bole district are Gonja or Mo, and Mo and Nafana in Tain District (Stahl, 2001).Generally, livelihoods are linked to ethnic groups (Table 1) (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014c;Stahl, 2001).A variety of ethnic groups such as Gonja, Akan, Wala, Dagarti and Lobi persist in the study area (ERM, 2007;Tain District Assembly, 2012).The study placed much emphasis on the majority, that is, Ewe, Nafana, and Mo.Community livelihoods include subsistence farming, fishing, hunting, wild produce collection, charcoal burning, wage labour, processing of cassava into garri for sale, and trading but, a few (Bator, Bui, Banda Nkwanta, Tainaboi, Mempeasem and Agbelikame North and South) historically engaged in active fishing (ERM, 2007).
Thirteen communities (Table 1) were selected for the study.Seven have been displaced by the Bui dam.The other six communities will not be relocated except, Bui Camp (Wildlife village) that is currently in the process of relocation.The resettled communities are located in two camps Bui camp (containing Bator, Bui and Dokokyina), and Gyama camp (containing Dam site, Lucene, Brewohodi and Agbegikro).The resettlement created a mix of adverse negative implications such as poor compensation for lands for farming and fishing, loss of social and economic forms of livelihood available for the people in the communities nearby BNP.
Selection of these villages was shaped by the need to compare the experiences of those villages that have been relocated with the experiences of villages that have not been relocated.For example, an impact assessment has indicated that Bui dam will impact the Wildlife community; through the loss of some livelihoods such as fishing, charcoal burning, trading, and farming; loss of social facilities such as a church, clinic and school; and the loss of traditional leadership (ERM, 2007).The inclusion of the Bui Camp, Bongaase, Jama, Banda Ahenkro, Agbelikame North and South Wildlife villages in the sample was critical, because the selected will allow for a comparison with the relocated communities.Many of the communities in the study area have weak educational systems, and weak foundations in community competence such as, skills and competences to overcome stress in their livelihoods (ERM, 2007) Table 1.List of villages around BNP inundated or isolated by the Bui dam (Stahl, 2001;ERM, 2007;Ghana Statistical Service, 2012).

