Contenu du sommaire : Frontières, ressources et espaces transfrontaliers dans les Afriques

This article highlights the specificity of Kakamega County – Western Kenya - in the context of the new gold rushes in Sub-Saharan Africa. Although Kakamega County shares borders with Tanzania and Uganda, it is characterized by national and local dynamics very specific to Kenya regarding indigenousness and access to the gold resource. The rise of artisanal gold mining since 2017 has been driven by local residents living on private land. Only techniques, tools and gold seem to cross borders and inscribe this artisanal gold mining area in cross-border dynamics. This article is a continuation of the research conducted on new gold rushes and, more broadly, artisanal mining activities in Sub-Saharan Africa since the early 2000s, both in the Francophone scientific sphere (Grätz, 2004; Dessertine, 2016; Grégoire and Gagnol, 2017; Chevrillon-Guibert, Gagnol, Magrin, 2019; Bolay, 2021) and in the Anglophone sphere (Hinton, Veiga, 2003; Siegel and Vega, 2009; Hilson, 2013; Hilson and McQuilken, 2014; Verbrugge and Geenen, 2018). The novelty of this study work lies in its unique field of study compared to the usual areas impacted by gold rushes. Western Kenya is a densely populated region and not an uncontrolled desert periphery as in some parts of West Africa or the Sahelo-Saharan Africa. Furthermore, limited academic research has focused to date on Western Kenya, and specifically Kakamega County.Beyond mining activity itself, this article examines the dynamics of transborder movements of objects and techniques associated with artisanal mining. The methodology of this study is inspired by Armelle Choplin's work in West Africa on the journey of cement (Choplin, 2019) by following the path of objects destined for artisanal miners. Additionally, recent works by Matthieu Bolay and Yvan Schulz (Bolay, Schulz, 2022) help examine the gold sale circuits in Kenya within transnational dynamics, uncovering links with Switzerland and Dubai.This research primarily relies on qualitative surveys conducted between 2022 and 2023. The initial surveys consisted of directive interviews with about ten questions each, aimed at understanding the profile of artisanal miners in Kakamega County. This first series included 100 directive interviews, 39 with women and 61 with men. The second part of the qualitative survey, conducted in 2023, is based on 33 semi-directive qualitative interviews with both artisanal miners and institutional actors, such as the Ministry of Petroleum and Mines. Finally, photography was used to further analytically explore artisanal mining practices and the circulation of techniques and objects related to gold panning and mining.

The political ecology's approach to conflict emphasizes unequal resource access as a driver of border conflicts and civil wars. Like realists' theories of international relations, it establishes a causal link between hydrocarbons, border conflicts, and petrol violence. Contrary to these deterministic readings, this article analyzes the issues of conflict and cooperation around marine energy resources in the Bay of Biafra. This research data was produced during an ethnographic survey on insecurity on Cameroon's seafront between 2009 and 2022. These are administrative and security archival documents and documents, interviews with officials from the Border Research Unit of the Cameroonian Ministry of Territorial Administration, and various reports from national oil companies and Extractive Industries Transparency Initiatives in Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, and Nigeria, as well as the various treaties on Joint Development Zones. The cross-analysis of the data produced makes it possible to historicize the role of energy resources in the dynamics of conflict and cooperation in the Bay of Biafra. Between 1960 and 2023, there were two successive sequences in which maritime oil and gas resources, once objects of conflict, became factors of transnational cooperation. After describing this area's oil and gas potential and analyzing the determinants of maritime border conflicts that have occurred there, this article shows that the presence of hydrocarbons has been at the heart of the territorialization of the Bay of Biafra national maritime areas. Before the 2000s, the conflict dynamics around hydrocarbons in this area were linked to the low territorialization of marine spaces, particularly to the overlap of continental shelves and the general configuration of national coasts (concavity, inflections, and presence of islands). The discovery of resources in disputed spaces has opened Pandora's box of border conflicts. Fueled by multinational oil companies, Great powers, and local predatory regimes, these conflicts have manifested in a spectrum ranging from legal battles to war, incursions, and various incidents. However, since 2001, despite difficulties in delimitating national maritime borders, energy resources have become factors of transnational cooperation and a challenge for stabilizing national naval areas. The territorialization of the Bay of Biafra's maritime spaces has opened windows of opportunity that lead to agreements on Joint Development Zones, pending the signing of final agreements. The international context, resource geography, and economic considerations influenced this cooperative dynamic. In addition, multinational oil companies, which have been accused of exacerbating tensions between oil-producing countries in the Bay of Biafra, are increasingly encouraging Treaties on the joint development of cross-border oil and gas fields. Finally, security problems, primarily maritime piracy, have forced the States of the subregion to cooperate and implement integrated responses to secure their interests at sea. This article puts into perspective, for example, the lousy role attributed to oil multinationals. The dynamics described also illustrate the local manifestations of a global dynamic of in-depth transformation of borders. They make it possible to move away from the militant and victim-based approaches of African historiography of borders and from the deterministic readings that make borders significant obstacles to development, international cooperation, and regional integration.

