Literature on the geographies of peace and violence suggest that the evolution of peace and violence during conflict can be traced as a process in distinct situated contexts. Based on the case of the almost-century-old boundary dispute between Alavanyo and Nkonya in Ghana, this study conducts a temporal analysis of primary and secondary data to demonstrate how incidents of violence and peace-building activities contribute to different peace(s) at different times. The study finds that processes such as encroachment, mediation, militarization, adjudication and tenancy atonement in the course of this conflict, have contributed to various manifestations of peace (‘peace-ful concepts’) such as reconciliation, resistance, hospitality, justice and solidarity. It also argues that the ‘geographic ambiguity’ that has attended the boundary (re)formation between the disputing communities creates uncertainties that have implications for peace-building. Based on this evidence, the study concludes that peace-ful concepts are differentiated by how much they accommodate ‘violence’ and the evolution of peace in times of conflict is shaped more through the informal choices of parties in or affected by conflict, than by the formal institutions regulating their interactions. It recommends therefore that an understanding of geographical implications of peace-building are necessary for success.

Additional Metadata
Persistent URL,
Journal Political Geography
Penu, D.A.K., & Essaw, D.W. (2019). Geographies of peace and violence during conflict: the case of the Alavanyo-Nkonya boundary dispute in Ghana. Political Geography, 71, 91–102. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2019.03.003