Literature review and theoretical framework
Dams are constructed across streams, block river flow and triggers the formation of lakes (Gilman, 2008).Dams construction have in recent past shifted from the industrialized world to developing countries (Khagram, 2004: p.270;Fearnside, 2015).Incidence of recorded cases of dams was over 37,641 of not less than 15 m height by 2015, with 8,689 being either wholly or partially for the purpose of hydropower (ICOLD, 2014).Dam construction can contribute to socio-economic development in many developing countries (WCD, 2000;Cernea, 2003;Nusser, 2014).For example, dams can increase energy access (OECD/IEA, 2003;Bakis, 2007), control floods, and increase infrastructural development (Galipean et al., 2013;Nusser, 2014).Generally, hydropower is the major source of over 97% of all electricity generated by renewable sources, prevent the burning of 22 billion gallons of oil and 120 million tons of coal annually, and serves as the most efficient way (0.85 cents per kwh) to generate electricity (Kaygusuz, 2004;Rakis, 2007).Dams such as the construction of the Akosombo dam resulted in improved income from the fishing industry, including a 90% increase in total fish harvested (73,000-82,000 metric tonnes, values at US$ 2.4 million) from inland waters (FAO, 1991(FAO, : 1995;;Braimah, 2001).However, dams can undermine the social and ecological integrity of community resources, displace and destabilize communities, and fracture relationships and social systems that form the foundation for effective governance arrangements (Hussein, 2002;Bennett et al., 2012;International Rivers, 2013;Peter, 2013).Dams can also adversely affect livelihoods and the socio-economic wellbeing of people whose assets are acquired, as well as the communities they live in (The World Bank, 2004).For example, the construction of Arase dam, Japan disrupted feeding routes of fish and diminished fish catch (Jovais, 2014).The Don Sahong Dam in Cambodia jeopardized migratory routes of fish, undermined food security and livelihoods of millions of people (Ross, 2014).
Dam related resettlements can have positive impacts such as improved housing and provision of better schools.However, resettlement often has led to loss of land, legal authority over land, community support for members, and cultural and traditional healing systems (Teemacane Trust, 2002;Ferraro et al., 2011;UNDP, 2011;Bennett and McDowell, 2012: p. 97;International Rivers, 2013).For example, between 40-80 million people have been displaced by hydro dams worldwide (Ligon et al., 1985;WCD, 2000: p.16;Cernea, 2003;Cornea, 2005;Krueger, 2009).Ghana's case is not different as the construction of the Akosombo and Bui dams led to the displacement of some 80,000 people from 740 villages and over 1200 people from seven villages, respectively (Kalitsi, 2004;ERM, 2007;Ghana News Agency, 2010).Dams and resettlements have impacted governance in nearby communities.For example, the application of international laws over indigenous rights resulted in the loss of the voice of the people of San Kaputura (a resettlement communities near Etosha National Park), and led to a dependence on the government (le Roux and White, 2004;Bennett and McDowell, 2012: p. 98).In the cases of dam impacted communities, the voices of the displaced are rarely heard (Bennett and McDowell, 2012).Community competence (CC) can support community adaptive capacity to cope with socio-ecological changes such as dams and associated resettlements through; improvement in knowledge about hazard impacts, skills training and development, livelihood enhancement programmes, and development and improvements in community assets (Paton, 2003;Paton et al., 2006;West et al., 2006;Dzodzi, 2006).Wallerstein (1992) argues that skill training is central to community empowerment as well as addressing the challenges of powerlessness among people.Providing training in community interventions areas such as community health care can result in substantial reductions in child mortality through the management of ill children in Ghana (Haines et al., 2007).Similarly, skills training in indigenous conservation practices were shown to support effective hunter-gather traditions for resettled communities in NyaeNyae Conservancy, Botswana (Bennett and McDowell, 2012: p.98).However, knowledge of hazards and consequences alone does not exercise significant influence on preparedness (Gregg et al., 2004;Lasker, 2004).The ability to make the right decisions; and a person's ability to make, and act on, his or her own decisions has provided some important hallmark for developing the competence of some communities whose livelihoods have been undermined by shocks (Kopelman, 1990: p. 327;Silberfeld, 1990: 37;Wicclair, 1993;Silberfeld et al., 1994: p. 6).For example, the application of proper decision making that involve local level management with a collaborative governmental support is important for addressing conflicts in fisheries in the long term (Bennett et al., 2001).But, in some cases of dam impacts, the approach to lessening the potential impacts have been diverse as a result of its effectiveness in bettering the lot for people whose livelihoods are impacted by the dam.In some literature, it is found that developing community competence can support community efforts to develop adaptive capacities to overcome the impacts of dam and related resettlement.Community competence (CC) is the capacity and effectiveness of communities to: undertake community action (such as conflict resolution); mobilize resources; make decisions; exhibit critical reflection; solve problems; and, develop technical expertise (Reid and Muruvi, 2011).
CC embraces strategies such as, gender equality, social cohesion and inclusiveness (Krishna, 2004;Norris and Stevens, 2006).Further, CC is noted to encourage community participation; promote collaboration and partnership; and engage traditional leadership, local governance institutions, researchers, and livelihood groupings in livelihood development activities (Kopelman, 1990: p. 327;Carney, 1997;Norris and Stevens, 2006;Mochizuki and Fadeeva, 2010;Possardt and Reid, 2010;Hout et al., 2011;Reid and Muruvi, 2011).For example, building community capacity to plan, and implement community projects such as farms and their related organizations is effective in enabling tomato farmers to develop greater roles and improve their position in tomato chain management, and also effective in building the competences of tomato farmers in the Northern region of Ghana (Clottey et al., 2008).
CC approaches have been applied by different organizations (international development partners, NGOs, governments and researchers) to address a wide variety of issues including resettlement issues, livelihood studies, poverty reduction and park governance (Carney, 1996;Brooks, 2003;Norris and Steven, 2006;Paton et al., 2006;Smith and Wandel, 2006;West et al., 2006;Smith and Mireles, 2011).For purposes of this study, Reid and Muruvi (2011) provides some critical domains of CC that support livelihood development in rural communities in Ghana.These domains are: 1) Governance, 2) Capacity to plan and implement community projects, 3) Participatory enabling activities, and 4) Sustainability of community projects.
Governance refers to how power is obtained, exercised and monitored, as well as serving as evidence of a system for accountability (Reid and Muruvi, 2011).Governance domains are evident in a community leadership structure, available systems of checks and balances, the execution of legitimate authority, processes for resolving conflicts, and processes for delegating power (Dudley, 2008;Nelson and Agrawal, 2008;Reid and Muruvi, 2011).Similarly, governance as a competence domain is also measured through the practice of local traditional belief systems, and traditional authority in managing communities.
Capacity to plan and implement community projects refers to planning organizational infrastructure, evidence of implemented community programmes and resource mobilization (Reid and Muruvi, 2011).A community's capacity to plan and implement community projects is measured through the level of technical expertise applied in community project implementation, experience in planning and implementing projects in the community, and community demonstrated competence, and community mobilization (Labonte and Laverack, 2001).The ability and level of linkages formed also indicates a community's capacity to plan and implement community activities.
Participatory enabling activities refer to evidence of inclusiveness or openness to all members of community, participations in activities, as well as how members are included in decision making (Eng and Parker, 1994;Reid and Muruvi, 2011).In measuring community participatory enabling strategies issues of community reach, level of gender equity, process and effectiveness of decision making, level of social cohesion and inclusiveness, and community history of sharing are taken into consideration.In many cases of CC in Ghana, participatory enabling activities such as community involvement in skills training provides important solutions to address un/underemployment leading to improved livelihoods and poverty reduction for many rural communities (Palmer, 2007).Sustainability of community projects refers to evidence of continuity within the community, including whether the group is transient or saves a permanent function in the community (Labonte and Laverack, 2001).Sustainability as a competence domain is measured by the level of community utility of activities and whether those activities project the concept of longevity, taking into cognisance the need to plan and implement projects that suit the needs of the present and the future members of the community.
The sustainability of education for all, including people in rural communities is linked to the development of community capacity to address challenges in livelihoods.Palmer (2007) argues that provision of technical and vocational education, including the widening of opportunities for lifelong learning and sustainability is critical in creating enabling environment for skills utilization through skills development, sustainable employment and sustained growth in Ghana.
However, community efforts to develop and improve competence are sometimes undermined by poor social and economic infrastructure, poor social mechanisms for knowledge transfer and skills development, and the development of socio-economic projects such as dams (WCD, 2000;West et al., 2006;Krueger, 2009;Nelson, 2010).For example, in Ghana, aggravated traditional stratification of society inherited from the colonial governance structures, led to class domination in exploitation of the mass of the people (Donkor, 2002: p. 212).The weakness in Word Bank development policies such as funding for Plan of Action to Mitigate the Social Cost of Adjustment (PAMSCAD), a social and economic development policy, was unable to empower people to mitigate poverty in late 90s in Ghana (Donkor, 2004: p. 228).A number of factors are thought to mitigate the effects of dams on communities.These additional factors include: gender, ethnicity, age and type of livelihood.
Gender can shape development planning in that women can effectively apply knowledge (plants and medicinal herbs, and irrigation) in subsistence farming, water harvesting, and wise use of natural resources (Enarson and Morrow, 1998;Anderson, 2009;Enarson and Chakrabarti, 2009;Harcourt, 2012).For example in Kumasi, Ghana women are marginalized in accessing land particularly amongst the older generation due to old age, physical weakness or the loss of land after the death of husband (Ashong and Smith, 2001, p.14), Again, women especially the elderly are more vulnerable to shocks such as economic risks and vulnerability that culminate into an increase in migration, illiteracy rates, poverty, and limited land rights (Amuzu et al., 2010, p.39) Accordingly, gender can impact agricultural productivity, health and nutrition (Krishna, 2004;Eysenbach, 2011, p. 193;FAO, 2014).Greenburg et al. (1999) argue that boys are more responsive to negative influences of the neighbourhood, and therefore more vulnerable to their environment.Gender and social skills measured by performance on a role play, shows that being male in the United States is identified as risk factors for maladjustment during childhood (Patterson et al., 1990).Men use more problem-focused coping than women at work and in situations having to be accepted and requiring more information but, not for emotion-focused coping (Folkman and Lazarus, 1980).Abukari and Laser (2013) argues that the Ghanaian youth often experience minimal early learning opportunities but, females are more negatively impacted through sex discrimination, and other forms of discrimination in education.In many cases, such discrimination comparatively predispose females to significant risks for dropping out of school and reduces their chances to attain postsecondary education.Other studies have indicated that gender contributes significantly to explaining the competence of people who act as activists in communities (Zanbar and Itzhaky, 2013).For example, there is the argument that men are characterized by higher levels of abilities associated with community activity.
Similarly, ethnicity is noted to mediate the effects of dams and resettlement on communities.Studies conducted in Wenchi, Ghana reveals that historical, ethnic and gender dimensions of diversity provide additional insights into livelihood patterns and soil fertility management and importantly in negotiating alternative land tenure arrangements for people (Agyei-Nsiah et al., 2007).Ethnicity can influence social struggle for power, resources and identities, and plays key roles in most conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa (Aluned, 2000;Braathen et al., 2000).For example, in places such as Angola, Congo-Brazaville, D R Congo, Liberia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Somalia ethnic affiliations was perceived to be a key factor in the prolonged conflicts that occurred in many communities (Horowittz, 1985).
Ethnicity is an important factor that explains why black children in the United States are more likely than white children to live in lowincome homes (Patterson et al., 1990).Dei (2004) argues that for effectiveness in inclusive schooling in Ghana, educators and students should emphasize ways that people respond to ethnicity, gender and other forms of social difference, because such factors implicate the wider educational experience for the youth.Experience in working with various different cultural groups according to PhD graduates in counselling and clinical psychologists, is important in predicting competence (Allison et al., 1996).Ethnicity is argued to moderate joint and unilateral decision making for 14-16 year olds in the United States (Lamborn et al., 1996).For example, for joint and unilateral youth decision making, variations in decision making had a stronger impact on ethnically mixed than in predominantly white communities (for Hispanic-American youth and for African-American youth).The negative impact of unilateral youth decision making was stronger in predominantly white communities.Similarly, ethnicity is a weak predictor of dropout, utilization and level of functioning among some ethnic groups in the United States (Maramba and Hall, 2002).For example, ethnicity's effect on dropout and utilization has a larger effect on minority groups than Caucasian Americans.
Age affects access to human, physical, natural and financial capitals, livelihood portfolios (Scoones, 1998;De Shebinin et al., 2008;Mabala, 2011), and household labour supply which, in turn affects natural resource use (Paumgarten, 2005).Similarly, age has significant influence on the ability to reduce shocks in enterprises, and improve livelihoods for women in Tolon/Kumbungu, Ghana (Zakaria, 2009).Age can influence discrimination between low prospect of livelihood sustainability.Relatively young women are more likely to have a higher prospect of livelihood sustainability than older women, in a study conducted in Tolon/Kumbungu, Ghana.Older Ghanaian have a lower propensity to sustain themselves through the use of saving and assets due to the prolonged periods of living under worsening economic strain such as un-and underemployment, increasing costs of living and low earnings, and worsening weather and flooding that worsen agricultural fortunes (Ogwumike and Aboderin, 2005, p.9, 12).
Age is argued to mediate children's pre-academic skills and behaviour and is often considered the basis for placement and programming decisions (La Paro and Pianta, 2000).Age of a child affects what measures are possible to support the development of social competence (Clikeman-Semrud, 2007, p.50).At preschool level for example, observation is argued to provide the best effect for developing social competence.Liberman (1975) holds the view that the aged as compared to the younger population, are more successful in developing adaptive strategies to address life stresses.Younger populations are more vulnerable to threat and loss of management strategies to deal with stresses in life (Lieberman, 1975).
Some researchers have argued that livelihoods strategies applied by households and individuals in rural communities are highly dependent on resource availability (Mutenje et al., 2010).As a result, overcoming challenges or shocks in livelihoods can be successful through the application of diversified livelihoods (Ellis, 1998;Bryceson, 2002;Aasoglenang and Bonye, 2013).Diversification of individual or community livelihoods is greatly influenced by assets portfolios and the economic shocks that households face (Freeman and Ellis, 2005).The success of a diversified livelihood is influenced by improvements in risk management capacities of individuals and households, as well as targeting areas where shocks are minimal (Ellis, 1998;Mutenje et al., 2010).During the construction of the Akosombo dam in Ghana, communities resettled nearby the dam were able to overcome dam impacts through the practice of multiple livelihoods such as farming, fishing, fish mongering and trading.

