ELUSIVE EMPOWERMENT: ASSESSING THE IMPACTS OF CONFLICT ON GENDERED RELATIONS, IDENTITIES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN ACHOLILAND
Date
2020
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
A brutal 30-year conflict between the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Government of Uganda in Acholiland (Northern Uganda) left hundreds of thousands of people dead, and millions of Acholi individuals and communities displaced from their homes. The conflict led to a humanitarian crisis of staggering proportions, which was met with much international attention and intervention in its later years. This study involved 15-months of qualitative fieldwork with four communities in Acholiland and identifies and examines a complex web of impacts and changes experienced by Acholi in the midst of conflict and displacement. The research considers changing gender norms and dynamics arising from conflict and takes a critical look at “external” frameworks and benchmarks used to assess complex issues of gender and empowerment in this context. The project stresses the need to look at gendered impacts within a wider socio-cultural context and suggests that externally imagined benchmarks and frameworks will never be sufficient without a deeper understanding of how people view their own experiences, opportunities, and realities. As such the research prioritizes Acholi perspectives and experiences. One of its key findings (and contributions) relates to the identification of Acholi cultural concepts of power, and the recognition that cultural concepts and systems still dictate, define, and constrain individual options and opportunities, particularly those of women, despite significant changes observed in relation to socio-cultural and gender norms. Observations regarding the failure of many external actors to identify and integrate culturally relevant concepts and experiences into their interventions, particularly those related to gender empowerment, also help to highlight common shortcomings in these approaches and point to reasons for the frequent dissonance between well-intentioned project goals and people’s lived experiences, needs, and realties.