Understanding The Sociology Of Land Re-locations – The Puzzling Case Of Bududa

The Bududa disasters have ignited a sociological debate as to why, with all the glaring risks to the local inhabitants, there is no noticeable sense of urgency among the affected to relocate to safer areas despite the government initiatives to provide alternative safe havens.

According to Mr Martin Owor the commissioner for disaster management in the Prime Minister’s office, the government allocated six acres (6) to each family in Kiryandongo District. However, there was a lukewarm response to the solution and some of those who had accepted to move returned to Bududa. At least 5,000 people were relocated to Kryandongo leaving a surplus of 3,000 plots unoccupied.

The question here is why would someone abandon six acres of land with a permanent house and go back to an overpopulated, landslide prone area in Bududa where the biggest acreage wouldn’t go beyond one acre per family? The answer to this rhetoric question lies in the sociological construct of the affected societies and the inhabitants.

There are three major sociological theories that can be applied to best explain the Bududa debacle. These include the symbolic interaction, conflict theory and the functional theory.  However, for purposes of this write up, I will stick to only the functionality theory. Functionality theory has to do with relationships between the parts of society and how the aspects of society are adaptive.

Developed by Emile Durkheim (1858-1917). He was interested in finding out how social order is crafted and how it maintains the stability of society. Societies instinctively have inherent norms that bind them through dos and don’ts. The actualization of these norms makes it hard to deviate from the accepted standards and separation of members becomes too hard.

The functionality paradigm avers that different parts of society are primarily composed of social institutions, each of which is designed to fulfill different needs with particular consequences for the form and shape of society.  The Bududa question is etched in the sociological psyche of the people and any attempt to relocate them must be steeped in the clear appreciation of the opportunity cost of those willing to relocate to a new setting and benefits of staying together even when they are faced with adversity.

As noted earlier, the relocation to Kiryandongo was estimated to accommodate 8,000 families but only 5,000 shifted, leaving a big chunk of the land provided empty. This clearly explains the functionality theory, where established societies are apprehensive to tear the cultural fabric that binds them together even when there is an alternative. The distance from Bududa casts a shadow of anxiety onto the unknown. It means forging new cultural ties with people you have nothing in common, different terrain, weather, language and food.

It should be pointed out that Bududa is a mountainous area, fertile, cold with readily available water. On the other hand, Kiryandongo is a flat land, not so fertile, hot and occupied mainly by having pastoralists. These are two worlds apart. It has been found out that most of those who had relocated to Kiryandongo later went back or decided to keep two homes in both Bududa and Kiryandongo.

Following this challenge, there are different suggestions advanced to try to mitigate the dilemma. The first is that the people can be left in Bududa but an early warning system is put in place to monitor the weather, the changing rain patterns and then people are evacuated to safer areas set up or ordered to evacuate to relatives in safer areas around Bulambuli where they can go back when the situation stabilizes. The advantage here is that people may be in position to tend to their gardens and go back to safer points. The challenge however, is that social services must be put in place, schools, health centers, sanitation, water etc.

The other suggestion is relocating to urban centers, but with a chance to go back to their gardens or relocate back during the dry season. However, enforcement to evacuate after the dry season may be a challenge to implement given the local politics involved. Evacuating villages means depriving local politicians of voters and the backlash is that it may be fought as an imposition by the central government.

There is a suggestion to relocate to surrounding districts, however, it has been realized that it is only possible outside the Elgon region because districts around Bududa are already overpopulated and the relocation may lead to conflicts. It is also true that the Bamasaba are a mix of different dialects that historically have had sharp differences and cannot relate with each other cordially. Bamasaba from north Bugisu are different from those from south. And low lying districts of Pallisa, Butaleja and Kumi don’t share cultural norms, meaning acceptance may be a problem. Pallisa and Butaleja districts are low lying areas and are also prone to floods due water that flows from Mount Elgon down stream.

There have been suggestions that forceful relocation should be carried out to Bunambutye and Bikhwonge in Bulambuli where government has bought land and Bududa land is taken over by National Environmental Management Authority for afforestation, but this may turn out unpopular, again because local politicians may want their people to stay. Bulambuli offers the best bet because the social fabric is the same, food and other cultural ties are the same unlike Kiryandongo.

The biggest challenge to government has been the logistical nightmare of relocating entire villages or sub-counties and the attendant lack of amenities in the new areas. The cultural sentiments attached to ancestral grounds like burial grounds, cultural sites like imbalu ceremonial grounds and historical sites of Mundu and Kakai. The attachment to the sites of ancestral gods have a big role in the sociological mindset of the locals. They have a feeling that they are the guardians of their spirits that must not be abandoned in the wilderness.

The school of thought that leaving the people intact but only evacuate during the rainy seasons cites countries that face seasonal weather vagaries like tsunami, cyclone, hurricane and monsoons like the USA and the Caribbean islands that live normal lives till those seasons when massive evacuations are mandatory. After that time, the people go back and resettle into their normal activities. The problem in the Elgon region is that rain has no strict season, it rains almost throughout the year and early warning systems may not be effective to detect possible disaster. There is also talk of cracks that have existed for decades without causing any harm to communities. This has bred complacency among the locals who have watched these cracks since childhood without harm.

The release of Shs32.75b to carry out the relocation, targets 6,300 people to Bunambutsye and Bikhwonge sub counties in Bulambuli district starting with those affected from Bukalasi, Buwali, Nalwanga and Bubiita. The money will be given to the initial batch of 900 households, a double roomed house on government land of 2,800 hectares, each getting 2.5 acres. Each family to get 30 roofing sheets, 50 bags of cement, bricks and sand. 10,000 people will be relocated in the next financial year.

Any mitigation measures in Bududa must first start by addressing the sociological factors that may be key to acceptance to relocate to safer areas. Compelling people to relocate may not be the best option though at some point the State must act in the best interest of its citizens.