This article examines iba-iba, an indigenous humanitarian practice among the Balondo people of Southwest Cameroon, tracing its development from the precolonial period (c.1700) to the present. Rooted in collective values of reciprocity, solidarity, and mutual responsibility, iba-iba has long served as a locally sustained mechanism for responding to hardship. It has addressed a range of needs – from fires, deaths, and displacement to school fees, medical treatment, and food scarcity – without reliance on formal state or international aid systems. Using a historical methodology grounded in oral history, ethnographic observation, and archival research, the study reconstructs the continuities and adaptations of iba-iba across colonial, postcolonial, and contemporary periods. Field interviews with Balondo elders, women leaders, and youth – conducted in Londo (Balondo language), Pidgin English, and English – are complemented by archival documents from missionary and colonial records to illuminate how this indigenous system has persisted despite external pressures. The article situates ibaiba within a broader network of Balondo mutual aid institutions, including icheche (compulsory contribution), njange (rotating savings), erio (collective labour), and ereni (shared meals). These practices reveal a sophisticated communal infrastructure for managing vulnerability and promoting social cohesion. The study pays particular attention to the role of iba-iba during recent crises, such as the Bakassi conflict and the ongoing Anglophone crisis, where it has provided informal but effective support to internally displaced persons. By centering an indigenous system of care, this article challenges dominant humanitarian narratives that prioritize foreign-led interventions. It argues that iba-iba embodies a historically grounded, community-based approach to welfare and emergency response that is both resilient and contextually relevant. This study thus contributes to decolonial scholarship by foregrounding African epistemologies and local knowledge systems in discussions of humanitarianism.
Cyprian Nanji (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: