Oxford Journals Social Sciences African Affairs Advance Access 10.1093/afraf/adr041

MODERN CHIEFS: TRADITION, DEVELOPMENTAND RETURN AMONG TRADITIONAL AUTHORITIESIN GHANA

Nauja Kle ist *

↵ *Nauja Kleist (nkl@diis.dk) is project senior researcher at the Danish Institute forInternational Studies. I am grateful for comments and questions from Rita Abrahamsen, SaraDorman, and two anonymous reviewers as well as from Bruno Riccio, Kristine Krause, KatharinaSchramm, Lindsay Whitfield, Peter Hansen, and Simon Turner in response to earlier drafts ofthe article. Likewise I thank Takyiwaa Manuh, Irene Odotei, Alhassan Anamz oya, and GeorgeBob-Milliar for interesting discussions on chieftaincy. Most of all, I thank the interviewed chiefsand other interlocutors for sharing their thoughts with me.

Abstract

Appointment of traditional authorities with an international migrant background hasbecome an important trend in Ghana. Such ‘return chiefs’ are expected to bringdevelopment and modernization, but – as former international migrants – they arealso seen as potentially estranged from local customs and realities. As presumedguardians of tradition, they are thus placed in a situation that poses a range ofdilemmas of legitimacy and public authority. The article argues that return chiefs arein an ambivalent position between the domains of tradition and modernity and thatthey endeavour to overcome this dilemma through emphasiz ing their foundation in

-

-

This Art icle

Afr Aff (Lond) (2011)doi: 10.1093/afraf/adr041

First published online: June 29, 2011

Abstract» Full Text (HTML)Full Text (PDF)

All Versions of this Article:adr041v1

110/441/629 most recent

Classif icat io ns

Article

Services

Alert me when citedAlert me if correctedAlert me if commentedFind similar articlesAdd to my archiveDownload citationRequest Permissions

Se arch this jo urnal:

Ad vance d »

Current Issue

April 2012 111 (443)

Alert me to new issues

The Journal

About this journalPublishers' Books for ReviewRanked High in ISIRights & Permissions

PDFmyURL.com

they endeavour to overcome this dilemma through emphasiz ing their foundation intradition as well as by using their professional and international experience to spurlocal development and modernize the chieftaincy institution. Return chiefs thussimultaneously practise and invoke the traditional and the modern. In this way, thetransformation of chieftaincy is embedded in both local and global contexts. Returnchiefs go beyond local customs to bring development and innovation to their areas,mobiliz ing international networks, touring European and North American countries,and collaborating with international development agencies, NGOs, and migrants.Their practices are thus at once local and global, and the article calls for inclusionof both perspectives in contemporary chieftaincy studies.

MUCH HAS BEEN WRITTEN ABOUT the recent transformation of African chieftaincy.Contrary to the expectations of modernization theorists, chieftaincy institutionshave not disappeared or been replaced by modern institutions of governance.Rather, there has been a resurgence and formal recognition of traditional authoritiesin sub-Saharan Africa since the early 1990s, often converging with multi- partydemocratization and neo- liberal reform.1 This development has led to a renewedinterest in African chieftaincy, focusing inter alia on the relationship between the stateand traditional authorities in relation to issues such as democracy, governance, andtrust,2 as well as the role of traditional authorities as new development actors. 3

These are important issues which deserve much attention. However, one hithertoignored aspect of the transformation of chieftaincy is how traditional authorities areembedded in current processes of international migration and transnationalism.Indeed, as Rijk van Dijk and Adriaan van Nieuwaal pointed out more than ten yearsago, there is a need for more research on ‘how African chieftaincy interacts withexternal forces, such as international organizations and diasporic Africancommunities’.4 With a few exceptions,5 this observation is still valid. The articleaddresses this lacuna, analysing how Ghanaian chiefs with a background asinternational migrants draw upon transnational networks and experiences to bringdevelopment and modernization. It thereby contributes to the evolution of studies ontraditional authorities by showing how the chieftaincy institution is embedded in bothtransnational and local contexts.6

The focus on migration and development is important. Following recent policyattention to this relationship, policy makers and governments all over the world have

+

+

+

-

Respo nses

Cit ing Art icles

Go o gle Scho lar

Share

What's this?

Navigate This Art icleTopAbstractMethodological considerationsModern chiefsThe dilemmas of returnA moral economy of reciprocity andbelongingChiefs as development actorsRecogniz ing and incorporatingConclusionFootnotes

Mo st Read Mo st Cit ed

ETHNICITY, PATRONAGE ANDTHE AFRICAN STATE: THEPOLITICS OF UNCIVILNATIONALISMAfr ica in the wor ld : a h is tory o fextravers ionTHE END OF FOREIGN AID TOAFRICA? CONCERNS ABOUTDONOR POLICIES

Dispatch date of the next issueWe are mobile – find out more

Published o n behalf o f

The Royal African Society

Impact f act o r: 1.4905-Yr impact f act o r: 1.763

Jo int Edit o rsRita Abrahamse nSara Rich Dorman

View full editorial board

For Authors

Instructions to authorsSelf-Archiving Policy

Alert ing Services

Email table of contentsEmail Advance AccessCiteTrackXML RSS feed

Corporate Services

Advertising salesReprintsSupplements

PDFmyURL.com

started calling upon ‘their’ overseas populations to involve them in nationaldevelopment, encouraging the temporary or permanent return of especially highlyskilled migrants.7 Like other highly skilled return migrants, traditional authorities withan international migrant background – ‘return chiefs’ as I will term them here – areperceived to be in favourable positions to mobilize international networks and bringdevelopment and modernization. In the words of an interviewed return chief, ‘themodern chief today is faced with expectations of development and progress. Thereis an orientation towards the exterior world and the chiefs should help facilitatingthat.'8 However, the position of return chiefs can also cause debate, as returnees aresometimes accused of having lost their cultural identity and being out of touch withlocal conditions and tradition.9 For return chiefs, who are expected to bringdevelopment as well as being the guardians of tradition and custom, this situationposes a range of dilemmas of legitimacy and ‘the morality of power’,10 which Iexplore in this article.

Ghana is an interesting case for such an analysis. First, Ghanaian chieftaincy iswell- known for being a powerful and important institution – a position which wasfurther strengthened with the guarantee of chieftaincy in the 1992 Constitution of theFourth Republic, which also marked the beginning of multi- party democracy,connecting democratization and an enhanced position of chiefs. However, thoughgenerally cherished and respected, chieftaincy is continuously debated11 andchieftaincy disputes are numerous, implying that the legitimacy of individual chiefs isnot automatically granted. Second, migration is an integral part of Ghanaian historyand society and up to 1.5 million people are estimated to live outside the country,12

mainly in West Africa, the US and Western Europe. Many Ghanaian migrants areengaged in various transnational practices, including sending remittances, andmigration is considered to have important development potential.13 Finally, since theearly 2000s, a number of Ghanaian migrants have returned to Ghana14 to retire, togo into business or politics, or because they have been elected as chiefs. Indeed,an increasing number of chiefs in Ghana are said to be well- educated returnees –including prominent chiefs such as the Asantehene and the Okyenhene – aphenomenon also known from examples in Cameroon15 and Zambia.16

This situation raises the following three questions which guide this article: First, howdo Ghanaian return chiefs articulate their position and the dilemmas they face asreturnees? Second, how do they engage in transnational resource mobilization

DONOR POLICIESPeas ant gr ievance andins urgency in S ier ra Leone:J ud icia l s er fdom as a dr iver o fconfl ictWars do end! Changingpatterns o f po l i ti ca l vio lence ins ub-Saharan Afr ica

» View a l l Mos t Read ar ticles

PDFmyURL.com

targeting Ghanaian migrants or other potential donors? And, third, which registers oflegitimacy do they draw upon? I am thus interested in both how return chiefsendeavour to mobilize migrants as well as in the social and symbolic relations thatmake their positions and mobilization efforts possible, legitimate, and potentiallysuccessful. On the basis of interviews and observations, I argue that return chiefsendeavour to bring together ‘the modern’ and ‘the traditional’ but that they often findthemselves in an ambivalent tension between these registers of legitimacy. Thearticle shows that chiefs emphasize their foundation in tradition, performingchieftaincy through their statutory activities, dress, and conduct as well as articulatingtheir position in terms of moral obligation. At the same time, return chiefs alsodescribe themselves as development actors with international experience, touringWestern countries, collaborating with international development agencies, andincorporating migrants and other donors into their development efforts throughcollaboration and public recognition. Tradition and being modern thus constitute twosimultaneous, but potentially contrasting, registers of legitimacy.

Methodological considerations

The article is based on ten in-depth interviews with eight return chiefs from sixdifferent regions in Ghana. It is thus of a qualitative and explorative nature, analysingemerging trends of contemporary chieftaincy, rather than being representative of allreturn chiefs in Ghana, let alone all traditional authorities. Six paramount chiefs wereinterviewed as well as two senior divisionary chiefs.17 Interviews were carried outduring six months of fieldwork in Ghana in 2008 as well as one month in 2010, andsupplemented with observations during public ceremonies. Likewise Internet materialon chieftaincy is included. At the time of fieldwork, the interviewed chiefs were agedbetween their early 40s and 70s, and had been chiefs for 5–35 years. Beforebecoming chiefs, they had spent from a few years to several decades workingand/or studying in North America and Europe. Six of them returned in the late 1990sor early 2000s – four of them to take up a position as chief. Though not all fromwealthy families, they were all highly educated professionals with backgrounds aslawyers, administrators, businessmen, or university professors; two of them helddoctoral degrees from universities in Germany and the US. All of them now live part-or full- time in the capital of Accra, pursuing their professional careers or havingpalaces located there. They are thus part of the educated elite in Ghana – and,

PDFmyURL.com

indeed, of a chieftaincy elite.

Theoretically, the article is informed by an understanding of chieftaincy as a dynamicphenomenon where traditional authorities (as well as other actors and institutions)are active agents in the continuing (re)production of the institution. Its point ofdeparture is an understanding of tradition – and hence of traditional authorities – asin itself a product of modernity,18 being invented or ‘re- imagined’ rather than theexpression of an unchanging past.19 Yet, chieftaincy cannot be reduced to colonialinvention but exists in a tension between being imposed, re- invented and ‘re-integrated into new vistas of power’.20 Indeed, just as the notion of ‘being modern’ isextremely appealing in Africa today, so the notion of tradition is a strong ‘mobiliz ingmetaphor’,21 and I will argue that both are important dimensions in contemporarychieftaincy.

This dynamic and relational understanding of tradition and modernity turns theanalytical attention to the emic and local meanings of these terms; to how they areimagined, articulated, and performed in particular contexts, and to the boundary-making work between these domains. It thus implies a focus on positioning and howthe chiefs present their public selves as chiefs and as returnees,22 using the termsof tradition and the modern to ‘constitute the speakers and hearers in certain ways’.23 In the case of chieftaincy, as we shall see, these terms or domains arearticulated as fundamentally different, but also as closely interlinked. Chiefs and theirsubjects are thus actively constructing and reproducing these domains throughperforming, invoking, and engaging with them.

Modern chiefs

That chieftaincy should not be regarded as a static phenomenon is witnessed in theinstitution's long and dynamic history in Ghana. Chieftaincy dates back to pre-colonial times and has been described as marked by ‘evolutionary tenacity andcontradictions, but not refusal of change’.24 While the early British colonial rulersencapsulated traditional authorities into a system of indirect rule, the leaders ofindependent Ghana perceived them as traitors and curtailed their power, claimingthat traditional authorities were impediments to development and should bereplaced by modern and rational institutions.25 Today it is evident that this did nothappen. Rather, Ghanaian chieftaincy has evolved into an institution with (what are

PDFmyURL.com

characterized as) both modern and traditional dimensions, backed and guaranteedby the state and the constitution.