The issue of consensual management of transboundary water resources has become imperative for West African states, given the historical nature of post-colonial borders and conflicting uses of resources on both sides of the border. It poses many challenges to the integrated management of water resources and the protection of biodiversity. Downstream and upstream of the Burkina-Mali border, the Sourou River crosses both states in its north-western part, and the exploitation of the river's water resources involves numerous stakeholders and various uses on both sides of the border. Whether used for agriculture, livestock farming, fishing, or supplying drinking water, the distribution of water has not always been a pleasant affair between stakeholders with divergent interests. In response, a cross-border committee for joint management of the basin's water resources has been set up by both states. In concrete terms, this agreement has served as a framework for launching a cross-border cooperation initiative between the local authorities bordering the Sourou River. This situation raises the issue of how concerted management of transboundary water resources contributes to the construction of a cooperative area, and how the management of such an area is organized. The main objective of this study is to analyze the role played by water resources in the construction of cross-border territorialities, using the Burkina-Mali interface as an example. The methodology involved a review of the literature on cross-border dynamics and the commons as well as interviews with cross-border stakeholders, and surveys conducted among local populations. The results provide an insight into the process of territorialization based on water resource management in border areas. Indeed, the first level of results shows that joint management of water resources has been a strong incentive for activating cross-border cooperation in the Sourou area. Many factors have contributed to this cooperation. These include the hydraulic developments carried out in Burkina Faso at the junction of the Sourou and Mouhoun rivers, which have led to an increase in the volumes of water in the Malian part of the Sourou. In addition, there are the environment and exploitation constraints of the basin's resources and the prospects for watershed development in the Malian part.The second level deals with the historic nature of social relations in the Sourou basin, marked by a territorialization/deterritorialization of space around water from pre-colonial times to the present day. Finally, the local border authorities in the watershed area have seized this opportunity to cooperate by setting up a local cross-border grouping known as “Groupement local de coopération transfrontalière C10Sourou” (GLCT/C10Sourou), which is structured around 10 border municipalities, including 4 on the Burkina Faso side and 6 in Mali, and has legal status and financial autonomy. Under the group's leadership, development initiatives are being implemented in the area.This grouping is structured around 10 border communes, including 4 on the Burkina Faso side and 6 in Mali, and has legal personality and financial autonomy. To this end, development actions are being implemented in this area, under the leadership of the group.