Data and methods
The study is a case study illustrating how Bui dam has impacted on nearby communities.Case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context, especially if the intention is to provide clarity of phenomenon and context (Woodside, 2010).This study adopted a triangulation approach involving document analysis interviews with key informants, and a household survey.This paper addresses the following research questions: How do communities near Bui dam perceive the impacts of Bui Dam on community competency?Are perceived impacts of Bui Dam on community competency influenced by age, gender, ethnicity, type of livelihood, and whether communities have been relocated?This study used the PAPR "Community Poverty Scan and Assets based Approach to Poverty Reduction" that developed a competence domain for assessing livelihood development in rural communities in Ghana (Reid and Muruvi, 2011).The competence domains of the model include: 1) Governance-how power is obtained, exercised and monitored as evidence of a system of accountability; 2) Capacity to Plan and Implement-planning the organizational infrastructure, evidence of implemented community development programmes and resource mobilization; 3) Participatory enabling strategies-evidence of inclusiveness or openness to all members of community, participation in activities, and how members are included in decision making; and 4) Sustainability-evidence of continuity within the community to show that community project ensures development that meets the needs of the present generation of people in the community.Such activities should also lay foundation for the future generation to continue to benefit from community projects as well as provide the needed platform without compromising the ability of future generations, to benefit from existing projects or develop their own activities to support their generation.Data was collected through a survey questionnaire (n=329), and through key informant interviews (n=24).
The study forms part of a larger research project focusing on a multi-dimensional Canada-Africa Research and Learning Alliance seeking to address the challenges of reducing rural poverty and ensuring environmental sustainability through a focus on protected areas and adjacent communities in Canada, Tanzania and Ghana (Protected Areas and Poverty Reduction, 2010).This study explores processes to reduce shock in community competence, with a focus on dam and resettlement impacts on Community Competence in communities around Bui National Park (BNP).The study involved key informant interviews, document analysis and household survey.Traingulation is critical to research; because it emphasises the confirmation of findings as well as complements findings (Redfem and Norman, 1994); and has the potential to produce a more comprehensive and insightful data (Halcomb and Andrews, 2005;Casey and Murphy, 2009).The study uses traingultion to help in achieving the best of each method, inceasing confidence of results, and a potential of creating new methods, and opportunity in enriching the explanation of the research problem (Jick, 1979) while also helping to overcome the shortcomings of each method (Denzin, 1978).

Key informant interviews
Key informants for the study involved a total of twenty four (24) people purposively selected from different groups; women, young adults, volunteers, aged, and researchers who have some experience such as having undertaken some form of studies in the resettled communities around BNP.A key informant interview (use of a semi-structured interview) was preferred as an effective and flexible method, because it is an effective tool to probe for more information about the topic (Robson, 2011;Creswell, 2007).Interviewees included eight traditional leaders and elders of the resettled communities, four from the livelihood groups (that is, traders, fishermen, fishmongers and farmers), and representatives of BNP, BPA, school, church, District Assembly and researchers (Table 2).
Key informant interviews provided information on (1) the impact of Bui Dam construction and resettlement on CC.Responses were used as primary data, and also to inform the development of a household survey outlined below.
Questions asked included how the people made a living before and after the Bui dam, and aspects of community competence that has been changed by the Bui dam.Key informant interviews served to complement survey findings, and also guide the presentation and interpretation of the results for the study.Key informants were selected based on the specific roles they play in the society, and who were perceived to have some level of knowledge on issues being investigated (Creswell, 2007;Robson, 2011).In many other cases, snowballing was handy in identifying other relevant respondents (Henslin, 1972;Biernacki and Waldorf, 1981).Efforts were made to reduce the potential biases in snowballing such as obtaining a sizeable sample, using other indirect sources to source respondents, and reaching isolated groups such as women and the youth (Atkinson and Flint, 2001;Faugier and Sargeant, 1997).