The main functions of chiefs include dispute settlement; codification of customarylaw; organization of rituals, ceremonies and festivals; custody of stool land;organization of communal labour; and promotion of socio-economicdevelopment.26 Chiefs' responsibilities thus include both statutory and non-statutoryaspects, such as promoting development. Yet chiefs have been involved in thedevelopment of their areas since pre-colonial times,27 and it is thus mistaken toclaim that this is a recent concern. Rather, contemporary chiefs face particularchallenges which are of a novel nature, such as demands of good governance, theintroduction of information and communication technologies (ICT), and expectationsof international connections. Therefore, in addition to royalty and seniority, educationand access to powerful networks have become central qualifications for chieftaincyelection. This has led to the category of modern chiefs, capable of bringingprogress and international orientation, as the comment by a return chief quoted inmy introduction showed.

At a first glance, the idea of being a modern chief might seem self- contradictory.However, the term does not express a devaluation of or disregard for the traditionalaspects of the chieftaincy institution, but rather indicates the coexistence of modernand traditional dimensions. Indeed, being a modern chief was a shared ambitionand self- description among all the chiefs I talked to in Ghana. Chiefs emphasizedtheir educated backgrounds and ambitions to further development in their traditionalarea,28 balancing between the domains of the modern and the traditional, as thefollowing example of Nana shows.

Nana, a tall and round former military officer and business man, moved to Canadato study in the early 1970s and ended up staying for almost 30 years, working as abusiness manager in a big corporate firm. He returned to Ghana in 1999 to take upa position as senior divisionary chief in his rural hometown in the Eastern Region. Ifirst interviewed him in his palace there. As prescribed by the royal protocol, he wasdressed in a long robe, sitting in a royal chair, and surrounded by his counsellorsand sub-chiefs. On that occasion Nana described the transformation of the chiefposition in the following way:

When I was installed as a chief, the position had changed. Before there was

PDFmyURL.com

more focus on traditional things such as festivals and funerals. Now, it is afull- time job because you need to help develop people. We all haveportfolios now. Everybody has a function; it is modernized anddecentralized. … Some of us are getting tired of sitting down; the peopleneed somebody to push them.29

In spite of the obvious changes in life style between his current and past life, Nanaemphasized how he now uses his Canadian leadership experiences as a chief,pushing people towards engagement in development. Yet, as a return migrant whohad lived half of his life abroad, he also had to demonstrate his knowledge oftradition and local custom, and he spoke of the history of the area and the stool inrich detail. At a later private interview in Accra, however, he disclosed how he has towatch his step not to appear foreign and be seen as degrading tradition. Discussingthe lavish funerals in the area, Nana explained that though he thinks that the funeralsare too costly and time-consuming, he is very careful not to propose undulydramatic changes.

All the funerals take too much time and money that could be used fordevelopment but I am very slow in suggesting changes. People wouldn'taccept it and would say it is because I lived abroad. I will be condemned,and then I cannot do anything. There are purists around – also among thetraditional authorities – and they don't accept any changes.30

For Nana, being a modern chief – but not a too modern one – implied striking abalance between introducing change and modernization and respecting tradition,thus avoiding being seen as culturally polluted by his years in North America.Indeed, a commonly shared notion of a good chief in Ghana is one who is installedand reigns according to tradition.31 Nana assessed that he could modernize certainthings in his hometown, yet he did not want to run the risk of messing with traditionsand thus with his own authority. He thereby indicated how his authority as chief isembedded in a web of rules and expectations, where both subjects and othertraditional authorities keep a watchful eye on what the chief does and says. AsWeber writes, the command of traditional authorities is only legitimate ‘within certainlimits that cannot be overstepped without endangering the master's traditional status’.32 Or, in other words, chiefs have to remain within a circumscribed space of actionin order for them to be recognized as legitimate rulers, and they have to position

PDFmyURL.com

and negotiate their innovations as being located within this space.

Several chiefs echoed Nana's self- description: a knowledgeable custodian oftradition, as well as one who exercised professional and educated leadership.However, while Nana emphasized that he had to be careful not to violate ideas oftradition, watching his back, other chiefs have more power. One such chief is theOkyenhene, Osagyefuo Amoatia Ofori Panin, paramount chief of the Akyim AbuakwaTraditional Area and one of the most powerful chiefs in Ghana. During an interview inhis palace in Accra, he explained his views on chieftaincy and custom in thefollowing way:

Chieftaincy gives us a sense of identity; it gives us a sense ofbelongingness. It give us appreciation of what those who came before usdid and enables us to sit down and look at their lives and deduce the thingswe want to continue. Those things that have outlived their usefulness, wedrop.33

The Okyenhene went to New York city to study political science as a young man andworked in an insurance company until 1999 when he became chief, now living halfof the week in Kibi, Akyim, and the other half in Accra. He is well- known in Ghana forhis engagement in development and environmental issues and his unconventionalactions as a chief – such as going jogging in public and taking an HIV- test34 – aswell as his American accent when speaking English.35 The chief articulated adynamic understanding of tradition, as offering identity and belonging but also aspractices that could – and should – be dropped if they are not useful. Being amodern chief can thus be described as having the ability to simultaneously masterthe statutory, leadership, and development aspects of the chieftaincy institution –and, not least, the ability to successfully negotiate what should be seen aspraiseworthy traditions to be celebrated and respected. Modern chieftaincy is thusdefined by its opposition not to tradition but to being parochial, illiterate and withoutconnection to the world outside Ghana, ‘just sitting down’ and not acting, notpushing. However, there are also differences as to the degree that chiefs cancircumscribe and negotiate tradition, and more powerful chiefs have a greater say inthe definition of which traditions should be considered useful or redundant, therebyextending – or circumscribing – the space of action for traditional authorities. Theability to define the meanings and boundaries of the traditional and the modern is

PDFmyURL.com

thus closely related to power.

