Social influence, not norms, drives pro-FGMC attitudes

New social network analysis among Arsi Oromo communities is informing new policies aimed at ending female genital mutilation/cutting (FGMC)

To the point:

• Spread through social influence: In rural Ethiopia, pro-FGMC attitudes are spread through social influence and everyday social connections, rather than widely held community norms or selective advice networks.
• Diverse attitudes require a tailored approach: Data from over 5,000 Arsi Oromo adults shows that most people expect little community support for FGMC. Intervention strategies must therefore reflect this diversity of opinion and network structure.
• Rethinking intervention strategies: The findings challenge the traditional approach of eliminating the practice through public declarations. Instead, they urge interventions that address the subtle ways in which attitudes are shared and spread.

A new study conducted by researchers at the University of Bristol, the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Addis Ababa University, the University of Groningen, and the University of Montpellier among Arsi Oromo agropastoralist communities in rural Ethiopia sheds light on why female genital mutilation/cutting (FGMC) persists in some parts of the country, despite legal prohibitions and decreasing societal support. Using survey and social network data collected from 5,163 adults across nine kebele zones, the analysis reveals the hidden dynamics that perpetuate pro-FGMC attitudes.

First author Sarah Myers, a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany and the University of Bristol in the UK, explains: “What we learned is that pro-FGMC attitudes are surprisingly rare and do not appear to be maintained by any widespread belief that the majority supports the practice. Instead, these attitudes primarily spread via everyday social interactions, such as conversations, networks of respect and practical support like lending money, rather than through shared religious or marriage-centred advice networks.” The research team mapped four kinds of social relationships and discovered that influence can come from both family members and others.

Attitudes are shaped by daily interactions

A key finding of the study is that, regardless of their stance on female genital mutilation/cutting, most survey participants believe that few, if any, of their neighbours actually support the practice. Even those who favour FGMC generally see themselves as part of a small minority. As Mhairi Gibson, professor at the University of Bristol notes, “This undermines popular theories that FGMC is a truly entrenched social norm and calls into question the effectiveness of interventions that assume uniform community support or rely on mass public commitments to abandon the practice collectively.”

The implications for policy and public health intervention are profound. Conventional campaigns that focus on triggering community-wide tipping points or public abandonment ceremonies may be less effective in areas where attitudes are diverse and social influence is diffused across ordinary social networks. The researchers therefore advocate strategies that empower women and girls through expanded education and employment opportunities, as well as leveraging 'edutainment', such as radio or television dramas, as cost-effective tools to change perceptions on a large scale. However, the authors caution that “there is no one-size-fits-all approach: successful efforts must be guided by local realities and the specific pathways through which attitudes spread”.

With FGMC still affecting over 200 million women and girls worldwide, it is critical to understand the layered social processes at play if we are to reach the United Nations’ goal of eliminating it by 2030. By challenging long-held assumptions and advocating evidence-based, context-sensitive interventions, this research offers new hope to communities striving to end FGMC.