Household survey
The survey questionnaire was developed from a literature review and the key informant interviews.Questionnaire items focused the impact of Bui Dam construction and resettlement on CC.The questionnaire on CC is limited to these four broad domains; governance, capacity to plan and implement community projects, participatory enabling activities, and sustainability.The domains were in reference to Reid and Muruvi's work on "The Community Poverty Scan and Assets Based Approach to Poverty Reduction" on how to access CC on the context of Ghana (Reid and Muruvi, 2011).The domains have been successfully applied to study livelihoods, capital assets and CC in the Ghanaian context.A pilot study involving six researchers from academia; and ten people of at least one from each of the eight resettled communities around BNP were used for the study.Respondents reviewed the questions, and also helped to provide clarity and relevance of questions to the intended participants in the communities.Pre-test information was used to modify the household questionnaire to ensure that respondents easily understood the questions, and provided the required information.All statements were translated through the help of a translator, into the Akan language, a common language of the resettled communities.
The sample involved participants representing households, randomly selected from an openly available village register that indicated housing units, and members of households (Groves et al., 2006;Robson, 2011).Households for the study represented people forming domestic social units sharing resources, specifically each of the following criteria: (1) share a meal a day, (2) share accommodation, and (3) share expenditure (Bender, 1967;Yanagisago, 1979;Wilk and Miller, 1997;Davenport et al., 2000, p.901;Casimir and Tobi, 2011).The sample was comprised of 339 people (with 100% response rate), including adult male and female representatives of households (Table 1).Each household selected a representative to lead the household in providing responses to the questionnaire.The result is a sizeable number of females who responded to the questionnaire.In some cases as well, households were headed by single parents of whom a large number were females.Data was collected between 2013 and 2014.The selection of sample size was based on the number of households available in each community; at least 50% (Krejcie and Morgan, 1970;Nwana, 1981) of the total number of households in each resettled community around BNP (Table 1).
Four trained Ghanaian research assistants who had at least a diploma level education in research methodology, conducted the surveys as well as the pilot study.In this research, a number of independent variables were examined for their impact on each type of community competence.In order to understand the relative impact of each independent variable (relocated, livelihood and ethnicity), multiple regression was used.
First, a total score was computed for each community competence, by summing the mean scores reported in each item in the table.For example, a total score for governance was computed by summing the mean responses of each of the items reported.This total score for governance was the dependent variable used in the multiple regression analysis reported in the first row of Table 11.