The dilemmas of return

An implication of electing professional and educated persons as chiefs is that theyoften continue their professional careers in parallel with their duties as traditionalauthorities in order to pursue their careers and generate income to sustain theirfamilies and uphold their lifestyles. This situation has led to the phenomenon of so-called absentee chiefs36 who stay with their families in Accra or other major citiesbut go back to their palaces and traditional areas during weekends and holidays.Absentee chiefs are not a phenomenon limited to international return migrants, butalso include chiefs who have left their hometown to pursue further education and aprofessional career elsewhere in Ghana – internal migrants, in other words – andwho remain partly outside their hometown after taking up the office. Indeed, theinterviewed chiefs did not distinguish between absentee chiefs with an internationalor an internal migrant background, adding that Accra constitutes the political andcommercial centre of Ghana. Therefore, they explained, high- ranking chiefs need tohave a presence there, and several of the paramount chiefs had palaces in thecapital as well as in their hometown. However, they sharply distinguished betweenso-called local and foreign absentee chiefs; the former stay part- time in Accra,whereas the latter remain outside Ghana after becoming chiefs. An elderlyparamount chief from the Eastern Region simply stated that ‘if you want to be aproper chief, you need to go back’.37 Likewise a senior official in the Ministry ofChieftaincy and Culture described foreign absentee chiefs as ‘appalling’ in contrastto local absentee chiefs whom he characterized as ‘normal chiefs’. He explained:

A person who comes to Accra and becomes a big man and doesn't gohome will not become a good chief. It's not a question if it is Accra or theUK; it depends on their knowledge … the more prominent the stool is, theless people find it proper. You cannot have the best of both worlds, juststaying outside. Then being a chief is just a status symbol.38

This statement accentuates the importance of local commitment and knowledge oftradition against a status-oriented vulgarization of the chieftaincy institution where‘bigness’, money, or education can be used to buy a stool. Likewise it is adenunciation of the legitimacy of foreign chiefs because of the absence of sacrifice,

PDFmyURL.com

‘having the best of both worlds, just staying outside’. While human sacrifice tookplace in the past, sacrifice today is not bloody. Rather, as several of the interviewedchiefs explained, it refers to challenges in terms of lifestyle and responsibilities.39

While some traditional authorities are very wealthy – such as the Asantehene and theOkyenhene in the Ashanti Region – chiefs from destitute rural areas only have limitedaccess to royalties and other chieftaincy- related income, but are still expected toperform their duties and care for their extended families. Therefore, accepting theposition requires a range of reflections.

Togbe, a university lecturer who did his PhD in literature in Germany prior to hisenstoolment, shared his considerations on becoming and being senior divisionarychief in his impoverished rural hometown in the Volta Region during two formalinterviews and a series of informal and private conversations.

When I was approached initially, I declined … the responsibilities are reallyheavy, and it would mean I had to compromise my career. Then there areeconomic implications also, because unlike in the past when the chief usedto live on the good will and the charity of the people, these days it's theother way around. You are not living at home, and when you want to gohome, they can call you any time. You swear an oath, you say that any timethey call you, you will attend to their call. So, you have to move betweenAccra and your hometown at your own expense. You know you receivevisitors. The institution is not endowed in our area, like it is in some otherparts of Ghana … Because they [people in the traditional area] cannotsupport you financially, you are supposed to continue working.40

In the end, Togbe decided to accept the responsibility and returned to Ghana, nowworking in Accra during the week and staying in his hometown during weekends andholidays. For him and other return chiefs, returning is embedded in a range ofdilemmas, not least in relation to the strains of living in a poor country. Just like othersuccessful migrants, return chiefs are expected to continue supporting theircommunities and kin after return. Because, as Nana said, ‘there is poverty andhunger and therefore it becomes an obligation to give something’.41 Furthermorebeing a chief implies adherence to prescribed rules of behaviour. Indeed, Togbeexplained the extensive sets of rules that he must observe when he is in hishometown or in the company of his subjects, such as never walking or driving

PDFmyURL.com

alone, not being seen eating, and not dressing casually. The sacrifice is thus notonly of comfort and income but also of time and privacy.

A moral economy of reciprocity and belonging

The webs of social relations, obligations, and expectations described above formpart of a moral economy of reciprocity and belonging in which return chiefs areembedded. If we follow John Lonsdale, the concept of moral economy refers to‘subjective criteria of equity and exploitation, honour and shame, identity andalienation on which people act, if within strong structural constraints’.42 Withinspiration from Pierre Bourdieu,43 it can also be described as guidelinesconcerning civic virtue, moral obligations, and notions of good and bad within socialfields – in this case referring to norms of generosity and reciprocity based onaffiliation to a hometown or traditional area. The moral economy prescribes thatprosperous community members support their kin and more broadly people in theirhometown – no matter whether they are living in the hometown, in Accra, orabroad.44 Such obligations are sometimes articulated as paying back to those –relatives or the entire village – who morally or financially have contributed to one'supbringing and success, thereby ‘sustaining one‘s place in a network of belonging’.45

Togbe and other chiefs took great care to embed their choice to accept achieftaincy position within this moral economy, positioning themselves as dutiful andcommitted, rather than aiming for status.46 Such statements signal purity – incontrast to those chiefs who are said to ‘have bought’ their way to the stool. Indeed,being a chief is an extremely attractive and honourable position in Ghanaian society,and though articulated as a sacrifice of one's future, a chieftaincy position may alsoenhance a political or business career.47 Furthermore, while return from NorthAmerica or Europe implies dealing with poverty and poor infrastructure in Ghana, itusually also entails upward social mobility – not least for return chiefs, as being ahigh- ranking chief implies higher social status than most Ghanaian migrants couldever dream of obtaining in Europe or North America. However, being a traditionalauthority in order to obtain higher social status is not legitimate and the de-emphasisof status can thus be seen as a way of legitimiz ing the chieftaincy position. AsBourdieu has pointed out, symbolic capital – legitimate honour, reputation, and

PDFmyURL.com

prestige within specific fields – cannot be obtained through deliberate attempts butonly as a practical form of recognition.48 In other words, the status, respect,adoration, and worship that chiefs receive as legitimate chiefs should be earned, notbought; it should be associated with selfless sacrifice and obligation, rather thaninstrumental yearning. It should, in short, be embedded in the moral economy.

Chiefs as development actors

To be embedded in a moral economy of reciprocity and belonging does not standin opposition to expectations of bringing development and innovation. On thecontrary, return chiefs (like other chiefs and other successful migrants) are supposedto initiate and support development in their areas, and I now turn to some of theirstrategies for transnational resource mobilization. In principle, local development isthe responsibility of various Ghanaian state institutions as well as of the local districtassemblies. However, under pressure from neo- liberalism, economic crisis, andlack of financial and human resources, these institutions often cannot offer thenecessary resources, meaning that basic facilities frequently are insufficient. Thissituation necessitates involvement of so-called non-state actors – includingtraditional authorities – in local development.49

All the interviewed chiefs were engaged in a range of activities to attract orcollaborate with migrants, NGOs, or other donors to further development in theirtraditional areas. These activities vary in ambition and scope, including a number ofhigh-profile prestige projects. A well- known example is the projects of theAsantehene, Otumfou Osei Tutu II, king of the Ashantis. The Asantehene establishedthe Otumfou Educational Fund in 2000 and obtained a US$4.5 million grant from theWorld Bank for a Promoting Partnership with Traditional Authorities Project,50 runningbetween 2003 and 2006. Likewise, the Okyenhene has established the OkyenheneEnvironmental Foundation Programme and a University College of Agriculture andEnvironmental Studies51 in the Eastern Region, supported by Wageningen, Tufts,and Boston universities. The World Bank and the University College projects showhow high- ranking Ghanaian chiefs are establishing prestigious projects withinternational partners, surpassing the Ghanaian government. Indeed, the Okyenheneexplicitly criticized the government for being too bureaucratic and inefficient inbringing development, encouraging it – as well as international donors – to

PDFmyURL.com

collaborate directly with traditional authorities:

We are impressing on our government to work with the traditional authoritiesfor the betterment of this whole country. The reason is that the psychology ofownership plays a part in projects; when the people feel that they own theprojects from the beginning to the end, they tend to protect them and workharder. You see accountability and transparency, you also see results. Andyou can share the benefits, as you share the responsibilities in doing theprojects.52

With this statement, the Okyenhene positioned himself and other traditional authoritiesas central development partners, claiming that traditional authorities can ensurelocal ownership, accountability, transparency, and, hence, results. He therebyemphasized what he sees as his competitive advantage as a decentralized, locallygrounded, and accountable authority, aiming at direct collaboration with internationaldevelopment agencies as well as other international partners.

Whereas the Okyenhene was targeting international development agencies as themost attractive development partner, he and the other chiefs were also collaboratingwith migrants living outside Ghana. Migrants represent important constituencies andpotential repositories for support, and all the interviewed chiefs were collaboratingwith Ghanaian migrant associations.53 Their projects primarily include (mostlysecond-hand) equipment for local clinics and hospitals but also support for theestablishment of libraries, public water taps, and ICT centres.54 In some cases, themigrant associations make contact with the traditional authorities, whereas in othersthe chiefs, touring Europe and North America, reach out to ‘their’ migrants livingoutside Ghana. Most of the interviewed chiefs had been on tours to Westerncountries to meet with – and appeal to – Ghanaian migrants, participating infestivals, fundraising events, and community gatherings. At such events, chiefs meet‘their’ populations as chiefs, invoking the dual registers of legitimacy of tradition anddevelopment. The Ga Mantse, Tackie Tawiah III, paramount chief of the Ga State inthe Greater Accra region, pursued an explicit strategy of transnational mobilizationand had made four trips as chief and two private trips between his coronation in2007 and January 2010, when I interviewed him.55 Asked about the role ofGhanaians living abroad in relation to development, he explained:

PDFmyURL.com

It is our prayer that people will use their national instinct to realize that weask for development for their compatriots and not for our own benefit – thatthey can make a difference for us. They should consider the debt they oweto their origins. Some come back and are amazed of the lack ofdevelopment and the lack of opportunity and employment. So we arepraying for some help from our brothers and sisters outside. … There is anawakening of sensibilities and sentimental attachment – friendship, roots ofbirth, and corporate business.56

The Ga Mantse thus employed the language of moral obligation, roots, and kinship,appealing to ‘brothers and sisters outside’ to make them remember and respond totheir debt. He thereby referred to the moral economy of belonging and reciprocity,using it to explain why migrants should contribute to development in his area.Furthermore, the chief explained that, being a former migrant himself who had livedmany years in both the UK and the US – working for the Ghana High Commissionand the UN – he understands the situation of migrants. ‘This is a huge advantage’,the chief said, ‘because I know them and their disposition and that makes talking tothem easier … . I can make them understand our difficulties.'57

The Ga Mantse's appeal and connection to migrants and his internationalbackground are also demonstrated on his website and facebook profile, with photosof the chief dressed in full chieftaincy regalia at various events.58 These include anofficial visit to the Houses of Parliament in London, a meeting with Ghanaianmigrants from the Ga area living in London, and official meetings in London andAccra with a British-Ghanaian politician. Finally, the website appeals to the ‘UK andrest of the world’ to donate to the Ga Mantse Charity Foundation, which waslaunched in London and is registered in both Ghana and Britain. The chief thuspositions himself as transnationally engaged with a strong and powerful presence inLondon, liaising with ‘his’ migrants as well with British politicians.

Recogniz ing and incorporating

Despite his own past as a migrant, it would be a mistake to think that the Ga Mantsemeets with migrants abroad as fellow people in the same boat. Rather, he and otherchiefs meet them as chiefs, dressed in full chieftaincy regalia and following thenorms and rituals connected to the institution, as his website and facebook profile

PDFmyURL.com

show. However, there is a certain ambiguity to such encounters, as the chief prayedfor support, as the Ga Mantse stated it, rather than commanding it. Indeed, chiefs'authority over international migrants is not granted but must be mobilized andjustified,59 and I suggest that one of the ways that chiefs do this is throughsimultaneously invoking both registers of legitimacy. This is illustrated in the exampleof the Dormaahene, Osagyefo Oseadeyo Agyemang Badu II, paramount chief of theDormaa Area in the Brong Ahafo Region. The Dormaahene studied law for two yearsin London before returning to Ghana to work as a lawyer, becoming a chief in 1999.He explained how he went on two international tours shortly after his coronation in1999:

Most people from the area are living inside Ghana but a significant numberare also living outside and have got to know how the system works thereand I went to solicit their views in terms of health, education, et cetera. In2001, I went on a European tour to UK, Germany, Italy, Belgium, France, andNetherlands. I then went to US and Canada in 2003. There are Dormaacitizens or Brong Ahafo associations in all the countries and they workedhand in hand with us to fashion the programme. I told them my visions andsolicited their views about how to run the system and develop the area. Idecided to make them know that they are a part of the system. It was very,very successful!60

In his account of the tours, the Dormaheene presents himself as appealing to bothmigrants' senses of belonging and their visions of development. He went on tour aschief – Nieswand has described how the chief's participation in a fundraising eventin Berlin in 2001 was staged and performed as a royal visit according to custom61 –but he addressed Dormaa migrants as resourceful citizens, ‘soliciting their viewsabout how to run the system and develop the area’, as he explained in the interviewabove. In this set-up both chief and migrants are cast as modern, resourceful, anddevelopment-oriented citizens, but their encounters remain embedded in achieftaincy framework and the ensuing hierarchies. The Dormaheene thus used hisauthority as chief to appeal to migrants' senses of belonging, responsibility, andobligation.

Chiefs also use their public authority when they endow recognition through praisingactions congruent with notions of public virtue. Public ceremonies celebrating

PDFmyURL.com

donations of funding, projects, or equipment are common in Ghana wheredignitaries such as chiefs, politicians, or reverend ministers receive the donationsand donors, and they are often documented in the newspaper and on websites. Forthe donors, such events constitute social arenas of public recognition,62 where theysignal belonging, identification, and loyalty towards their home community. For thegranters of recognition, it is a way of exercising public authority and signalling asuperior position. This is demonstrated in the following vignette from a function inNana's hometown, where he received a donation from a visiting Americandelegation.

It's a cloudy morning in June. A big crowd of townspeople andschoolchildren are assembled in one of the local schools, waiting for Nanaand the American delegation. The arrival of Nana and his entourage, alldressed in traditional clothes, is announced with drumming, and, once he isseated, some of the chiefs dance for Nana and the delegation. After anopening prayer, Nana delivers a speech for the head of the delegation,emphasiz ing their good personal relations. He recalls how they met a fewyears ago when she first visited the town – ‘we had fun, didn't we’ – and howshe came back the following year and they started discussing contributionsto development in town. The word is then passed to the head of delegation.Visibly touched, she presents a cheque for US$7,500 to Nana, stating thatshe and her group are willing and able to donate more money. Nana thanksher again, promising to make her an eminent citizen of the town during theannual festival. Afterwards, a group photo is taken on the school ground.63

This event shows how the granting of public recognition has several aspects. First,the event is staged as a traditional ceremony marked by the public performance ofchieftaincy with royal dressing, dancing, and conduct. Second, it shows how Nanauses his ability as chief to grant recognition, promising the head of delegation statusas an eminent citizen – a great honour he, as chief, can bestow upon her at theannual festival. Third, he endows recognition in an interpersonal way, emphasiz ingthe close social relations between the two of them, thereby signalling a specialrelationship that goes beyond the donor–recipient affiliation. In sum, the eventdemonstrates how Nana links the delegation to his own development efforts: he (andnot the school principal, the local district assembly, or Ghana Education Service)

PDFmyURL.com

received the cheque, and he attempted to mobilize the delegation for furthercontributions, using his power of recognition and his interpersonal skills.

While such functions offer spaces of public recognition for the donors, they thus alsoconstitute venues for traditional authorities to demonstrate their capabilities inresource mobilization. Indeed, recognition is a social relation where the act ofreceiving and bestowing recognition implies specific positions within a given fieldand moral economy. To be able to bestow public recognition implies public authority– occupying a ‘position of trust, competence, and wisdom’ acknowledged byothers64 – and thereby also the power to define what is seen as praiseworthy andvirtuous in the specific field. The appointment of eminent citizens constitutes apowerful way in which chiefs bestow public recognition and at the same timeincorporate migrants and other donors into their development efforts. A relatedphenomenon is the so-called development chiefs and development queen mothers– Nkɔsouhene or Nkɔsuohemaa in Akan. These are honorary titles conferred onindividuals who have contributed to local development and have become awidespread and popular phenomenon in Ghana during the last 20 years. The titlesare often awarded to internal or international migrants or citizens from othercountries65 and – like the appointment of eminent citizens – the phenomenon isseen as ‘a poverty reduction strategy and an appreciation of their efforts to thecommunity’, as a paramount chief from the Volta Region expressed it.66 Suchappointments thus constitute a mobilization strategy of incorporating resourcefulindividuals and groups into chiefs' development efforts, enticing further commitmentand, indeed, establishing a connection between the donors and the traditionalauthorities. Or, in other words, they are attempts to extend the boundaries of moraleconomy of reciprocity and belonging to include new, exterior, or peripheral actorsor to strengthen already existing relationships.

Conclusion

In this article, I have explored the ongoing transformation of Ghanaian chieftaincy inan era marked by globalization, international migration, and neo- liberalism, focusingon traditional authorities with an international migrant background. These chiefsoccupy an ambivalent position, expected to bring about development but alsopotentially estranged from local culture and tradition. The article shows how the

PDFmyURL.com

positions, transnational mobilization efforts, and legitimacy of return chiefs arenegotiated and enacted in a field of potential tension between what is articulated asbeing traditional and modern. Both tradition and the modern are extremely appealingand desired domains in Ghanaian society today but are also seen as potentiallyoppositional. Therefore return chiefs have to strike the right balance, demonstratingthat they master both registers of legitimacy. On the one hand, the interviewed chiefspositioned themselves as having a solid foundation in tradition, sacrifice, andobligation, staging their public selves as chiefs through performing, dressing, andadhering to the protocols of royal conduct and rituals. On the other, theyemphasized their professional leadership, describing themselves as innovative andinternationally connected, establishing development projects, touring Westerncountries, and incorporating migrants, NGOs, or international organizations into theirown development efforts.

However, the distinction between two registers of legitimacy of tradition andmodernity is not always very clear- cut. Return chiefs endeavour to bringdevelopment as chiefs, using their international networks and professionalexperience as well as their traditional authority and the pomp and customs of thechieftaincy institution to mobilize support and appeal to migrants and potentialdonors. They thereby simultaneously practise and invoke the two registers. Likewise,the two registers merge in the moral economy of belonging and reciprocity that linkspeople to their hometown through norms of obligation towards kin and community,including expectations of bringing development. Yet, while the registers thus maymerge, they are perceived as being rooted in different sets of practices andexperiences and may be mobilized to legitimize, challenge, or dismiss thepractices of chiefs and other persons. This shows that chiefs' legitimacy iscontextual and processual with room for manoeuvre, innovation, and negotiation. Yetit also implies that chieftaincy is thoroughly embedded within already establishedcontexts and power structures, and chiefs' actions are policed by other traditionalauthorities as well as by some of their subjects. Just like other authorities, theirlegitimacy is circumscribed by cultural and political expectations and norms.

Finally, the article shows that the phenomenon of modern chiefs is embedded inboth local and global contexts. The emerging trend of appointing traditionalauthorities with an international migrant background accentuates that chiefs are notonly supposed to be thoroughly grounded in local tradition and custom, but that

PDFmyURL.com

higher education, professional experience, international experience, and networksare crucial qualifications as well. Indeed, return chiefs go beyond local customs tobring development and innovation to their areas; they are transnationally connected,manoeuvring in a globalized world. Their practices are thus at once local andglobal, and analyses of the contemporary transformations of chieftaincy mustinclude both perspectives.

Footnotes

↵ 1. For example, Helene Maria Kyed and Lars Buur, ‘Introduction: traditionalauthority and democratization in Africa’ in Lars Buur and Helene Maria Kyed(eds), State Recognition and Democratization in Sub-Saharan Africa: A new dawnfor traditional authorities? (Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY and Houndmills,2007), pp. 1–28; Pierre Englebert, ‘Patterns and theories of traditional resurgencein tropical Africa’, Mondes en Développement 30, 118 (2002), pp. 51–64.

↵ 2. Kyed and Buur, ‘Introduction’; Francis B. Nyamnjoh, ‘Chieftaincy and thenegotiation of might and right in Botswana democracy’, Journal of ContemporaryAfrican Studies 21, 2 (2003), pp. 233–50.

↵ 3. Kwame Boafo-Arthur, ‘Chieftaincy in Ghana: challenges and prospects in the21st century’, African and Asian Studies 2, 2 (2003), pp. 125–53; Irene K. Odoteiand Albert K. Awedoba (eds), Chieftaincy in Ghana: Culture, governance anddevelopment (Sub-Saharan Publishers, Accra, 2006); George M. Bob-Milliar,‘Chieftaincy, diaspora, and development: the institution of Nkosuohene in Ghana’,African Affairs 108, 433 (2009), pp. 541–88.

↵ 4. Rijk van Dijk and E. Adriaan B. van Rouveroy van Nieuwaal, ‘Introduction:the domestication of chieftaincy in Africa: from the imposed to the imagined’ in E.Adriaan B. van Rouveroy van Nieuwaal and Rijk van Dijk (eds), AfricanChieftaincy in a New Socio-Political Landscape (African Studies Centre, Leiden,1999), p. 17.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 5. See Bob-Milliar, ‘Chieftaincy, diaspora and development’; Boris Nieswand,‘Ghanaian migrants in Germany and the social construction of diaspora’, AfricanDiaspora 1, 1–2 (2008), pp. 28–52.

↵ 6. Charles Piot, Remotely Global: Village modernity in West Africa (ChicagoUniversity Press, Chicago, IL and London, 1999).

↵ 7. For example, Maurice Schiff and Caglar Ozden, International Migration,Remittances and the Brain Drain (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005); RajBardouille, Muna Ndulo, and Margaret Grieco (eds), Africa's Finances: Thecontribution of remittances (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle uponTyne, 2008).

↵ 8. Interview, senior divisionary chief in the Volta Region, Accra, 4 June 2008.

↵ 9. John A. Arthur, The African Diaspora in the United States and Europe: TheGhanaian experience (Ashgate, Aldershot and Burlington, VT, 2008); SavinaAmmassari, Migration and Development: Factoring return into the equation(Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2009).

↵ 10. Carola Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captain and the politician: legitimatingpower in northern Ghana’, Africa 68, 1 (1998), p. 46.

↵ 11. Janine Ubink, ‘Traditional authority revisited: popular perceptions of chiefsand chieftaincy in peri- urban Kumasi, Ghana’, Journal of Legal Pluralism 55(2007), pp. 123–61.

↵ 12. Emmanuel Akyeampong, ‘Africans in the diaspora: the diaspora andAfrica’, African Affairs 99, 395 (2000), pp. 183–215; Kwaku Twum-Baah, ‘Volumeand characteristics of international Ghanaian migration’ in Takyiwaa Manuh (ed.),At Home in the World? International migration and development in contemporaryGhana and West Africa (Sub-Saharan Publishers, Legon, 2005), pp. 55–77.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 13. Giles Mohan, ‘Embedded cosmopolitanism and the politics of obligation:the Ghanaian diaspora and development’, Environment and Planning A 38, 5(2006), pp. 867–83; Nauja Kleist, ‘“Let us rebuild our country”. Migration-development scenarios in Ghana’ in Darshan Vigneswaran and Joel Quirk (eds),Theorizing the State and Mobility in Africa (University of Pennsylvania Press,Philadelphia, PA, forthcoming).

↵ 14. Arthur, The African Diaspora; Ammassari, Migration and Development.

↵ 15. Francis B. Nyamnjoh, ‘“Our traditions are modern, our modernitiestraditional”: chieftaincy and democracy in contemporary Africa’ (Occasionalpaper, CODESRIA, Dakar, n.d.), pp. 1–28.

↵ 16. Wolfgang Zeller, ‘“Now we are a town”: chiefs, investors, and the state inZambia's Western Province’ in Buur and Kyed, State Recognition andDemocratization, pp. 209–31.

↵ 17. The most detailed interviews were carried out with the two seniordivisionary chiefs whom I met on several occasions. Respecting wishes ofprivacy, I have changed personal details about their backgrounds and here callthem Nana and Togbe, which is how chiefs are addressed in the Eastern andVolta Regions, where their traditional areas are located.

↵ 18. Peter Geschiere, Birgit Meyer, and Peter Pels, ‘Introduction’, in PeterGeschiere, Birgit Meyer, and Peter Pels (eds), Readings in Modernity in Africa(International African Institute, London, 2008), p. 3.

↵ 19. Eric Hobsbawn and Terence Ranger (eds), The Invention of Tradition(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, NY, 1993); Piot,Remotely Global .

