Customary courts, state institutions, or opting out: Patterns of forum pluralism in three African countries

Human security and economic development require access to conflict resolution forums, making them a critical governance service. Yet, state governments are not the majority provider of dispute resolution in many countries. We draw on a sample of 5000 disputes from the 2019 Local Governance Process Indicators (LGPI) survey to study the impacts of forum pluralism in peri-urban and rural Zambia, Malawi, and Kenya. We show that the greater diversity of forums in a community is associated with an increased use of dispute resolution services. This counters expectations that customary forums crowd out the use of state forums or function as substitutes. Their coexistence increases overall use of conflict resolution services, yet the profiles of users of each forum type vary systematically. Even among users with similar geographic access to customary and state forums, status within each has a significant impact on the choice of forums and, therefore, the norms of justice governing citizens. We also find certain groups, particularly individuals with low status in customary forums and women, are less likely to seek any dispute resolution. Distance from the state’s courts positively impacts the likelihood of using customary forums, highlighting the importance of ease of access on forum choice. Overall, the findings show that even as customary forums increase access to a vital governance service, policymakers must pay careful attention to which groups remain underserved and excluded from equal access to conflict resolution.