The analysis focuses on the relationship between borders and shared natural resources, considering the context of environmental change in two cross-border areas in West Africa. The region is strongly affected by both borders and climate change, in a context of demographic growth and pressure on natural resources in border areas. The article is based on the mobilization of the literature of border studies differently treated based on a multidisciplinary approach. This contribution looks at natural resources, both as a means of delimiting borders and as a cause of border disputes between States. It also looks at scientific papers dealing with the issue of “cross-border governance of shared natural resources”, with the establishment of catchment management bodies in many cross-border areas in developing countries, in West Africa and Mesoamerica, and “territorial construction”.In addition to this extensive literature, the methodological approach encompasses empirical elements drawn from semi-directive interviews conducted between August 2021 and February 2022 in the two areas and at national level with stakeholders involved in the governance of cross-border regions. The interviews focused on the operation and actions of the LCCA and the CCF, the challenges associated with the use of natural resources, the management of environmental change and the sustainability of cross-border governance arrangements. Lastly, the methodology is also based on participatory observations that provide a better understanding of certain processes linked to cross-border territoriality, the use of natural resources and potential conflicts.The findings show that natural resources are segments of construction of cross-border territories in the Kossi (Burkina Faso) - Tominian (Mali) and Dendi-Ganda (Benin-Niger-Nigeria) regions and favour the establishment of local cross-border cooperation bodies such as the Local Cross-border Cooperation Association (LCCA) and the Cross-border Consultation Framework (CCF). Through their operation, these bodies structure the community level (African Union convention on cross-border cooperation), the bilateral level (bilateral framework agreement on cross-border cooperation), the cross-border level (local cross-border agreement on natural resource management) and the national level (border management policies, decentralisation, and local governments act). They serve as dynamic bodies for the governance of their cross-border regions including shared natural resources. However, the exogenous nature of their funding and the low level of institutionalisation of cross-border cooperation, as well as political and regulatory issues at national level, represent real challenges to their sustainability.

This article examines the process of regional integration in the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC). CEMAC lags behind other regional organisations on the continent in terms of the free movement of people, goods and services. To remedy this situation, CEMAC has developed a number of institutional frameworks (treaties, protocols, declarations, etc.) aimed at removing borders between Member States and deepening cross-border cooperation. The objective of this contribution is to verify the practical implementation of these institutional frameworks, which are supposed to foster the development of cross-border cooperation. The hypothesis put forward is that border regions participate in the materialisation of these dynamics. This explains the choice of the northern Gabonese province (Woleu-Ntem) and the southern region of Cameroon. These distinct territorial entities share a common border separating Gabon from Cameroon. This is why this study is part of the border studies framework. The methodology used is based on a combination of documentary research, field observation and semi-structured interviews conducted between July and September 2022. The results identify the border not as a barrier, but rather as an area of resources from which many players (states, local authorities, border residents) benefit. In addition to the field survey, we drew on a number of previous studies to arrive at this result. Research by Oyaya (2001) focuses on the a-spatial dimension of customs union theory and the marginalisation of regional realities. Next, Tsafack Nanfossi and Tamba (2003) examine the driving forces behind economic integration in Central Africa. Nguema Engo (2007) then looks at the initiatives taken by border towns to promote the well-being of resident populations and improve relations between border localities. Loungou (2010) and Zogo Nkada (2011) then examine the free movement of people in the CEMAC area. The first analyses the differences between Member States on this issue, with countries that are reluctant (Gabon and Equatorial Guinea) and those that are in favour (Cameroon, Congo, Central African Republic and Chad). The second is a comparative study of the state of construction of free movement between CEMAC and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). This is subject to numerous obstacles in CEMAC, whereas it is effective in ECOWAS. Finally, the work of Boudzanga (2013) highlights the resistance of the central powers in Gabon and Cameroon to the virtuous decentralisation process. In the first part, the article outlines the foundations of regional integration: its specific features and the factors that contribute to its development. The second part, on the other hand, contributes to the analysis of these different issues, between the elements that contribute to the strengthening of cross-border cooperation and the obstacles and brakes that obstruct its growth. Finally, the last part is devoted to demonstrating that the border is a resource for border regions and the State. For this reason, attraction mechanisms are designed to seize this resource.

