This analysis reveals how power dynamics affect land dispute management in multi-stakeholder environments, suggesting strategies for resolution.
Land dispute management is essential for sustainable land management in regions where large‐scale infrastructure projects intersect with fragile socio‐ecological systems and overlapping statutory and customary land governance. The Atuabo–Aboadze gas plant‐induced land dispute in Ghana reflects these complexities, where industrial development drives land‐use change through farmland conversion, vegetation disruption, and environmental pollution. The dispute is further characterized by decision‐making uncertainties and unequal power among the government, traditional authorities, and project developers, complicating its resolution. To address this, the study develops an integrated fuzzy DEMATEL‐GMCRPA framework to analyze causal interdependencies, strategic interactions, and power asymmetry in multi‐stakeholder land governance. The fuzzy DEMATEL analysis revealed the economic, environmental, and cultural influence on the strategic options of project developers. Integrating these with the GMCRPA framework enabled a deeper understanding of how unequal leadership power shapes cooperative or conflictual strategies among stakeholders. The results show that when government and traditional authorities jointly influence decisions, though with varying degrees of power, and project developers adapt their strategies to align with both statutory and customary expectations, a more stable and implementable equilibrium emerges. In contrast, when leaders act independently or inconsistently, projects face withdrawal risks and long‐term land degradation. The integrated framework therefore provides a more realistic analytical basis for understanding and managing land disputes where uncertainty, asymmetrical power, and cultural dynamics intersect. It contributes both methodologically and practically by linking causal reasoning with hierarchical power analysis, offering policymakers and practitioners a decision‐support tool for enhancing institutional coherence and participatory governance toward sustainable land management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Addae et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: