WOLKITE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES DEPARTIMENT

OF CIVIC AND ETHICAL STUDIES

THE EFFECT OF INTER-ETHNIC CONFLICT ON LOCAL DEVELOPMENT: the

CASE OF AMEYA WOREDA SOUTH WEST SHOA ZONE OF OROMIA REGIONAL
STATE.

BY

GETACHEW GELANA

ADVISOR: Mr. ABDULKARIM

August, 2019

Wolkite, Ethiopia
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................................ i
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................. ii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the study ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. The statement of the problem............................................................................................................ 1
1.3. Objective of the study ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1. General Objective ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.2. Specific Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 2
1.4. Research Questions ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.5. Significance of the Study .................................................................................................................. 2
1.6. Delamination of the study ................................................................................................................. 3
1.7. Limitation of the study ...................................................................................................................... 3
1.8. Organization of the study .................................................................................................................. 3
Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature ................................................................................................. 4
2.1. Concept of Conflict ........................................................................................................................... 4
2.2. Causes of Conflict ............................................................................................................................. 4
2.3. Ethnic Conflict .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.4. Dynamics of Ethnicity and Inter Ethnic Conflicts in Ethiopia.......................................................... 6
2.5. Inter-Ethnic Conflicts in Post 1991 Ethiopia .................................................................................... 9
2.6. Ethnic Federalism and Inter Ethnic Conflicts ................................................................................. 11
2.6.1. Debates on Ethnic Federalism .................................................................................................. 11
2.6.2. Ethnic Conflicts in Post 1991 Ethiopia ..................................................................................... 13
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 16
3.1. Description of the study area........................................................................................................... 16
3.2. Population of the Study ................................................................................................................... 16
3.3. Sampling Techniques ...................................................................................................................... 16
3.4. Methods of Data Collection ............................................................................................................ 16
3.4.1. Methods of Primary Data Collection ........................................................................................ 16
3.4.2. Methods of Secondary Data Collection ....................................................................................... 17
3.5. Methods of Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 17
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ........................................................ 18
4.1. Analysis of the Societies Responses ............................................................................................... 18
 4.2. Analysis of the Woreda Administration.......................................................................................... 20
4.3. Causes of Conflicts and its Effect among the Oromo of Amerya District ...................................... 22
4.3.1. Land Conflict ............................................................................................................................ 23
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................................ 25
5.1. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 25
5.2. Recommendation ............................................................................................................................ 25
Reference .................................................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................. 28
Appendix B ................................................................................................................................................. 29
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all, I thank the Almighty God who made everything a reality during the entire research

period.

Secondly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude and heartfelt thanks to my advisor Mr.

Abdulkerim Shafi for his superb and careful constructive, criticisms and guideline for writing this

research.

I am indebted to the participants of this research paper from which data was collected. To all the

others not specifically mentioned but who contributed to the writing of this project, thank you very

much.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge my beautiful wife and three beautiful children’s for their

moral support and encouragements during the work of this research paper.

i
ABSTRACT
This study examined the inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and cota society at Ameya woreda.

To realize the objectives of the study, the researcher employed both qualitative and quantitative

research approach, which enabled him to explore the cause of inter-ethnic conflict, the impacts of

conflict and the main actors in the inter-ethnic conflict of the study community. In this study, both

primary and secondary data collection techniques were used. The primary sources of data were

collected through questionnaires, interview, semi-structured interviews and observation. The

findings of the study reveal that there were various causes for inter-ethnic conflicts, among them

few of the causes are control over resources, such as grazing land, water points and cultivable land.

In addition, the result of the findings also shows that the drunkenness, revenge and land related

issue is the major cause of conflict that can cause a simple insult to escalate into complex homicide

in the study area.

ii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the study
Indeed, Oromia is a heterogeneous region and the zones and woreda’s found under the region have
the same characteristics. The successive Ethiopian regimes have implemented their respective
strategies towards diversity that left its own good and bad legacies. That same strategy have a great
effect on the wellbeing of Ameya woreda.

In relation to this, the inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota people in Ameya woreda on
the case of race, ethnic and economic pastor is the focus of this study. It is the serious enemy and
obstacle for the development of Ameya woreda.

The history of Ethiopia is riddled by intra and inter-ethnic conflict in modern history of the country
and several external aggressions. The issue that drive ethnic conflict cannot easily explained
simply because there are numerous causes. The literature however, point out that struggle over
territory, competitions over economic resources and marginalization that may increase inequality
can cause intergroup conflicts.

In an attempt to explain why ethnic conflicts occur under different circumstances. Horowitz (1985)
concluded that ethnicity could be looked at from three perspectives. First, ethnic conflicts are
remands of traditional practices supposed to be over taken by modernity. The utility of a
‘allegiance to ethic groups. Second ethnic conflict is viewed as traditional and as strong
impediment to modernization. This can be seen the independence movement that peace headed the
struggle against colonial rule with used their strong ethnic support base, hence setting the stage for
ethnic nationalism. Third ethnic conflict can be viewed as part of even an outcome of the process
of modernization.
1.2. The statement of the problem
The history of Ethiopia is riddled by intra and inters ethnic conflict. In its modern history, the
country has to with several aggressions and internal as well. Ethiopia was experienced acute social,
political and economic contradictions (Asnake, 2004). More specific studies in east Africa also
show that resource scarcity and the absences of strong informal institutions to handle the situation
are the principal cause for recurrent conflict among different pastoral group (Ayalew 2002,
Getachew 2001. Bekele 2008). Inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota in Ameya woreda

1|Page
raised great obstacle to the woredas’ in particular and to the country in general. The disagreements
are valueless are as well as the great danger for social, economic, cultural and political
development of the country. Besides, the place where the conflict was taken place was difficult to
work and challenge the society. It results poverty and famine because the conflict aggravated the
security of the human being under question. Thus, the present research focuses on the effect of
inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota and its outcome on the local development of Ameya
woreda. In doing so, the researcher bases this study on the following objectives discussed below.

1.3. Objective of the study

1.3.1. General Objective
The general objective of the study is to investigate the effect of inter-ethnic conflict between
Ameya and Cota and its consequences on the local development of Ameya woreda.

1.3.2. Specific Objectives

Specifically, the objective of this study is to:
Explore the cause of inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota at Ameya woreda
Create awareness between people
Identify the impacts of conflict on the development of Ameya society
Identify the key causes and what should be improve.
Find out the main actors in the inter-ethnic conflict.

1.4. Research Questions

The research paper raised the following research papers:
1. What were the causes of inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota at Ameya woreda?
2. Who were actors involved in the conflicts?
3. What is the effect of ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota in Ameya woreda?

1.5. Significance of the Study

The study of the effect of inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota in Cota woreda can be
significant in the following ways:

It may support the government officials to take into account the problem of ethnic conflict in
decision making as well as further prospective planning and realization at community level.

2|Page
 It also has an academic significance in that it provides information about the nature and extent
of inter-ethnic conflict for academicians who are interested to make further studies on the same
issue.

1.6. Delamination of the study

This study concerned with the inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota society at Ameya
woreda. The study was conducted in Cota kebele of research site.

1.7. Limitation of the study

I have attempted to investigate the inter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota society at Ameya
woreda. While conducting this study, I encountered different challenged which could affect the
quality of the research to some extent. Conducting such a study obviously demands time and
financial resources. I faced problems of time and finance. The other problem was the problem of
unwillingness of respondents. Some respondents were unwilling in most cases to share their
knowledge with me because of the suspicion about the research.
However, I have tried to overcome the above problems by approaching them frequently through
their relatives and friends. Lack of experience and knowledge about research was also another
problem. In this case, I attempted to overcome the problem by making discussion with my
colleagues and other, knowledgeable individual about the research.

1.8. Organization of the study

This study is organized into five chapters. The former chapter includes: background of the study,
the statement of the problem, objective, of the study /general and specific objectives), research
questions, significance of the study, delamination (scope) of the study and limitation of the study.
The second chapter contains: review of related literature, concepts of conflict, causes of conflict
and ethnic-conflict. The third chapter contains: methodology, description of the study, population
of the study, sampling techniques, methods of data collection, methods of secondary data
collection and methods of data analysis. The fourth chapter includes: data analysis and
interpretation, analysis of the societies responses, analysis of the woreda administration, cause of
conflict and its effects among Oromo of Ameya district and land conflict. The fifth and the last
chapter contain conclusion and recommendations.

3|Page
Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature
This chapter introduces brief literature review to explain the different scholar arguments towards
on the way of inter group conflict. It changes and continue mainly along with post 1991 restating
of the national government literature works direct on the social, economic, cultural and border
conflict and detriment theories that are believed to instrument for the actual analysis.

2.1. Concept of Conflict

Conflict is inevitable phenomena in human social life. It is either naturally or socially occurring
phenomena in daily social life of human beings. In this regard, Bohannan (1989 xiii) argued that
“conflict exists in animal life, including human life. According to Augsburger, “conflict is essential
to, in eradicable from and inevitable in human life; and the source, cause and process of conflict
can be turned from life-destroying to life building ends.

2.2. Causes of Conflict

In discussing the major causes of conflicts scholars like Marx and Dahrendorf whose works
mentioned (in Tonder at 2008:374) basically identified various causes of conflict which include,
“poverty, social mobility, absence of security, unemployment, competition and class
consciousness”. In a similar fashion, Jeong (2008:52) stated that, in Marxist analysis economic
forces that are basically the forces of production comprise an important element in arranging the
stage for class and other social conflicts. In addition, Assefa (2001) also reveals competition over
resources as a prominent cause of conflict among the Oromo in particular and the country as a
whole. To support his argument, he mentioned pastoralist clashes in the lowland areas of Ethiopia
as representative example.

Furthermore, according to Alao (2007: 64) who categorized the principal causes of conflicts into
nine main sources as follows: problems associated with land scarcity; difficulties arising from
conflicting laws governing land tenure; boundary disputes and rival claims to specific portions of
land; demands for a review of “landlord-tenant” arrangements over land ownership; complexities
arising from racial imbalance on land ownership; the clash of spiritual consideration with political
and economic realities: complaints over government’s land regulatory policies; complexities of
massive human influx; and conflicts arising from land and labor relations.

4|Page
2.3. Ethnic Conflict
Inspectoral setting the end of cold war pained by many raids of change in causes, nature and types
of conflict in the global, regional and national level. One major problem in this respect is the
localization of civil war. In which the peripheral regions of horn of African country can be leading
witness for its protracted local country.

The horn of African including Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan and Kenya is home to the largest number
of tradition lives producers in the world and the sometime represent the above assertion (Markakis
1994). Pastoralist as both production and social system requires vast a create perform patterned
transmit mobility occurs seen for some other scholars ethnic conflict is highly attached with certain
policies of the formal colonial power mainly up internal border demarcation and indirect rules
formulate to achieve their administrative objective. This affected the cost many system of
negotiating resource occurs a resporical relationship that has existed among various pastoral
groups before the advent of several of colonialism. The pastoralist’s areas over colonial
demarcation and national state administrative borders that precipitated into immediate conflict
(Ibid).

Markakis (1994) also brought vital perspective on resource and subsequent “marginalization of
herders approach” for him the commercial of pastoralist resources by the state that appear
apparently fosters an eviction and shriving of grazing land become catalysts of conflict areas. In
an attempt to explain with ethnic conflict occur under different circumstances Horowitz (1985),
concluded that ethnicity could be looked at from three perspectives.

First ethnic conflict is remaining of traditional practice supported to be over taken by modernity.
The assumption here it that modernization will be diminish the utility of allegiance to ethnic
groups.

Second ethnic conflict is viewed as traditional and as strong impediment to modernization. This
can be seen the independence movement that peace headed the struggle against colonial rule with
used their strong ethnic support base, hence setting the stage for ethnic nationalism. In the past
colonial states, therefore, ethnicity emerged as a superior base for political solidarity and
community mobilization as stated. This ethnic took center stage in political of many modern
countries and posed challenges to the cons and venues of the states.

5|Page
Thirdly, ethnic conflict can be viewed as part of or even outcome of the process of modernization.
The distribution of benefit of modernization for example in economic and educational opportunity
as well as political representation can act as motivating factors for ethnic competition.

2.4. Dynamics of Ethnicity and Inter Ethnic Conflicts in Ethiopia

Regarding the nature of inter-ethnic relations in the history of Ethiopia, there are polarized views
from prominent scholars. Merera represented the history of Ethiopia as the history of conflict. In
another extreme, Hizikias stated that “the norm in the country has been ethnic coexistence rather
than ethnic warfare”. The latter argues, the so called ‘ethnic conflict in the past Ethiopia was not
more than a conflict which appears between elites from different ethnic back ground. It means
there is consensus among scholars on the existence of conflict rather their difference is on the role
of ethnicity in the course of violent conflicts. And when someone attempts to puzzle out the
difference through looking thoroughly their claims and counter claims, the problem is attributable
to variations in conceptual understandings of ethnicity and ethnic conflict emanated from the
earlier theoretical perspectives.

