A Theoretical Framework for Understanding Conflict Persistence in Ethnically Heterogeneous Nigerian States

This study develops an original theoretical framework for understanding why conflicts persist in ethnically heterogeneous Nigerian states, addressing a significant gap in existing conflict studies theory which inadequately accounts for the specific institutional, historical, and structural configurations of Nigerian subnational conflict systems. Drawing on an extensive multi-site comparative research design, qualitative data were gathered from Plateau, Kaduna, Taraba, and Rivers states through elite interviews with 60 conflict scholars, government officials, traditional leaders, and community peace practitioners. Comprehensive documentary analysis of conflict incident archives from 2015 to 2024 supplemented primary data collection. The proposed framework integrates structural grievance theory, elite mobilisation theory, and institutional legitimacy models into a composite conflict persistence model that identifies eight causal mechanisms operating across macro, meso, and micro levels of Nigerian conflict systems. The framework addresses the theoretical gap between universal conflict persistence theories and the specific configuration of identity politics, oil rent distribution, and federalism-generated grievances in Nigeria. Findings from testing the framework across the four study states confirm its explanatory power for predicting conflict persistence trajectories with significantly higher accuracy than existing single-level models. Theoretical contributions include the concept of compounding legitimacy deficits as a mechanism sustaining conflict cycles in multi-ethnic Nigerian states. Recommendations include adopting the framework as an analytical tool for national conflict risk assessment and developing state-specific conflict management strategies based on the identified operative mechanisms. Keywords: conflict persistence, theoretical framework, ethnic heterogeneity, Nigeria, subnational conflict.