“We will not relocate until our ancestors and shrines come with us”: heritage and conflict management in the Bui Dam Project area, Ghana

Abstract

The construction of a dam on the Black Volta River at Bui in Ghana to generate about 400 megawatts of hydroelectric power engendered conflict between three project-affected communities-Bui, Akanyakrom, and Dokokyina (Figure 10.1)— and the Bui Power Authority (BPA), the managers of the dam. The members of the communities had opposed plans by the BPA to resettle them without making provision for what they regarded as the “souls” of their communities, including deities and ancestral remains. This conflict had the potential to halt the power-generating process and project schedule. Timely completion of the project and the generation of power in 2013 became possible only after the authors led a team of archaeologists from the University of Ghana and a representative of the Ghana Museums and Monument Board (GMMB) to intervene and successfully mediate and resolve the conflict. The developers had to wait for the team of archaeologists to interact with the communities in order to find lasting solutions to the thorny issues surrounding the movable and immovable heritage remains of the dam-affected communities. The team carried out a survey to study and salvage some archaeological remains at old middens associated with the settlements. The team also lobbied and negotiated with the BPA on behalf of the affected communities to exhume and relocate ancestral remains as well as shrines of deities and other features. All these were identified as vital heritage properties by elders of the communities, without which the communities would not relocate. Abandoning these properties to be inundated by floodwaters of the dam would, according to the elders, be a sacrilege they would not condone. We show in this chapter that while maintaining its scientific verve, archaeology can play a major role in the negotiation and resolution of human rights and cultural heritage-related conflicts among affected communities associated withlarge-scale development projects in Ghana and elsewhere in Africa (Schmidt 2014b). The Bui Dam project (Figure 10.2) began in August 2007 after the government of Ghana committed about US$60 million to it. The government also contracted a concessionary loan of US$4,263.5 million from the Chinese government and a buyer’s credit facility of US$298.5 million from the EXIM Bank of China (Bui Power Finance Plan 2010). A series of consultative meetings were held with key stakeholders selected by the government of Ghana. The stakeholders include the Ghana Forestry Commission, Ghana Wildlife Society, the Environmental Protection Agency, the district assemblies of the area, and chiefs and elders of the damaffected communities. The government also established the BPA as a statutory public utility agency under the Bui Power Authority Act of 2007 and mandated it with the authority to plan, develop, execute, and manage the project and to negotiate and pay compensation to relevant landowners. The BPA appropriately commissioned an environmental and social impact assessment of the project. This resulted in recommendations that would mitigate the project’s impact on natural and cultural resources, including the resettlement of1,216 people whose communities would be inundated by the dam’s floodwaters. In 2008, it successfully resettled three communities-Brewohodi, Agbekikro, and the dam site-at Jama in the Northern Region of Ghana without trying to conserve their cultural heritage properties. Archaeologists were never informed about this relocation exercise. The planners appear to have been ignorant of the relevance of archaeology at this stage. Three other communities-Bui village, Akyanyakrom, and Dokokyina-were the last to be resettled in 2011 at a new site currently called Resettlement Township B. New houses were built to compensate for their lost environment. Residents were also promised new farmlands, compensation packages for lost farms and economic plants, and a one-year financial livelihood support package. These promises were fulfilled over time. Despite providing these support packages, the BPA failed to understand and address protests of these last three communities about their heritage remains. This culminated in tension and conflict between the BPA and the communities until archaeologists were engaged by the BPA to intervene.