Accordingly, the first argument articulates ethnicity as major source of contention in the history
of the state; whereas the other extreme argued the conflict in the country gives sound meaning if
it is explained in terms of socio- economic marginalization than ethnicity. In the word of Hizikias,
the conflict has been ‘elite driven conflict’, not a conflict emanated from mere ethnic hatred and
animosities. The first analysis is inclined to the primordialist perspective which argues ethnic
difference is essentially source of conflict among groups. Whereas the second explanation is an
instrumentalist argument; ethnicity is totally superficial in ethnic conflict of the state but
manipulated for economic and political motives of elites. However, both arguments are
unconvincing though not problematic. In spite of its influence in the course of group conflicts, in
Ethiopia ethnicity is neither inherently problematic nor superficial. This paper claimed that ethnic
conflicts in the country were/are results of group’s comparison against the other in terms of
economic, political and social positions.

Regarding the political history of Ethiopia, analysts of Ethiopian conflicts are obsessed to cite the
event (expansion of Menelik II) which took place during the 19th century in the country. They
stated that the years following the victory of emperor Menelik II on newly occupied territories
were characterized by land encroachment, and imposition of language, culture and religion of the
6|Page
Amhara. They assume ethnic diversity following the expansion brought distasteful ethnic relations
between ethnic groups, particularly between Amhara and other nationalities.

Markakis notes, “The imperial state was founded on explosive conjunction of antagonistic class
and ethnic divisions that made it inherently unstable”. Similarly, Endrias while discussing about
the chief causes of 1960s and 70s resistant movements, he concluded that, “nationalist struggle
was against the suppression of nationalities and regional identities by people from other
nationalities” (emphasis from the researcher). Thus, for them, in Ethiopia ethnicity has been a
problem resulted from Amhara domination over other ethnic groups of the country. Markakis
further notes, “Ethnicity was the political essence of the imperial state, where the distribution of
power was based on ethnic calculus that gave a near monopoly to Amhara ruling classes”.

To the opposite, Clapham argued, “economic marginalization provides a better explanation than
ethnicity, and political exclusion even economic exploitation to the incidence of insurgencies”.
Abbink has also stated that the root causes of conflicts during the previous regimes were
marginality in all spheres due to geographical remoteness and less valuable resources. Abbink
further argued that if the problem was ethnicity, Arsi Oromo (violently subdued by Menelik II)
would be the first to fight against the center, but Tigray the center of Abyssinian civilization was
the first not Arsi Oromo. On his part, Hizikias claimed that the so called ethnic conflict has not
been emerged from ethnic animosity. According to Hizkias conflicts before institutionalization of
federalism were instigated by elites from different ethnic backgrounds (Ibid).

However, meaning of ethnic conflict for Hizkias is at first problematic, he argues a conflict is an
ethnic conflict if it emerges from mere ethnic animosity and hatred, and ended with ethnic
cleansing and genocide. However, this paper argues any conflict is ethnic conflict, where at least
one conflicting party claims the cause for the conflict and remedies are related with ethnic fault
lines. Hence, in the past Ethiopia, ethnic conflict has been the norm of the state but it was not
emanated because the state is heterogeneous. It is to mean that ethnic conflicts were not erupted
from mere ethnic difference, animosity or hatred. The chief source of ethnic conflict in the history
of the state was real/perceived illegitimate socio-economic and political boundaries between ethnic
identities. During the imperial regime, at least nationalist armed struggles fighting against the
central government claimed their source of hostility was exclusion from key activities of the state

7|Page
because of their ethnic identity. As Wolf, S stated when at least one of conflicting parties explains
its dissatisfaction in ethnic terms, the conflict is ethnic conflict.

We know the actual ethnic diversity in Ethiopia, and the enduring problems of ethno-regional
disparities in education, infrastructure, development and representation in leading administrative
positions at the level of the central state. Both the large Oromo population and the many minority
groups in Ethiopia, if looked at proportionally, were underrepresented in all major domains. Many
groups which were incorporated or conquered by Minilik II in the late 19th Century remained
marginal to the polity, the economy and the exercise of administration.

Therefore in the pre-1991 Ethiopia, it can be concluded that there was feeling of relative
deprivation which was coincided with ethnic lines. Freeman argues, when actual or perceived
deprivation corresponds with ethnic lines, it provides an opportunity for elites to mobilize the
mass. But, this is not to mean that elites were easily mobilizing the mass members of a group for
violence based on mere identity difference. For instance, Vaughan notes ‘... in mobilizing peasant
support [TPLF and its Coalitions], they suggest that nationality was less a primary contradiction
in Ethiopia, than the most effective means of mobilizing the population to combat uneven
development’. Thus, elites were manipulating feelings of relative deprivation/exclusion than
ethnicity.

Tegegne Teka argues that violent ethnic conflicts in history of Ethiopia were not consequences of
mobilization. Contradiction between ethnic identities will not be transformed in to violence
through mere mobilization but after rationalizing the cost and benefit of employing violence as a
solution to the contradiction by members of the group at large. On this, Vaughan stated that forging
popular consensus among Tigrians against the central state took 10 years for TPLF. This
demonstrates that ethnicity is not easily manipulable by political elites in the way instrumentalists
argue on it. Hence, in history of Ethiopia, fundamental source of ethnic conflict has been emerged
from feelings of comparisons of one ethnic group with other referent groups. It was not the result
of ethnic heterogeneity or mobilization of elites.

8|Page
2.5. Inter-Ethnic Conflicts in Post 1991 Ethiopia
As it has been discussed before, in most cases, ethnicity is defined as either membership to a group
of people which share primordial elements, such as common language, common ancestry, and
feeling of solidarity. Or it is membership to imagined community created and manipulated by
ethnic entrepreneurs. But, when someone deeply observes dynamics of ethnicity in Ethiopia in the
last two decades, it would be clear that the two dominant schools on ethnicity are unable to provide
complete explanation on the subject.

