As a victory of colonial interests over African interests, the ‘’extraversion’’ and ‘’monoculture’’ of African economies is widely denounced and rebuked. The exploitation is likely to reap great monetary benefits however the risks entailed in extreme specialization should be carefully set. Nevertheless, considering the execution of capitalism system in the colonies sooner or later, several questions were raised about the distribution of cost and benefits, and the investment measures needed to make the difference to earn a competitive advantage owing to the colonies location. The concept of balance of powers, and ideology conflicts between various interest groups gripped the African colonies. The diversions between the ‘’settler’’ and ‘’peasant’’ economies were the basic differences. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effects of British Colonialism on contemporary African Development: A comparative study on Nigeria & South Africa. In order to do so secondary literature review was adopted as a research methodology.
Chapter One: Introduction
A long history is shared by the African colonization. The European Scramble for Africa during late 19th and 20th century exists to be the most significant period. The religious, economic, social and political factors driven native African society was subjected to bigger cultural discords. To defend and instigate their existence, Europeans brought rituals and customs in Africa (Woods, 2014).
According to Davis & Tan (2014) for racial and economic reasons, Africa seemed attractive to the European rulers. In fact, the trade posts, settlements and ports of call along the oceanic coasts of African continent were established by the Portuguese, the first ever Europeans in 1446. The African continent offered an open trading market for Germany, France and Britain, with overall low selling and more purchasing from the expatriates (Shillington, 2005). After the event, the African State was shared among the European countries, who sought enforcing facets of their society.
Pennycook (2014) highlighted some interesting aspects of the intricate process of colonization explaining that the colonies reformed with significant impact of France and England. The idea of ‘Imperial Monarchy’ was used both by the British and the Germans. The French however, had to grapple with union of Africans into a democratic institution (Grinker, 2010). The modern values in the entire process over took few of the native values and institutions. The domestic course of action of progression and state establishment in Africa were thwarted by colonization and gave away bequests of political instability and corruption (Tangie, 2006). In fact, the researchers have prejudiced opinions; some opined that only Africans could bring positive changes while other believed that presence of Europeans yielded productive output. However, no definite inference can be drawn since not all the steps taken by the colonizers produced same and constructive results. As an effect, Africa presently is a fusion of language, customs, traditions and people etc (Cain & Hopkins, 2014).
The study is intended to inspect the African societies with respect to the colonizers and the several aspects that impacted the colonial economic development. As a case study, in order to determine the parallels and disparities between sovereign and previous colonial states, a comparison among three countries will be done. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the power of England was expanded and consolidated by the fall of the empire of Napoleon. At the same time, the intervention of the Emperor in Spain and Portugal favoured the independence of Spanish America and Brazil. The decline of Dutch rule is also produced, as Holland, allied to the Emperor, was stripped by the Cape Colony by the British in 1806. In the same period, the sale of Louisiana to EEUU and independence of Haiti, the French empire almost disappears (Lugard, 2013).
These events trigger two consequences; first ruin other favours to British imperialism, which prevail during the nineteenth century; and second American independence makes it clear that the continent no longer served as a field of European colonial expansion. Therefore, hereinafter powers seek other continents (Nunn, 2007).
The aim of this research is to present an analysis of the effects of British Colonialism on contemporary African Development: A comparative study on Nigeria & South Africa.
Fenske (2014) states that the Africa’s current economic situations can better are comprehended by studying its history and the influences exercised by colonizers such as France and England. However certain questions need to be responded to speak about various matters.
The study will focus on answering the following set of questions:
- What role was played by the colonial powers in the expansion of the African colonies?
- Moreover: Did they carry their religion, mentality, institutions, political and economic systems in the colonies?
- Do sovereign states progress swiftly than the colonized republics?
- What were the differences among the sovereign, French and British colonized states?
