A common policy response to female genital mutilation/cutting (“FGM/C”) is the enactment of criminal prohibitions. The implementation of such prohibitions requires significant state capacity, which is often associated with the coercion. We examine compliance with anti-FGM/C law in Burkina Faso and Kenya, two countries which are thought to have markedly different state capacity and where the practice of FGM/C has been widespread. Using a hard-case comparison and both qualitative and quantitative approaches, including a list experiment to elicit accurate responses regarding the current state of FGM/C practice, we find that Burkina Faso and Kenya have achieved comparatively similar compliance with their respective anti-FGM/C laws. We explain this surprising finding by pointing to the different implementation approaches taken by each state, one coercive and one facilitative, and the degree to which those approaches were well-matched to the attitudes of their respective populations. This paired comparison suggests that coercively weak states may still be able to secure compliance with their laws. It also suggests that academics and policymakers alike should consider the numerous other capacities states possess beyond simple coercion.

中文翻译：

---

强制与便利：反女性生殖器切割法的背景和实施

对女性生殖器切割（“FGM/C”）的共同政策回应是制定刑事禁令。实施此类禁令需要强大的国家能力，这通常与强制相关。我们检查了布基纳法索和肯尼亚对反 FGM/C 法律的遵守情况，这两个国家被认为具有明显不同的国家能力，并且 FGM/C 的做法很普遍。使用硬案例比较以及定性和定量方法，包括一个列表实验，以得出关于 FGM/C 实践当前状态的准确回应，我们发现布基纳法索和肯尼亚在各自的反 FGM/ C 法律。我们通过指出每个州采取的不同实施方法来解释这一令人惊讶的发现，一种强制性的和一种促进性的，以及这些方法与其各自人群的态度完全匹配的程度。这种配对比较表明，强制力较弱的国家可能仍然能够确保遵守其法律。它还建议学者和政策制定者都应该考虑国家拥有的许多其他能力，而不仅仅是简单的强制。