In Ethiopia, dynamics of ethnicity is hardly explained by primordial arguments which claim

ethnicity is static based on essentialist attributes – ethnicity is fixed. For instance, during the
transitional period there were only 63 recognized ethnic groups, but now a time official reports
revealed that the state hosts more than 80 ethnic groups. From where do these 17 ethnic groups
appear? Moreover, in post 1991, five ethnic groups are deleted and other new six ethnic identities
are newly registered in to the national statistical census of the country. In the period, Silte and
Kimant are also recognized as having their own distinct ethnic identity different from Gurage and
Amhara respectively. In Metekel,Kumpal that was identified as different ethnic category before
1991 is now categorized under the family of AgewAwi. Similarly, Gumuz, before 1991 called
themselves and by others Shanqila6, but during the field work, no Gumuz informant mentions the
term as their identity marker. Thus, ethnicity in Ethiopia is dynamic in which members of the
group adapt themselves to changing circumstance.

The ongoing debate on the existence of Amhara ethnic identity has also been attracting scholars.
Though it is contestable until very recently, Amhara people are one of ethnic groups in Ethiopia
in which a regional state is designated by their name. However, it is hard to say members of the
group share the aforementioned primordial ties. Tegegne stated;

The Amhara does not possess what usually referred as objective ethnic marker: common
ancestry, territory, religion, and shared experience except the language. The Amhara have
no common claims to a common ancestry. They do not share the sentiments and they have
no mutual interest understandings.

According to studies conducted so far, members of the Amhara have been identifying themselves
by regional cleavage identities; Gondere, Gojjame, Shewe, Wolloye. Moreover, Hizkias has

9|Page
reported that one regional cleavage was waging war against another in aligning with other ethnic
groups such as Tigre, Gurage and Oromo. Wubshet has also noted “after the battle of Segele 7 the
relation between people of Shewa and Wollo had been as enemies to each other or at least as people
from different ethnic identities”. But, now a time the rise of Amhara nationalism is becoming the
predominant point of discussion among members of its regional cleavages and scholars. It can be
argued that a strong sentiment of belongingness and membership to Amhara ethnic identity is
being developed. How can primordial understanding explain the rise of the new Amhara
nationalism?

The Ethiopian experience of ethnicity has also demonstrated, having similar language and culture
do not necessarily determine group identity. In the case of Kimant, for example, members of the
group are speaking Amharic language and share similar cultural practices with other Amhara
people living in Gonder. However, they claim for their distinct identity from the rest of Amhara
and the regional government has also recognized it. Spokesman of the regional state council during
the time, AtoYalew Abate (04/07/07E.c8) said that “particularly people of LayArmacho and
Chilga district identified themselves as Kimant and the remaining neighboring people are again
called them Kimants, thus their ethnic identity is Kimant not Amhara”. Thus, they are now
recognized as people with having their own ethnic identity. Regarding this, Barth argued that
“Ethnic groups are categories of ascription and identification by the actors themselves....”. In
ethnicity, others ascription is not also enough. For example, the attempt of creating a single
language identity of WoGaGoDa 9 out of four ethnic groups has caused destruction of property
and claims to numerous lives following violent ethnic conflict among groups.

Ethnicity in Ethiopia is not also something created and manipulated by elites; called themselves
representatives of the group. The case of Silte makes the argument clearly plausible. In 1999 a
conference was held at Butajira arranged by the government of SNNPRS 10 with 961 Silte
speaking representatives. The conference had the aim to decide whether Silte is different from
Gurage or not. However, in the conference no one has supported the claim of being different ethnic
identity. Later, a referendum was conducted; among 421,188 participants, 416,481 have voted for
the distinct identity of Silte. It shows how the interest of the mass has reversed the decision of the
so called ‘ethnic representatives/elites’. The case of WoGaGoDa is also empirical example for
ethnicity in Ethiopia cannot be explained by instrumentalist perspective.

10 | P a g e
Thus, from the above discussion, it can be concluded that ethnicity in Ethiopia is neither
necessarily sprung from fixed primordial ties nor a mere means to further economic and political
interests. In this regard, Jenkins has explained the subject convincingly;

That there are limits to plasticity of ethnicity, as well as its fixity and solidity, is the founding
premise for the development of an understanding of ethnicity which permits us to appreciate that
although it is imagined, it is not imaginary; to acknowledge its antiquity as well as its modernity.
Rethinking demands that we should strike to a balanced view of authenticity of ethnic attachments,
somewhere between irresistible emotion and utter cynicism, neither blindly primordial nor
completely manipulable, ethnicity and its allotropes are principles of collective identification and
social organization in terms of culture and history, similarity and difference, that show little signs
of withering away.

The researcher argues that either primordial or instrumental schools could not completely explain
the dynamics of ethnicity in Ethiopia. So, transitive approach appears convincing in explaining
and analyzing dynamics of ethnicity in Ethiopia. As it has been discussed, ethnicity in Ethiopia is
a matter of categorical ascription, and shaped by historical, social and political contexts of
relational space. Ethnicity is not constituted for some essentialist factors but from having interacted
over time. People are adapting their identities to changes in circumstance; some may even
transcend existing boundaries and shift their identities.

Hence, ethnicity in Ethiopia is an enormously complex concept. No ethnic entity has been
untouched by others. Groups in existence in the twentieth century are biological and social
amalgams of several preexisting entities. The ingredients are often discernible only by inference,
particularly if the mixing took place long ago. Nonetheless, such mixing led to the formation of
groups that think of themselves and are considered by others as different.

2.6. Ethnic Federalism and Inter Ethnic Conflicts

2.6.1. Debates on Ethnic Federalism
Ethiopian federalism has been hosting polarized academic and political discourses since the day
of its inception. Listing conferences held on ethnic federalism is a challenging task. Nevertheless,
ideological and practical reviews on the subject demonstrated the existence of polarized debate –
‘meta conflict’ among elites. The conflict is between three groups. Proponents of ethnic federalism

11 | P a g e
(e.g Mengesha, 2008; Endrias, 2003; Gebreab, 2003; Markakis, 2003), and opponents (e.g Hizkias,
1996; Mesfin, 2003; Alemante, 2003; Abbink, 1997) are some among others. In between the two
extremes, there is a group which accepts ethnic federalism in principle but blames framers for the
discrepancy between the policy and practice (e.g Merera, 2003 and Asefa, 2010).

