Background
Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is the most common form of violence against women [
1]. It is now a well known public health problem and a significant source of human rights violation worldwide [
2]. Intimate partner violence against women constitutes a major risk factor to women's health, with physical and mental health consequences [
3]. Though the impact of areas of conflict on women's health differs considerably between contexts and between individuals, women are generally susceptible to marginalization, poverty and suffering, with exacerbation of existing inequalities and patterns of discrimination, and violent acts [
4]. Studies both in Africa and other areas of conflict indicate that domestic violence increases both during and after armed conflict [
5]. This is attributed to the acceptance of violence as a means of asserting power and resolving conflicts; the changing role of women in society; lawlessness and a climate of impunity; weak or absent security provision such as effective policing, and hidden male trauma [
5]. Cross-cultural studies indicate that IPV is prevalent in societies with high levels of violence and conflict and that there is an association between collective violence and interpersonal violence [
6‐
8]. Even children raised in the midst of conflict may come to believe that violence is an appropriate way to settle interpersonal conflicts [
8]. Several studies report that intimate partner violence is acceptable in some instances as justifiable punishment for a woman's transgression of her normative roles in society by significant proportions of men and women in sub-Saharan Africa [
9‐
13], suggesting therefore that such attitudes toward violence are deeply rooted in the traditional gendered roles of women and men [
1]
Intimate partner violence in Nigeria
Intimate partner violence is pervasive in Nigeria [
14‐
16], and its prevalence has been reported to vary between different regions and states of the country, from as low as 24% in South Western Nigeria [
17], 31% in western Nigeria – Lagos [
14] and Ibadan [
18], 39% in Anambra State [
16], to as high as 79% in Imo State [
15]. The traditional Nigerian society is patriarchal; hence violence against women is frequently tolerated in communities where women are assigned an inferior role, subordinate to the male head of the family, and effectively the property of their husbands [
18]. Discriminatory laws that condone certain forms of violence against women, dismissive attitudes among the Police, an inaccessible justice system, and the fact that violence against women in the home is generally regarded as belonging in the private sphere, are all contributory factors [
18,
19].
Collective violence in the Niger Delta
Collective violence is defined as "the instrumental use of violence by people who identify themselves as members of a group – whether this group is transitory or has a more permanent identity – against another group or set of individuals, in order to achieve political, economic, ideological, or social objectives" [
1]. Acts that constitute collective violence, such as, civil wars; terrorism; communal violence; violent political conflicts that occur within or between states; state-perpetrated violence such as genocide, repression, disappearances, torture and other human rights abuses; and organized violent crime [
20], are a public health problem, and for over 25 years, unrest and violence in the Niger Delta have slowly escalated into a guerrilla-style conflict resulting in hundreds of deaths each year. Collective violence in the Niger Delta is characterized by militancy and criminality, exemplified by: oil theft (also known as "illegal bunkering"), armed violence, extortion and kidnappings by militant groups [
20], extra-judicial killings by Nigeria's security forces [
21,
21], rampant human rights abuses by security forces intent on crushing any resistance to the regions oil production [
22,
23].
The conflict is mainly motivated by the ongoing struggle for the control of the crude oil and gas resources that make Nigeria the number one oil producer in Africa, the world's tenth largest crude oil producer and the fifth biggest supplier of crude imports to the United States [
20]. It is also motivated by the perceived injustice of the people of the Niger Delta perpetrated against them by the Nigerian government [
24]. Other triggers of the violence include: habitual lack of social development, such as, lack of roads, schools, electricity, and health services in the Niger Delta, which has resulted in violence becoming an accepted norm in that society, and educated Delta indigenes leaving the region [
25]. In addition, consequences of oil spills, such as, environmental pollution, river pollution, and gas flares, severely destroy farmlands and rivers, failure of animals to thrive, and people being denied their livelihood [
26], inter-ethnic violence [
20,
26], insecurity, lack of political freedom, anger over high levels of unemployment, and economic marginalization [
27] fuel the conflict.
The Niger Delta Context
The Niger Delta has a steadily growing population estimated in 2005 at over 30 million people, accounts for more than 23% of Nigeria's total population, and has a population density that is among the highest in the world with 265 people per square kilometer. It consists of nine States: Rivers, Bayelsa and Delta, Abia, Akwa Ibom, Cross Rivers, Edo, Imo and Ondo States [
25]. Despite its natural resources accounting for over 95% of Nigeria's proven gas and oil reserves [
28], the Niger Delta suffers from administrative neglect, crumbling social infrastructure and services, high unemployment, social deprivation, abject poverty, filth, squalor, and endemic conflict [
29]. Studies on attitudes of women towards intimate partner violence in the Niger Delta are almost non-existent, so also are studies on attitudes toward intimate partner violence in areas of armed conflict. This study however attempts to fill that gap.
The objectives of this study were to: i) investigate the predictors of women's attitudes toward intimate partner violence in the Niger Delta in comparison to the attitudes of women from other parts of Nigeria. It hypothesizes that the women of the Niger Delta have a higher risk of accepting or justify violence under certain circumstances.
Discussion
Intimate partner violence is generally tolerated under several circumstances among women in the Niger Delta and among women in the rest of country. Of the women in the Niger Delta, 47 percent would justify IPV in at least one of the examined reasons, and among the women in the rest of the country, 42 percent would justify IPV for at least one of the above-mentioned reasons. More women in the Niger Delta than in the rest of the country would justify IPV for all the following reasons: going out without telling him, neglecting the children, arguing with him, refusing to have sex with him, and burning food (Figure
1).
Though comparable studies are lacking in other regions of conflict in Africa, the results of this study suggest that rural residence, lower household wealth, and lower status occupations (Agriculture self-employed., Agriculture employee, household & domestic, unskilled manual) of the women in the Niger Delta was associated with a higher risk of justifying IPV. Similar findings of tolerant attitudes of women with lower household wealth towards violence in non-conflict areas have also been reported in other studies [
34,
35]. This is as expected since women with low socio-economic status are likely to experience violence due to their limited resources [
35]. In the Niger Delta, the origins of collective violence is rooted in a combination of factors like unemployment, poverty, deprived livelihood, absent social amenities, and dissatisfaction with the central government. These factors increase both the women's risk of being victimized, and their risk of justifying violence against them – point corroborated by Heise, 1998 [
36]. Possible theoretical explanations for these acceptance attitudes could include the cognitive dissonance theory, which refers to the distressing mental state in which individuals feel "they find themselves doing things that don't fit with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold [
37]. These women find themselves trapped in an environment of conflict, and as such, tend to cope with, and make sense of their experiences by accepting violence toward them in certain circumstances. This theory could also explain why some women accept or justify intimate partner violence against them. Another plausible explanation for the women's attitude of justifying IPV could be the ecological theory, which is based on multiple, interconnected elements of individuals, communities, institutions, and cultures, and suggests that an individual's behaviour is shaped not only by his/her upbringing, but by current contextual factors such as the batterer, reactions he/she receives from those around him/her, and the resources available to him/her [
37,
38]. This two-way interplay includes the family, the neighbourhood or workplace, the broader social influence of the media, and ideologies and/or law [
39]. The attitude of the women may have therefore been shaped by current contextual factors (armed conflict in the region, low socio-economic status) around them and the resources available to them.
The association between having full or partial autonomy in household decisions regarding food to be cooked and a lower risk of justifying violence is in agreement with findings from other studies [
10,
40]. It underscores the importance of women's empowerment through decision-making, as interventions that promote joint decision-making might influence men and women's views towards equality in marriage and encourage men to settle household disputes with negotiation, rather than violence. Deeply entrenched social beliefs regarding the subordinate roles of women constitute a strong barrier to preventing acceptance of violence against women. This warrants the implementation of positive action to change these traditional attitudes through systematic and comprehensive education and awareness programmes, including educating women and girls about their right to live free of violence. Furthermore, the causes of the conflict in the region need to be appropriately addressed. Since the militant groups in the delta are connected to the communities, unless both state and federal governments seriously address grievances of the people of the Niger delta such as, environmental degradation, wide-spread poverty, under-development, and corruption, conflict in the delta will continue, with women and children bearing the brunt.
The association between access to media and the risk of acceptance to violence is conflicting. The increased risk of acceptance of violence amongst women with access to newspaper and radio is worthy of note, and is in contrast to findings from other studies [
13,
34]. This may be linked with the coverage of the violence itself in the more "independent" newspapers and radio stations (in contrast to the more "regulated" coverage by television stations) since media coverage of conflicts plays a large role in sensationalizing people, and thus exacerbating conflicts [
40].
Subsequent efforts towards peace in areas of collective violence should include working with the media on their reporting of conflicts. Access to television was associated with a lower risk of acceptance of violence. The explanation for this finding is unclear, and needs to be researched further; however, it may be linked with the more controlled coverage of the conflict in the Niger Delta by the television stations, which has been described as episodic or sporadic reporting about the conflict only when the crises are exacerbated [
41].
Among the women from the rest of the country, women from the Igbo and Other ethnic groups had a lower risk of justifying IPV. This may be associated with the gender-restrictiveness of the Hausa/Fulani/Kanuri ethnic groups that predisposes these women to IPV [
13,
42,
43]. Women in lower status occupations (Agriculture self-employed, Agriculture employee, household & domestic, unskilled manual) from the rest of the country had a 95 percent higher risk of justifying IPV compared to women with higher status occupations (Professional/Technician/Management). This is a common finding, given that woman with low socio-economic status are predisposed to experiencing violence due to their limited resources [
34,
35]. Lower risk of justifying IPV among women with full or partial autonomy in decisions regarding own health, and visits to family or friends is generally associated with women's increased empowerment [
17,
41]. However, higher risk of justifying IPV among women with full or partial autonomy in decisions regarding making large household purchases is conflicting, and needs to be researched further [
41]. The situation in the Niger Delta is complex, and is worsened in part by the traditional/cultural gender ideologies in Nigeria, which tend to have a strong hold on the women. Changing attitudes toward violence in the Niger Delta requires long-term commitment and strategies involving all parts of society. This would initially require the resolution of the conflict, and subsequently, stronger commitments by governments in passing and enforcing laws that ensure women's legal rights and punish abusers. Furthermore, community-based strategies can focus on empowering women, reaching out to men, and changing the beliefs and attitudes that permit abusive behaviour. Only when women are treated as equal members of society will attitudes toward violence, and violent acts against women change from being an invisible norm into a shocking aberration.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
Both authors have read and approved the final manuscript. DA: Major role in study conception, data extraction, analyses, and writing of the manuscript. JA: Study conception, discussion, and manuscript writing