Social capital and civil war: The Dinka communities in Sudan's civil war

It is generally assumed that violent conflict has a negative effect on social capital, and war zones are considered to be 'zones of social capital deficiency'. This article challenges this position, and attempts to develop a more nuanced understanding of the status of social capital in the context of Sudan's civil war. The empirical findings clearly question any simplistic assumption that conflict erodes social capital. While it is true that certain types of social capital have been a casualty of civil war, the opposite is the case in other communities. The article explains this difference by drawing a distinction between 'endogenous' and 'exogenous' counter-insurgency warfare. Communities in southern Sudan that were exposed to endogenous counter-insurgency warfare experienced a loss of social capital, but where exogenous violence dominated, there has been a deepening and strengthening of bonding social capital among and within communities. SINCE THE END OF THE COLD WAR, CIVIL WARS have become endemic to many African countries and the continent has the highest incidence of intense civil wars of any world region. This upsurge of violence has undoubtedly had a considerable negative impact on the socio-economic structures of rural communities, resulting in loss of lives as well as widespread disruption and loss of productive assets and capacity. There is also a general perception that civil wars are eroding or weakening social capital, even leading to the breakdown of organized society. Jeremy Swift, for example, has noted that social capital, as one of the bases for survival in African rural societies, is being deliberately targeted by counter-insurgency warfare and often becomes one of the first casualties of civil war. 1 Its destruction, or absence, in turn makes civil war even more likely. In most studies on civil wars, investment in social capital in the 'war zone' is per-*Luka Biong Deng (lukabiongus@yahoo.com)