Among the proponents, Mengesha and Endrias praised the framers of ethnic federalism as there
had not been other option left in Ethiopia for both practical as well as conceptual reasons.
According to them, Dergue was ousted from power by nationalist struggles with political demands
either for independence or self-rule such as EPLF, TPLF, OLF, WSLF and others. Participants of
peace and democracy conference 11 were also predominantly ‘nationalist organizations’ in need
of self-determination. Therefore, Endrias has concluded that “the history and identity of
protagonists in the wake of victory over tyranny thus explains why ethnic federalism proved to be
a decisive political instrument in Ethiopia’s transition to democracy”.

They are also arguing on its success, Endrias forcefully pointed out, “Ethnic federalism concluded
protracted civil strife fuelled or exacerbated by ethnic cleavage and conflict”. Mengesha has also
stated that through recognizing and empowering minorities, ethnic federalism has ended the
hegemony of one ethnic group which in turn creates social cohesion and national integrity; this
enables it to end decades of civil war in Ethiopian history. Thus, for proponents, ethnic federalism
was right in its rational and successful in achieving its objective.

On the other hand, various elites argue against the policy and practice of ethnic federalism. Their
critics begins, first Ethiopia had not experience the so called ethnic conflict. As it is discussed
before, they argue, the conflict was rather between central government and insurgencies just
bearing ethnic names. Chief sources of conflict were socio economic marginalization not
nationality question. Thus, for them, self-determination and independence were not the right
solutions. According to their argument, institutionalization of ethnic federalism fuels new forms
of ethnic conflicts which are strange to the state. Bloody conflicts over economic and political
resources, claim of territories, and exclusion of regional minorities becomes manifestation of the
post 1991 Ethiopia which was uncommon in history. Thus, the arrangement fuels ethnic conflicts
and encouraging disintegration than stabilizing and maintaining the unity of the state.

12 | P a g e
To the remaining others, Ethiopia’s federalism is the right path. But, they criticize lack of real
commitment of the ruling party for the promises of the constitution; right to self-determination and
secession. For them, discrepancies between the theory of federalism and the practice at the ground
are major sources of violent conflicts in which the country has been experiencing.

2.6.2. Ethnic Conflicts in Post 1991 Ethiopia

The previous sections shows that there are polarized understandings on the implication of ethnic
federalism on interethnic conflicts of the state. On the one hand, Ethnic federalism is praised for
ending protracted civil war prevailed in the state in pre 1991 period. It is claimed that in post
federal Ethiopia, ethnic relations are based on equality and cultural pluralism. The fear of
opponents to the dismemberment of Ethiopia was also neutralized by the participation of all ethnic
groups from corner to corner during Ethio-Eritrean war (1998-2000).

On the other hand, the new state policy is blamed as source of all evils that are going on within the
state in post 1991 Ethiopia. Accordingly, in post 1991, Eritrea has seceded from Ethiopia and
violent ethnic conflicts are still challenging the unity of the state. Empirically, Ethiopia has also
been experiencing the most deadly inter-ethnic conflicts since the day of inception of ethnic
federalism than ever. Ethnic conflicts between Guji and Gedeo, Amhara and Tigray, Sidama and
Wolayita, Wolayita and Gamo, Amhara and kimant, Afar and Issa, Somali and Oromo are among
others. The period has also witnessed ethnic based violence in many parts of the state; attacks over
Amhara in Arbagugu and Wollega, attacks over Agew and Amhara in Metekel, the recent attack
on Gamo in Burayu can be mentioned among others. But, is ethnic federalism the real cause behind
such evils?

As the data from fieldwork and the studies conducted so far revealed, Ethnic federalism is only a
single cause among multifaceted major factors of inter-ethnic conflicts and ethnic based violence
undergoing in the state. But, as Asnake has noted these factors for ethnic violence and conflicts in
the period are accompanied by federalization process of the state. Thus, the new political
arrangement can be taken as an aggravating and complicating factor behind other issues in the
course of ethnic conflicts. As such, factors behind such evils can be categorized in to the following
three major categories.

13 | P a g e
A. Relative deprivation

Relative deprivation is feeling of being excluded from social, economic and political benefits in
contrast to other referent groups. And when this feeling coincides with ethnic lines, it becomes a
cause for ethnic conflicts. The study conducted by Dagnachew has identified relative deprivation
as major cause of inter-ethnic conflict in Metekel zone. This is because, in the last two decades,
ethnicity has become essential point of explanation in social and political fabric of citizens –
burdens and benefits are explained based on ethnicity. Therefore, if anybody is excluded from
benefits, it is perceived as his/her ethnic identity is a cause for exclusion.

Accordingly, in the last two decades, Ethiopia has been ruled by TPLF (EPRDF) which is believed
to favor Tigreans against other member ethnic groups of the state. Key political positions,
economic and financial institutions, military and security offices were predominantly stuffed and
operated by Tigreans. This angered other ethnic groups particularly the two dominant ethnic
groups in a state – Amhara and Oromo. As such, in the last three years the state has experienced
violent popular protests and uprisings against the ruling party and Tigreans, people perceived to
be long favored by TPLF. The uprisings led to the coalition of Amhara and Oromo elites and the
end of TPLF dominance among member parties of EPRDF12. The coming of the new PM Abiy
Ahmed is also associated with this movement of the youth from these two largest ethnic groups.

Therefore, feeling of relative deprivation can be cited as the major factor behind ethnic conflicts
in Ethiopia, particularly between Tigreans and others. Still, the state cannot resolve problems
associated with equal sharing of political and economic resources. TPLF did not take a lesson from
the past system that it was organized (and claim) to fight against unfair distribution of resources
and political positions. It means, in post 1991 period deprivation of groups in contrast to other
referent groups remains as burden for the state in the effort of maintaining peace, stability and
democracy.

B. Identity and Territory

Conflicts in the last two decades have also involved issues of identity and territory; conflict
between Gamo and Welayita, Tigray and Amhara over welkayit, Amhara and Kimant, Silte and
Gurage can be mentioned. Moreover, the new federal arrangement was also followed by territorial
changes that led to claims and counter claims of territory and competition over shared resources.

14 | P a g e
This has also been a cause behind conflicts between Guji and Gedeo, Afar and Issa, Afar and
Amhara and others.