↵ 20. van Dijk and van Nieuwaal, ‘Introduction’.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 21. Kyed and Buur, ‘Introduction’, p. 23.

↵ 22. Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captain and the politician’, pp. 46–67.

↵ 23. Bronwyn Davies and Rom Harré, ‘Positioning: the discursive production ofselves’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20, 1 (1990), p. 62.

↵ 24. Nyamnjoh, ‘Chieftaincy and the negotiation of might and right’; Bob-Milliar,‘Chieftaincy, diaspora, and development’, p. 543.

↵ 25. Boafo-Arthur, ‘Chieftaincy in Ghana’.

↵ 26. Ibid.; Bob-Milliar, ‘Chieftaincy, diaspora, and development’; Ubink,‘Traditional authority revisited’.

↵ 27. Ibid.

↵ 28. Boafo-Arthur, ‘Chieftaincy in Ghana’; Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captainand the politician’.

↵ 29. Interview, Eastern Region, 16 March 2008.

↵ 30. Interview, Accra, 5 June 2008.

↵ 31. Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captain and the politician’.

↵ 32. Max Weber, ‘The types of legitimate domination’ in Guenther Roth andClaus Wittich (eds), Max Weber: Economy and Society. An outline of interpretivesociology (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1978), p. 227.

↵ 33. Interview, Accra, 3 February 2010.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 34. Bob-Milliar, ‘Chieftaincy, diaspora, and development’, p. 544.

↵ 35. Indeed, when I discussed my research project with my interlocutors, almosteverybody suggested that I speak with the Okyenhene.

↵ 36. See also Boafo-Arthur, ‘Chieftaincy in Ghana’.

↵ 37. Interview, Accra, 25 April 2008.

↵ 38. Interview, Accra, 18 January 2010.

↵ 39. See Zeller, ‘“Now we are a town”’; Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captain andthe politician’.

↵ 40. Interview, Accra, 4 June 2008.

↵ 41. Interview, Accra, 5 June 2008.

↵ 42. Bruce Berman and John Lonsdale, Unhappy Valley: Conflict in Kenya andAfrica (James Currey, London, 1992), p. 9.

↵ 43. Pierre Bourdieu and Löic Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology(Polity Press, Cambridge, 1992).

↵ 44. Carola Lentz , ‘Home, death and leadership: discourses of an educatedelite from north-western Ghana’, Social Anthropology 2, 2 (1994), pp. 149–69;Piot, Remotely Global ; Mohan, ‘Embedded cosmopolitanism’. However, as theseauthors have also shown, obligations are under constant negotiation and thusshould not be perceived as static or all- encompassing.

↵ 45. Patrick Chabal, Africa: The politics of suffering and smiling (Zed Books,London and New York, NY, 2009), p. 80.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 46. The only exception was the Okyenhene – arguably the most powerful chiefinterviewed – who explained that he sees his office as a platform for speakingand being heard, rather than a personal sacrifice.

↵ 47. Lentz , ‘The chief, the mine captain and the politician’.

↵ 48. Bourdieu and Wacquant, An Invitation.

↵ 49. Giles Mohan, ‘Making neoliberal states of development: the Ghanaiandiaspora and the politics of homelands’, Environment and Planning D: Societyand Space 26, 3 (2008), pp. 464–79; Kyed and Buur, ‘Introduction’.

↵ 50. Boafo-Arthur, ‘Chieftaincy in Ghana’; Alex B. Asiedu, Kwame A. Labi andBrempong Osei-Tutut, ‘An Asanteman-World Bank heritage developmentinitiative in promoting partnership with Ghanaian traditional leaders’, Africa Today55, 4 (2009), pp. 3–26.

↵ 51. See <environmentuniversity.edu.gh> (13 May 2010).

↵ 52. Interview, Accra, 3 February 2010.

↵ 53. With the exception of a paramount chief in the Northern Region, from wherethere are only few international migrants.

↵ 54. See also Richard Crook and Gideon Hosu-Porblev, ‘Transnationalcommunities, policy processes and the politics of development: the case ofGhanaian hometown associations’ (NGPA Working Paper Series, 13 (2008), pp.1–45); Mohan, ‘Embedded cosmopolitanism’; Valentina Mazzucato and MirjamKabki, ‘Small is beautiful: the politics of transnational relationships betweenmigrant hometown associations and communities back home’, Global Networks9, 2 (2009), pp. 227–52.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 55. Another example is the Okyenhene. See Samuel Zan, ‘One nation, onepeople, one destiny? The Ghanaian diaspora's contribution to nationaldevelopment using diverse channels’ (Research study, SEND Foundation ofWest Africa, Accra, 2004), pp. 1–21.

↵ 56. Interview, Accra, 22 January 2010.

↵ 57. Ibid.

↵ 58. ‘The official website of His Royal Majesty King Tackie Tawiah III GaMantse King of Greater Accra’, Ghana, <www.kingtackietawiahiii.com> (13 May2010).

↵ 59. For examples of how migrants negotiate power relationships to local andtraditional authorities, see Mohan, ‘Embedded cosmopolitanism’; Nieswand,‘Ghanaian migrants in Germany’; Mazzucato and Kabki, ‘Small is beautiful’.

↵ 60. Telephone interview, Accra, 27 July 2008.

↵ 61. Nieswand, ‘Ghanaian migrants in Germany’.

↵ 62. Ibid.

↵ 63. Field notes, Eastern Region, 28 June 2008.

↵ 64. Chabal, Africa, p. 40.

↵ 65. See also Bob-Milliar, ‘Chieftaincy, diaspora, and development’; MarijkeSteegstra, ‘“White” chiefs and queens in Ghana: personification of development’,in Odotei and Awedoba, Chieftaincy in Ghana, pp. 603–20.

PDFmyURL.com

↵ 66. Interview, paramount chief, Volta Region, 8 May 2008.

© The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal African Society. Allrights reserved

O th e r O xfo rd U n i ve rs i ty Pre ss s i te s :

O xfo rd U n i ve rs i ty Pre ss

Site Map Privacy Policy Frequently Asked Questions

Online ISSN 1468-2621 - Print ISSN 0001-9909Copyright © 2012 Royal African Society

PDFmyURL.com