Institutions providing training
In the resettlement plan, training was to be provided by many stakeholders but, coordinated by Bui Power Authority.Institutions that provided most of the training before and after the construction of the Bui dam (Table 3) were Bui National Park (BNP), followed by the Bui Power Authority (BPA).A substantial number of respondents (23%) indicated that no training was provided before the dam construction.The district assemblies were among institutions that provided the least training before the dam.Students from institutions such as Sunyani Polytechnic, and University of Ghana, Legon also provided some forms of training for households before the dam.The situation of training was not different after the dam, since BNP gave the highest number of training modules and followed by BPA.It was noted that cooperatives and students also led a number of training for households after the construction of Bui dam.Some key informants (e.g.V005) noted that other institutions such as the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) provided some training opportunities before and after the Bui dam.A senior official of BPA (G016) noted that it is now important for institutions such as health, education and district assemblies to provide some forms of institutional support for the resettled communities.
Further, he added that it is now the responsibility of some state institutions to resource these facilities and also ensure their functionality for the resettled communities.For example, the resourcing and functioning of the school is the responsibility of the Ministry of education, the clinic for the Ministry of Health, and the market for the District Assembly (G016).
The impacts of Bui Dam were examined with respect to training in the four aspects of CC: governance, sustainability, capacity to plan and implement community projects, and participatory enabling strategies.These findings are outlined in the following sections.

Impacts of Bui Dam on governance training
The governance aspect of CC refers to how power is obtained, exercised and monitored as evidence of a system accountability.Training in governance was examined with 6 questionnaire items outlined in Table 4, where respondents indicated their level of agreement on a 5 point scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree".The responses showed that the majority of respondents disagreed with each statement that training in governance was provided for households.
Responses for communities who had been relocated were not significantly different as compared to the responses of communities who had not been relocated (ttest findings).Comparing mean scores for these governance items by ethnicity, suggests some differences (ANOVA and Scheffe findings in Table 4): 1. Nafana mean responses higher that Ewe for 3 items 2. Nafana mean responses higher than Mo for 2 items 3.No differences in mean responses when comparing Mo and Ewe.
Table 4 examines the influence of livelihood type on governance training.Mean scores for livelihood by governance training range between the highest 2.49 and 2.32.Mean scores for livelihood was highest for farming for all aspects of governance training, followed by fishing, and lastly mixed livelihoods.This meant that farmers responded better to the training provided to support livelihood changes.
ANOVA test scores were significant for livelihoods under all items of governance training.Scheffe test scores for livelihood also showed significance for all aspects of governance training, except fishing by mixed livelihoods under governance training in how to lead, direct, and support community activity and training on how to share authority and responsibility.
There were no significant differences when responses were compared by gender or by age groupings.This study provided further support to the findings of Roux and White ( 2004) and Bennett and McDowell (2012: p. 98) that dams and related resettlements can lead to the loss of voice (an aspect of community governance) for resettled people and create a dependence tendency for communities near dams.This study also corroborates the findings of Dzodzi (2006), Kraan (2009) p.296) and Norris and Steven (2006) that advocates for the need to motivate people to formulate decisions in their governance such as negotiating livelihood space to provide preparedness to reduce risk that may invariably be caused by dams.

Impacts of Bui Dam on sustainability training
The sustainability aspect of CC refers to evidence of continuity within the community, that is, whether the group or community activity provides for functional continuity for the present people in the community as well as for future generations.Scores for impact of dam and resettlement on sustainability showed that the majority of respondents disagree that training in sustainability has been provided.Mean scores comparing relocated versus not relocated communities did not show significance (Table 5).Only one difference was noted when comparing ethnic groups (between Nafana and Mo).
The results of the Bui study further buttresses the findings of Teemacane Trust (2002), and Bennett and McDowell (2012) that indicated that dam related resettlements can lead to the loss of land and ruling of land, community support for members, cultural and traditional healing systems, and especially governance mechanisms that support the survival of many communities.

Training by relocation and ethnicity
When responses were compared by ethnicity, just one relationship was significant: Nafana scored higher than Mo for "training in how to ensure that community groups and organizations continue to function and adjust to changes".This indicated that Nafana is better placed to apply CC to overcome stresses in their livelihoods such as the effects of dams and related resettlement.Table 6 provides information on how livelihood type influences sustainability training for people impacted by dam and resettlement.
Mean scores on how livelihood influences sustainability training was highest for farming livelihoods for all aspects of sustainability.This implied that people in farming livelihoods are better in terms of being able to overcome the impacts of dam and associated resettlement on their livelihood.But, mean scores were lowest for mixed livelihoods for all aspects of sustainability training.For F at (19.385 and 18.880), ANOVA scores were significant for all items under sustainability training.Scheffe test  scores for livelihood type were significant for all aspects of sustainability training.There was no significant relationship between sustainability and gender, or age.