C. Tensions in Majority and Minority Relations in Regional States

Though framers of ethnic federalism claimed that they have established nine regional states based
on ethnicity, still majority of regional states host diverse nation nationalities in their territory. This
needs another political arrangement at regional level to accommodate claims of ethnic groups, but
is not an easy task. For instance, some regional states (BGRS13 and GRS14) categorized ethnic
groups in to owners (titular) and non-owners (non titular) in their constitution. Thus, the
contradictory claims and counter claims of titular and non-titular ethnic groups are sources of
deadly ethnic conflicts in such regional states. Alem has stated, the new political arrangement has
also forced previously dominant and dominated ethnic groups to adjust new forms of inter-ethnic
relations which in turn fuels ethnic conflicts, the case of Agew and Gumuz and Guji and Gedeo
are empirical examples. Contradictory interaction between majority and minority ethnic groups is
another cause of inter-ethnic conflicts.

Thus, though the Ethiopian government has adopted Ethnic federalism as a new approach to
accommodate diversity since 1991, the recent condition of intra and inter-ethnic affairs appear to
challenge the long held interdependence and togetherness of the people in the country. Now a day
people in different parts of the country are suffering from violent conflicts emanated from human
fault lines, ethnicity and religion. However, the existing dynamics of ethnicity and ethnic conflicts
in Ethiopia is not merely the result of ethnic federalism rather the interplay of various factors and
it is contextual. Ethnic federalism is only a single factor among many others. But, it can be argued
that ethnic federalism has decentralized conflict not power among ethnic identities of the country.
Hence, understanding of ethnicity and ethnic relations in Ethiopia needs deep investigation in to
historical and existing socio-political and economic contexts.

15 | P a g e
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1. Description of the study area
Ameya is one of the administrative districts under the South West Shoa zones of Oromia Regional
State. It is located at a distance of 144 kilometers from Addis Ababa in south west direction. Part
of the south Shoa zone, Ameya is bordered on the south Abeshge woreda, by west Wonchi woreda,
by North Dire Inchini and by East Nono Woreda. The administrative center of Ameya is Gindo.
With regard to the settlement pattern, people in Ameya and its surrounding is organized in rural
and urban kebeles. The people in Ameya particularly live in different localities closer to their
relatives near to their homesteads.

3.2. Population of the Study

The research is mainly concerned with the following local society, recorded class, woreda
administration and 30% on this important to obtain information about conflict between Ameya and
Cota ethnic group.

3.3. Sampling Techniques

The sampling technique of this study is purposive sampling. Among the total number of the
population, 50 peoples were selected from both male and female of Ameya woreda.

3.4. Methods of Data Collection

3.4.1. Methods of Primary Data Collection
In order to obtain adequate information on the issue under discussion, I have employed various
types of research methods includes observation, interview and questionnaire.

Questionnaires: In the form of both open ended and close ended would prepare to collect
information on the effect of enter-ethnic conflict between Ameya and Cota people. Accordingly,
20 questionnaires were distributed to the members of the community (i.e. woreda and kebele
officials) in the woreda under discussion.

Interview: Interview has a crucial importance in gathering wide range of data for the study. The
interview guide was prepared to ensure that all key issues have to be included during interviewing.
I prepared guiding questions that would be asked. The informants were interviewed on the

16 | P a g e
individual dispute, family and group conflict. In order to conduct the interviewed and to collect
information about the causes of conflict and its effect, 20 informants were selected from the local
community (i.e. elders, women and youth).

Semi-Structured Interviews: This type of interview was used with district and Kebele
Administration officials to obtain responses to some of the general guiding questions. Besides, I
have interviewed those individuals who have experiences in conflicts to get firsthand information.

Observation: In addition to the information obtained from the participants through various
mechanisms outlined above. I made personal observations in the people’s natural setting (i.e. at
where they communally live). Thus, I observe the day to day activities of the local community
such as their social relations, and economic activities. Observation is the other techniques that are
play a vital role for the research to find out solution for the problem.

3.4.2. Methods of Secondary Data Collection

Secondary data gathering was based on searching for relevant written materials, such as books,
journals, article, published and unpublished documents, magazines and bulletins I reviewed
various documents which are related to the effect of inter –ethnic conflict. The secondary data
enabled me to make meaning from large information I gathered through interview, questionnaire
and observation data gathering methods.

3.5. Methods of Data Analysis

The method of data analysis that can be employed in this study is descriptive analysis, which
depends upon the information obtained from historical facts or from the different written materials.
The data collected were analyzed both in qualitative and quantitative number and in percent that
were used to complete the people responses.

17 | P a g e
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
This part deals with analysis and interpretation of data obtained from society and woreda’s
administration through questioning.

4.1. Analysis of the Societies Responses

This part of research deals with analysis of the societies responses.
1. What is the economic practice of Ameya and Cota people?

Table 1: Types of economic activities in the study area

No. Economic Activities Frequency Percentile

1. Agriculture 20 54.6%
2. Livestock 22 30.8 %
3. Trade 20 14.6%
Total 62 87.8%

From the above table, 54.6% of the respondents said that their economy is depend up on
agriculture, 30.8% respondents said that economy is depend on livestock while 14.6 of the
respondent said trade thus, as we can conclude from the above table more of the respondent said
that their economies depend up on the agriculture.

2. What are the cause of conflict between Ameya and Cota people?

Table 2: Causes of conflict in the study area

No. Response Frequency Percentile

1. Border 3 18.73%
2. Water 3 18.75%
3. Cultural 2 12.46%
4. All 8 50.06%
Total 16 100%

As indicated in table 2: 18.73% of the respondents replied that the cause of conflict is border
causes, 18.75% said water, 12.46% cultural and 49.94% respondents said all (i.e. border, water

18 | P a g e
and cultural). Thus, as displayed from the table most of the people said that all the cause of the
conflict.

3. Is there any cultural conflict between Ameya and Cota people?

Table 3: Status of cultural conflict in the study area

No. Response Frequency Percentile

1. Yes 12 63.04%
2. No 7 36.96%
Total 19 100%

From the above table 63.04% respondents said yes and 36.96 said no.

Table 4 Actors of conflict in the study area

4. Who were the actors involved in the conflicts of Ameya?

RESPONSES
Responses

50.00% 47.10%

40.00%
29.40%
30.00%
23.50%
20.00%

10.00%

0.00%
Cota Ameya Both

Fig1: The Actors in the Ameya Conflict

As indicated in the above diagram 23.5% of respondent said Ameya 29.4% of the respondents said
Cota and 47.1% respondent replied both. Therefore, the above diagram depicts both Ameya and
Cota people are the main actors in conflict.

