The Economics of Ethnic Conflict: the case of Burkina Faso by Andreas Dafinger (review)

In this book, Andreas Dafinger presents an anthropological analysis of social relations between Bisa/Mossi farmers and Fulbe herders in northern Burkina Faso. These relations have long been reported as being conflictual, and are usually explained as the consequence of natural resource competition (over grazing land and water in particular) in an ecologically harsh environment. Dafinger shows how the image of conflict reflects a public discourse that hinges on the mobilization of ethnic stereotypes. By looking at everyday, inter-ethnic relations instead, Dafinger uncovers a more complex reality. Farmers often develop friendships with herders (and vice versa), and behind the ideology of ethnic distinctiveness actually lies a social world in which people from different socio-ethnic backgrounds actively engage with each other. Thus, the book associates with a literature suggesting that ethnic categories are socially constructed ones and that ethnic boundaries are permeable.

A major question remains: how should these friendships be interpreted? Dafinger sides with collective action theory (a specialized version of rational choice theory; pp. 146–8), arguing that cross-ethnic friendships emerge not as a union of like-minded individuals based on shared values or world views, but chiefly as strategic alliances revolving around the control of natural resources. Dafinger’s argument runs as follows. As elsewhere in the Sahel, farmers store their wealth in cattle. To avoid kinship demands for wealth (the Bisa/Mossi society being egalitarian), they entrust their cattle to the custody of their Fulbe friends – to be retrieved at an appropriate time, for instance when cattle prices are high. Fulani, in turn, have no land titles and so they access farming land through farmer friends. Through these liaisons, farming herders also obtain an advantage vis-à-vis migrating herdsmen. The farmers are highly motivated to chase away wandering herders, which reduces competitive pressures for farming herders. Bisa/Mossi–Fulbe social relations are therefore seen as exchange relations based on mutual self-interest.

At this point, a sense of unease creeps up on the critical reader. Certainly, Dafinger’s interpretation helps us to understand why ethnic distinction is so pronounced in this part of Africa. Ethnicity is communicated with the purpose of removing from public view what must maintain private: the ‘concealed economy’ of northern Burkina (pp. 12–14). However, a major problem is that the book offers inconclusive evidence for this. On pp. 96–101 and pp. 127–30, for instance, the case is presented of Noël, a Bisa butcher living in town, and Guieba, a Fulani herder living in the vicinity. Noël entrusted cattle to Guieba but later retrieved some of them without consulting the herder. A conflict ensued that spiralled out of control, resulting in a court case. The judge dismissed the case for lack of evidence. Importantly, the men did not break off relations, but continued their entrusting practice as before. Dafinger concludes: ‘This story underlines that the transfers of goods and services across the ethnic border are framed in terms of gifts and mutual friendships’ (p. 129). Although I subscribe to this conclusion, it is difficult to see an immediate link to rational choice/exchange theory.

Instead, such observations point to a world of shared social life. Incidentally, this resonates with earlier anthropological work carried out in northern Burkina Faso, suggesting that factors other than strategic, self-interested considerations shape farmer–herder relations. As Dutch anthropologist Mark Breusers’ work on the area has shown, friendships between farmers and herders extend well beyond the domain of cattle and also beyond purely economic exchanges. Breusers and other authors observed that Fulbe are often involved in naming and marriage ceremonies of, respectively, children and daughters of their Mossi friends. Hence, mixed friendships are seen here as associated with the intimate world of close kinship. Obviously this does not exclude the possibility that at times multi-stranded, cross-ethnic ties are mobilized for economic ends – entrusting cattle, or accessing agricultural land. Yet it also suggests that economic concerns...