Impacts of Bui dam on ability to plan and implement
Capacity to plan and implement refers to planning the organizational infrastructure, evidence of implemented community development programmes and resource mobilization.The majority of respondents agree that training has not been provided in capacity to plan and implement community activities (Table 7).Mean scores for relocated communities were worse for three of four aspects (statistically different as measured by Students T-Test).Analysis by ethnicity revealed a number of significant differences (ANOVA and Scheffe tests): 1) Nafana responses were higher than Mo for 3 of 4 items meaning Nafana ethnic groups are better in applying CC after the dam, to overcome stresses in their livelihoods; 2) Nafana responses were greater than Ewe for 3 of 4 items; 3) There was no difference between Mo and Ewe for any items.
There were no significant relationships when comparing responses by age or by gender.The Bui study contributes to knowledge and is supported by Jovais (2014) because the Bui study suggests that construction of dams and resettlement can disrupt community efforts to promote livelihoods, including the influx of migrants to compete for the available livelihoods.
Table 8 shows scores for the influence of livelihood type on ability to plan and implement community activities.Mean scores for livelihood type ranged between the highest of 2.31 and lowest of 2.06.Farming livelihood scored the highest mean (better in terms of using CC to overcome dam impacts) for all aspects of capacity to plan, followed by fishing, and then mixed livelihoods.ANOVA test scores were significant for all aspects of capacity to plan and implement except for training and opportunities in strategies to facilitate the promotion of community engagement, allow community voices to be heard, and make collective decisions.Analysis by livelihoods revealed significant results 1) Farming by fishing was significant for 3 aspects (meaning people who practice a mixed farming and fishing livelihoods are better able to use CC to overcome the impacts of Bui dam and related resettlement on their livelihoods); 2) Farming by mixed was significant for 3 aspects; 3) Fishing by mixed did not show any significant score.

Impacts of Bui Dam on development of participatory enabling strategies
Participatory enabling strategies refers to evidence of inclusiveness or openness to all members of community, participation in activities, and how members are included in decision making.Responses on training in participatory enabling activities show that the majority of respondents are of the opinion that training was not provided for households in all aspects of participatory enabling activities (Table 9).Mean scores did not show significance differences when comparing relocated communities to not relocated communities.When responses were compared by ethnicity, the following pattern emerged (ANOVA and Scheffe results): 1) Nafana responses were higher than Mo responses for 3 of 5 items; 2) Nafana responses were higher than Ewe responses for 5 of 5 items; 3) Mo responses were not different than Ewe responses.There were no significant relationships when comparing responses by age or gender.Mean scores for livelihood range between highest of 2.42 and lowest of 2.25 for participatory enabling strategies (PES).Mean scores for livelihood type was highest for farming for all aspects of PES.People practicing farming livelihoods and the dam impacted area are better in using CC to address the changes in their livelihoods caused by the Bui dam and related resettlement (Figure 10).Mean scores for mixed livelihoods were lowest for all aspects of PES.When responses (ANOVA and Scheffe) were compared for livelihoods, the following pattern emerged.ANOVA scores were significant for all aspects (meaning that PES have a better impact of the ability of the communities to address their livelihood changes in the phase of the Bui dam and its impacts) 1) Farming by fishing was significant for 5 aspects 2) Farming by mixed was significant for 5 aspects 3) Fishing by mixed was significant for 4 aspects.The study adds to literature (Hussein, 2002;Palmer, 2007;Bennett, 2012), because the Bui study suggests; dams can impact family involvement in decision making as well as the effectiveness of communities to participate in community activities to address changes in their livelihoods.

Multiple regression analysis
In each case, the R squared scores were low, but significant.The relative effect of each independent variable differed in each analysis (Figure 11): 1) For governance, only livelihood was significant; 2) For sustainability, only livelihood was significant; 3) For capacity to plan and implement, relocate and livelihood were significant; 4) For participatory enabling activities, only livelihood was significant.