19 | P a g e
5. Is there the conflict between Ameya and Cota people is economic factor?

Table 4 the conflict between Ameya and Cota

No. Response Frequency Percentile

1. Yes 7 70%
2. No 3 30%
Total 10 100%

From the above table 70% of respondents said yes, and 30 said No. Thus, as we can understand
from the above table, more of the respondent responses show the conflict between two groups is
economic factors.

Many types of conflicts occur in Ameya district. These include interpersonal conflict, intra-family,
inter family, inter-group and intra-ethnic conflict. The data obtained from informants, official
document gained from Ameya district police office affirm that water, cultural conflict, different
crimes (like insult), break of rule of law, border and land disputes are the major causes of conflicts
that have frequently occurred in the district.

4.2. Analysis of the Woreda Administration

This part of the response deals with analysis and interpretation of course of administration.

1. Do the woreda administrations take measure on the misbehaviors’ group?

RESPONSE

NO
45% YES
55%

Fig:2. Measures taken to resolve the conflict

20 | P a g e
As indicated on fig:2, 55.1% of the respondent replied yes and 44.9% said No. Accordingly, more
of the respondents said that the woreda administration takes measures on the misbehaviors.

2. Do you always give awareness about past conflict for each group?

Table 5: Awareness given for the people in resolving conflict

No. Response Frequency Percentile

1. Yes 16 55.1
2. No 13 44.9
Total 29 100

From the above table, 55.1% respondents said the woreda administration gives awareness and
44.9% not give awareness.

3. Is there the conflict resolution mechanisms in your woreda

Table 6: Mechanism of conflict resolution in the society

No. Response Frequency Percentile

1. Yes 15 51.7
2. No 14 48.3
Total 29 100

From the above table 51.7% of the respondent said that yes and 48.3 said No.

4. How many times do they take measure to reduce their misbehavior?

Response
40 35.8
29
30 23.5
20
11.7
10

0
Always Sometimes Rarely Not at all

Response

Fig.3: Frequency of conflict resolution

21 | P a g e
From fig.3; we can see that 35.8% of the respondents said always, 23.5% of the respondents said
sometimes, 11.7% said rarely and 29.4% respondents replied not at all.

5. For how long do the conflicts stay?

Table 7: Duration conflict in the study area

No. Durations Frequency of Percentile
Response
1. Two days 6 40
2. One week 8 53.4
3. One month 1 6.6
One year Total 15 100

As we can understand from the above table, 40% of the respondents said the conflict stay for two
days, 53.4% of the respondents said one week and 6.6% of the respondents replied one month.

4.3. Causes of Conflicts and its Effect among the Oromo of Amerya District
Like many other societies in Ethiopia, the majority of the people of Ameya district are an agrarian
community in which their livelihoods depend on agriculture and utilization of natural resources
such as farm or pasture land, water and forest. Since these resources are scarce, competition over
their consumption for resources are principal source of conflict among the Oromo of Ethiopia.

The data secured through combinations of methods show that principal causes of conflicts in and
around Ameya are resolving around economic related issues in one way or another. These include
land dispute, conflict over inheritance, marital dispute, and breach of agreements, drunkenness and
murder. Poverty, unemployment and poor living conditions which also have strong economic
dimensions are the sources of conflict.

Besides, the data obtained from informants, official document gained from Ameya district police
office affirm that theft, different crimes (like insult), break of rule of law, physical violence and
land disputes are the major causes of conflicts that have frequently occurred in the district.

22 | P a g e
4.3.1. Land Conflict
According to my informants, land dispute repeatedly occurred in Ameya district repeatedly
occurred in Ameya district. An increasing population is one of the main sources of conflicts in the
area. There is a considerable competition for the scarce resources such as cultivable land, pasture
land and water. According to Alao (2007:63), land is crucial natural resources due to its
comprehensive spiritual, social and political significance in Africa.

In the same manner, many of my informants’ attitudes toward the land are similar to the above
notion.

In accordance with the majority of the informants, conflicts over boundaries of plots of farmlands
commonly happen in the area under study. For instance, one of my informants stated that such
types of disputes occasionally happen if someone ploughs or plants beyond the border designated
between his/her plot and his/ her neighbor’s plot. In this situation, conflicts may occur among
members of the same family, relatives or unrelated individuals who share adjoining piece of land.
Gradually, such issues may develop to ethnic conflict in respective of conflicting parties.
According to my informant, the shortage of both farmland and grazing area are common problems
among the Oromo of Ameya district. Most of the young people including those who have already
established their own independent households are landless or have only a small size of farmland
and grazing areas. This group of people gets land either through inheritance or by renting it from
others. In some ways this resulted in the flaring of conflicts in the area.

Disputes usually arise when one of the parties fail to fulfill the rented agreement partially or totally.
There are also cases in which disputes happen when the owner of a land rents out the same farm
or grazing land to more than one individual by receiving a relatively more money from the latter
renter. Clearly, this is the result of competition over land resource in the area due to population
increase. It also ‘happens that relatives (most probably wives, sons or daughters) may not agree to
the selling of land by husbands to others. In that case conflict happens when those who disagreed
to the selling of the land try to bar those who bought the land from ploughing or using it. Therefore,
competition over land is very high and usually leads to conflict among the Oromo of Ameya
district.

23 | P a g e
The people of Cota in particular and Ameya in general attach the causes for conflict in the area
with the behavior of the disputants and with the socio-economic factors. According to my
informant, the behavior of individuals can be the cause for a conflict because some individuals
violate the norms and regulations of the society.

Sometimes, some individual feel beating an individual and winning is considered as

“Dhiirummaa” (maleness). Thus, such circumstances initiated one ethnic group to clash with the
other.

They frequently engage in disagreements, disputes and physical violence because of their violent
behavior. The socio-economic factors of conflict are related to the disputants’ incompatible goals
and needs. According to the informants, the social factors include alcoholism, lying, physical
injuries, and disputes over inheritance, killing and attempted put to death. The economic factors,
which are the dominant causes of conflict in the study area, include land, loan and failure to repay,
and intentional or unintentional damage to property. It is also discussed in the literature that
competition over resources are the causes that initiate people to conflict. Unequal distribution of
resources largely instigates an individual to commit from simple fight to difficult criminal cases.
Besides, the informant further described that money lending or borrowing are also another cause
of conflict in the Ameya district. Thus, my informant states that conflicts occur between leaders
and borrowers when the latter fail to pay back his/her obligation. According to my informants,
unconscionable lending is a common problem among rural people.