Relations between Brazzaville and Kinshasa are caught in a permanent paradox of conflicts and cooperation, from the point of view of both states and populations. They have been studied through the lens of the history of the cities' construction, of the cultural links between the riverbanks, and by the prism of specific cross-border trade channels. This article tackles this paradox with a geographical approach, by studying the spatial differentiation of exchanges between the two cities along the riverbanks. It combines a historical approach to the colonial and post-colonial production of river spaces with a field survey carried out in Brazzaville in 2022 at various river crossing points, and scrutinizes diverse places of crossing at an intra-urban scale, emphasizing the tangible exercise of spatially differentiated power. It combines political geography, which sees territory as shaped by the outcome of the exercise of power and by various power dynamics, with border studies. Drawing initially upon former historical and geographical studies, the article illustrates how the colonial division of territory not only delineated the border but also demarcated power centers from marginal spaces along the riverbanks, where the border is notably porous. It proposes a typology of cross-border spaces in Brazzaville, based on observations and interviews carried out on the banks of the river. Concretely, the exercise of power involves the material infrastructure allowing navigation and the practices of state agents, which are the base of the typology. These differences in the exercise of power are analyzed in terms of spatial distribution of the response to the needs of the State to maintain itself : the assertion of its sovereignty and control of its border and the capacity of the population to meet its basic needs. A “topological” rather than “topographic” approach to power allows understanding the coexistence of central and marginal power structures within the same urban space. The paradox of territorialization arises from the spatially differentiated exercise of state power, creating spaces where the border is more or less tangible, exploitable, and leads to an alternative territorialization surpassing the limit between neighboring sovereignties. The unique spatial configuration of Brazzaville and Kinshasa, two political centers facing each other across the Congo River, allows to understand an exercise of power at the border that is highly contrasting at an intra-urban scale. This contrast aids in understanding the historical paradox of recurring conflicts between public authorities and the sustained cooperation among populations. The interplay of conflict and cooperation articulates differentially depending on the crossing points and the resources exchanged therein. The border between Brazzaville and Kinshasa provides a unique spatial setup to examine conflicts and cooperation in a post-colonial context, focusing on traded goods as resources that turn the border itself into a spatial resource.

In this paper, we analyze the consequences of the co-presence of various stakeholders within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park regarding the use of space and resources, in this case wildlife. More specifically, the article focuses on the cooperative links and transboundary relations between Kruger National Park in South Africa and Limpopo National Park in Mozambique, two contiguous national parks that have been the subject of a transboundary conservation process (Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park) since 2002. The aim of this article is to put into perspective the different processes involved in the commodification of wildlife (observation tourism, conservationist mode of production, poaching), and to analyze the extent to which these processes both reveal and amplify tensions and conflicts between the stakeholders present on either side of the border between South Africa and Mozambique. The article follows on from the critical work that has been produced on the Great Limpopo Park, such as Bocchino's and Guyot's research on the influence and domination of South Africa in the process of cross-border cooperation; the work of Andersson et al. and Ferreira on the marginalization of populations living on the edge of parks, or the work of Lunstrum, Duffy et al., Büscher and Ramutsindela on poaching and the militarization of the park. Taking inspiration from Rodary's research on co-presence issues in protected areas, one of the contributions of this article is to integrate the animal question through relationships with wildlife, in order to address socio-economic inequalities and the effects of cross-border conservation policies. We draw on the rich literature of animal geographies, notably Barua's research on lively commodities and encounter value, Brockington and Scholfield's work on conservationist modes of production, Lorrimer and Chanteloup's on wildlife observation tourism and the charismatic dimension of certain animals. After presenting an analysis of the strong contrasts that exist between the national parks studied in terms of development and wildlife density, we propose a typology of stakeholders involved, based on different relationships to wildlife. Finally, the article analyzes the tensions and conflicts arising from the diversity of spatial logics and practices, which question the sustainability of the current transboundary conservation process. One of the contributions of this research is to propose a joint analysis of the dynamics linked to borders and conservation policies, based in particular on empirical data. We draw on data from field surveys carried out in South Africa and Mozambique, among tourists in Kruger National Park (n = 135), local communities in Limpopo National Park (n = 87), and people linked to park management or the conservation sector (n = 15). The results testify to the continuing marked socio-economic contrasts on either side of the border between South Africa and Mozambique. These contrasts are also reflected in the way people relate to wildlife, and remain marked by racialized divisions linked to the history of the parks and the countries.