DISCUSSION
Dams and resettlement negatively impact governance.In resettled communities nearby parks dam has worsened governance.Aspects of governance worsened include how to lead, direct and support community activity, and how to share authority and responsibility.This study provided further support to the findings of Roux and White (2004) and Bennett and McDowell (2012, p. 98) that dams and related resettlements can lead to the loss of voice for resettled people and create a dependence tendency for communities near dams.This study also corroborates the findings of Dzodzi (2006), Kraan (2009, p.296), and Norris and Steven (2006) that advocates for the need to motivate people to formulate decisions such as negotiating livelihood space to provide preparedness to reduce risk that may invariably be caused by dams.
Community competence in the form of sustainability of communities such as training in the usefulness of local institutions-chieftaincy, police, and clans as well as ensuing that community groups and organization continue to function and adjust to changes are adversely impacted by dams.The impact of dams on sustainability is rather worse for communities not relocated, but nearby dams.The results of the Bui study further buttresses the findings of Teemacane (2002) and Bennett and McDowell (2012) that indicated that dam related settlements can lead to the loss of land and ruling of land, community support for members, cultural and traditional healing systems, and especially governance mechanisms that support the survival of many communities.The study is therefore important as it provides further backing for the measures to address impact on the sustainability of education for all, including people in rural communities (Palmer, 2007).
The community's capacity to plan and implement projects is also negatively impacted by dams and   are rarely heard, and class division that suppress the voices of the masses are created.In a similar vein, the Bui study contributes to knowledge and is supported by Jovais (2014) because the Bui study suggests that construction of dams and resettlement can disrupt community efforts to promote livelihoods, including the influx of migrant to compete for the available livelihoods.
Community participatory enabling strategies are negatively affected by dams.The capacity to use people or community groups to implement community development programmes/projects, target inclusion of women or marginalized gender in planning is worsened by dams.The impact of dams on participatory enabling strategies is worse for relocated communities.The study adds to literature (Palmer, 2007;Hussein, 2002;Bennett, 2012), because the Bui study suggests; dams can impact family involvement in decision making as well as the effectiveness of traditional leaders to mobilize people for communal activities.Ethnicity and relocation were weak predictors of the variability in dam impacts and related resettlement for the different types of community competence.The Bui study is similar to others (Patterson et al., 1990;Allison et al., 1996;Lamborn et al., 1996;Maramba and Hall, 2002;Dei, 2004) becuase the Bui's study that suggested ethnicity and relocate as perceived weak predictors for CC in communities impacted through dam construction and resettlement.
The Bui study showed that gender and age do not appear to influence community competence for communities impacted by dam and associated resettlements.The results of the study differs from literature (Patterson et al., 1990;Laser, 2013); since the Bui study indicated that gender is not perceived to mediate CC for communities impacted by dams and associated resettlements.It also differs from studies by Liberman (1975), La Paro and Pianta (2000), and Clikeman-Semrud (2007, p.50), because for the Bui study the age of person is not perceived to influence CC available for people to overcome the impacts of dams and resettlements.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This paper examines the impacts of "shocks" (Bui dam construction and resettlement) on a number of phenomena which include community competence.Within each of these research questions, a number of intervening variables were examined, including resettlement, ethnicity, livelihood, age and gender, the impacts of "shocks" (Bui dam construction and resettlement) on community competence.The study is unique because it is one of only a few studies to examine dam impacts on community competence, and governance mechanisms available to resettled communities around Bui National Park.The study is undertaken with reference to Reid and Muruvi's work on "The Community Poverty Scan and Assets Based Approach to Poverty Reduction" on how to access community competence from the Ghana's perspective (Reid andMuruvi, 2011).The CC domains (governance, sustainability, capacity to plan and implement, and participatory enabling activities) (Reid and Muruvi, 2011) were arrived at after a successful application in the study of CC, livelihoods and capital assets in the Ghanaian context.
When each aspect of community competence was examined, it was apparent that perceived training was low (low mean), although some variability was apparent.Most of this variability appears to be explained by livelihood, rather than by relocation, ethnicity, age or Arthur 93 gender.However, the multiple regression analysis indicates that R squared values were low, suggesting that other factors (not explored in this study) contribute to variability in responses.
Training opportunities provided for dam impacted communities did not meet the core needs and focus of the impacted communities; because the number of training modules were few; training modules failed to focus on the core skills domains (e.g.governance, sustainability, capacity to plan and implement, and participatory enabling activities) (Reid and Muruvi, 2011) needed to overcome dam impacts.Training opportunities provided for the households impacted by the dam fell short in areas such as the necessary inputs and funds to explore opportunities in areas such as livelihoods.It is therefore relevant that policy implementers such as the government through the District Assemblies, Bui Power Authority, Bui National Park, and Community Base Organizations such as livelihood groups are empowered and provided with the necessary tools to carry out extensive campaigns relating to the development and sustenance of community competence activities.
The study showed that people perceive community competence to be decreasing on many spheres, but there is variability between households in the perceived impacts.The predictors of variability were relocate and ethnicity.The trend in community competence is a wakeup call for all stakeholders involved in issues that relate to community competence and ultimately the livelihoods of people living near the Bui National Park.The call to address the declining community competence is appropriate because issues of community competence have critical roles to play in the development, improvements, and sustenance of livelihoods on which communities such as those near Bui National Park subsist.

Table 2 .
List of key informants for the study.

Table 3 .
Institution providing training opportunities before and after the construction of Bui Dam.

Table 4 .
Impacts of Bui Dam on governance training by relocation and ethnicity.

Table 5 .
Impacts of Bui Dam on sustainability.

Table 6 .
Influence of livelihood type on how governance training is perceived.

Table 7 .
Impacts of Bui Dam on ability to plan and implement by relocation and ethnicity.

Table 8 .
Influence of livelihood type on how ability to plan and implement is perceived.

Table 9 .
Impacts of Bui Dam on participatory enabling strategies by relocation and ethnicity.

Table 10 .
Influence of livelihood type on participatory enabling strategies.

Table 11 .
Influence of three predictor variables: relocate, livelihood and ethnicity on community competence.