In general, many of my informants stated that drunkenness, revenge and land related issue is the
major cause of conflict that can cause simple insult to escalate into complex homicide in the area
under study.

24 | P a g e
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Conclusion
The study attempted to examine and assess the context, history or relation under cause of conflict,
which rise because of economic. Besides this study emphasis on the level and extent of conflict
between Ameya and Cota communities, the resource competition between two groups that
explained in the context of scarcity is not only an underlying cause of the conflict. But also another
determinant factor of conflict is explained in terms of resource scarcity good that contemporary
pastoral conflict in Ethiopia are struggle to gain the process of state expansion. In the framework
of ethnically define federalism and political liberalization that has taken place since the flow of
conflict in past to new emerging wider political and economic system. The ratio of conflict and
violence is changing above all numerous of past group laid the fundamental ground for the
protracted conflict, more over conflict arising over attached cultural values on the conclusion of
the research in this ethnic conflict are the following.

Ethnic conflict is one of the challenge to the local development of the woreda, zone , region
and federal. Thus, it is difficult to create sustainable development.
Accordingly, the study attempt to investigate the effect of inter-ethnic conflict and provide
information for the people in Ameya woreda.

5.2. Recommendation
To deal with conflict manifestation in Ameya and Cota people in Ameya woreda, the following
recommendation may be worth suggestions.

At community level, support and aid should be needed to avoid ethnic conflict and it created good
reaction in each aid at every kebele. In addition to this, kebele administration, regional level and
national level is also a great recommendation and great struggle to find a solution as well as
studying about ethnic conflict from this woreda. In general, ethnic conflict is the danger and
obstacle for the sustainable development of one country. Thus, government and nongovernment
organizations should take mandate in order to solve ethnic conflict from the country in general and
in Ameya woreda in particular.

25 | P a g e
Reference
Abbink, J. (1997). Ethnicity and Constitutionalism in Contemporary Ethiopia. Journal of African
Law, 41, 159-174.

Agbu, A. (2011) Ethnicity and Democratization in Africa: Challenges for Politics and
Development. Discussion Paper 62, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Uppsala.

Alao, Abiodun. 2007. Natural Resources and Conflict in Africa; the Tragedy of Endowment Rural
Conflicts over Resources. Rochester: University of Rochester Press.

Alemante Gebresellasie (2003). Ethnic Federalism: Its Promise and Pitfalls for Africa. Faculty
Publications. Paper 88. http://scholarship.law.wm.edu./facbups/88.

Asnake Kefale. 2004. Federalism, some Trends of Ethnic conflict and Their Management in
Ethiopia.

Assefa Abebe. 2001. “Indigenous Mechanisms for the Prevention and Resolution of Conflict: The
Experience of Oromo in Ethiopia”. Paper presented to the Workshop on Conflict in the
Horn: Prevention and Resolution organized by the Ethiopia Chapter of OSSREA, 8th to
9th June, 2001. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Bohannan, Paul 1989. Justice and Judgment among the TIv. Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc.

Dagnachew Ayenew (2016). Ethnicity and Inter Ethnic Relations between Agew and Gumuz in
Post 1991 Ethiopia: The Case Metekel Zone. MA thesis, Bahirdar University

Endrias Eshete (2003). Ethnic Federalism: New Frontier in Ethiopian politics. 1st National
Conference on Federalism, Conflict and Peace Building. May 5 - 7, 2003Addis Ababa.

Eriksen, T. H. (2002). Ethnicity and Nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives. London: Pluto

Press.

Hizkias Assefa (1996). Ethnic Conflict in the Horn of Africa: Myth and Reality. InKumar, R and
A. T. Valery (eds), Ethnicity and Power in the Contemporary World. Tokyo, New York,
Paris: United Nations University Press

Horowitz, Donald L. 1985. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berekeley: University of California Press.

26 | P a g e
Jeong, How-Won 2008. Understanding Conflict and Conflict Analysis. Los Angeles and London:
Sage.

Markakis, John. 1994. “Ethnic Conflict and the State in the Horn of Africa.” In Katsuyushi Fukui
and John Markakis (eds.), Ethnicity and Conflict in the Horn of Africa. James Currey:
London: Ohio University Press.

Mengesha Emzat (2008). Federalism and Accommodation of Ethnic Diversity in Africa: The
Ethiopian Experience. In The Kenyan Section of the International Commission of jurists,
Ethnicity, Human Rights and Constitutionalism in Africa.

Merera Gudina (2003). Ethiopia: Competing Ethnic Nationalisms and the Quest for Democracy,
1960-2000. Ethiopia: Chamber Printing House.

Tegegne Teka(1998). Amhara Ethnicity in the Making. In Mohammed, Salihand Markakis, J (eds.)
Ethnicity and the State in Eastern Africa. Uppsala:Nordic Africa Institute.

Wolf, S. (2006). Ethnic Conflict: A Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

27 | P a g e
Appendix A
Questionnaires for Woreda Society

These questionnaires are formicated to collect some event information about the conflict between
Ameya and Cota ethnic group since your information would be great help to this study. Please,
give responses to the entire question below.

1. The economic practice of Ameya and Cota people depend up on:

A. Agriculture C. Trade

B. Livestock D. All

2. What are the main causes of conflict between Ameya and Cota people?

A. Border C. Cultural difference

B. Water resources D. All

3. Is the two places conflict is cultural factory?

A. Yes B. No

4. From the two ethnic group, which one is mainly made conflict?

A. Ameya B. Cota C. Both Ameya and Cota D. None

5. Is the conflict between Ameya and Cota people is an economic factor?

A. Yes B. No

6. List down the main causes of conflict between Ameya and Cota people

28 | P a g e
Appendix B
Questionnaires for Woreda Administration

These questionnaires are prepared to collect information about Ameya and Cota people and its
impact on the society pleas, read and answer the following questions.

1. Does Woreda administration take measure on the misbehaviors groups?

A. Yes B. No

2. Do you always give awareness about the impact of conflict for each group?

A. Yes B. No

3. Are there the conflict resolution mechanisms in your woreda?

A. Yes B. No

4. To how extent your approach to reduce their misbehavior?

A. Always B. Sometimes C. Rarely D. Not at all

5. For how long does the conflict stay?

A. Two days B. One Week C. One Month D. Unknown

29 | P a g e
18 | P a g e
I|Page