Disputes arising from this competition led the Berlin Conference (1884-1885), which even convened under humanitarian pretexts and antislavery, marked the de facto partition of most of the continent among participating nations (Spear, 2003). Thus, France stayed in West and Equatorial Africa; England settled in many parts, except in the central strip; Germany, who had arrived late to the colonial race, tried to lost time also settled in several areas; Belgium took the Congo (now the Democratic Republic of Congo) (Acemoglu, Johnson & Robinson, 2000); Portugal expanded its traditional enclaves of Guinea-Bissau, Angola and Mozambique with getting the archipelago of Cape Verde and the islands of Sao Tome and Principe; Italy was introduced in Somalia and Eritrea; while Spain was left with Equatorial Guinea today, after signing a treaty with Portugal. Around the black continent only the independence of Liberia (which depended USA) and Ethiopia was respected (Ashcroft, Griffiths & Tiffin, 2003).
This scenario led not only to the First World War (1914-1918) was also waged in Africa, but also were sent to fight in Europe hundreds of thousands of Africans (it is estimated that this number only brushed 200,000 in 1918) (Englebert, 2000). Similarly, after the end of the Great War, Germany lost all its African colonial empire, and reconfiguring the continent in colonial map. During the wars, the colonial system was able to consolidate, breaking the traditional mould and causing a profound change in African attitudes to flush them of all identity and self-esteem in colonial Africa the word civilization was reserved exclusively to the behaviour of whites, no matter how cruel they were (Mbembé & Rendall, 2002). Furthermore, colonization also greatly marked the further development of independence, as countries were oriented monoculture or mono-production, neglecting food products and condemning them to dependence upon the precipitous drop in the price of raw materials; he favoured the city and countryside forgot; or the radial nature of the communications, leaving many areas in utter marginalization prevailed (Austin, 2008).
The passage of the Second World War, however, made it different dyes. First, Africa hosted some military campaigns only fleetingly and casual. Second, the war was instrumental in changing mind-sets regarding colonial rule, with the emergence of a more educated, demanding and nationalist basis elite that took shape with the so-called Pan-Africanist movement that highlighted some figures that years later would become leaders of independence (Lugard, 2013): Nkrumah (Ghana), Kenyatta (Kenya), Awolowo and Azikiwe (Nigeria), Abrahams (South Africa), Wallace-Johnson (Sierra Leone), Banda (Malawi), Toure (Guinea), Kaunda ( Zambia) or Lumumba (RD Congo). Third, the new world order was going to be led by two powers, the Soviet Union and the US, profoundly anti-colonialist. The first because it believed that colonialism was the result of capitalism; the second because it sought emancipation from colonial world to international relations and rights to free trade be extended equally to all people (Herbst, 2014).
The structure of this thesis is organized as follows:
- Chapter 1 Introduction
This chapter provides a discussion of the background of the study. The research problem stated. The research aim, questions and the research objectives are then stated. After this, the structure of the research is presented.
- Chapter 2 Literature Review
This chapter will present extensive literature review on colonialism and its theories.
- Chapter 3 Research Methodology
This chapter will discuss the development of the methodology of this research study. Moreover, the operational definitions, scaling, data collection methods and sampling for this study will also be discussed. In addition, the statistical techniques and tests will be discussed.
- Chapter 4 Results and Discussion
This chapter will discuss the normality and descriptive statistics of the data of this research study. After this is the presentation and discussion of the results of the methodology.
- Chapter 5 Conclusion
This chapter will discuss the conclusions and recommendations of this research study. The research contributions and research limitations of this study will also be discussed.
The consequences of the implementation of the growth theory in African States in analysed in this section of the research. The cons of economic growth theories and their implementations have been examined by Alfred Ndi, in his research paper, Why economic growth theories became a fiction of development in postcolonial Africa: Critiquing foreign aid policy as discourse’’ (2010). The research paper attributes new ideologies, dependency and power as the causes of impoverishment and a misfit to boost the GDP or per capita income and social progression, as observed in Africa (Cogneau & Moradi, 2014).
The Europeans and Americans introduced and executed economic growth theories as foreign aid policies. They are the strategies that are aimed in equipping and modernizing the African societies with the flow of technology and capitals from the west. According to the ‘gap theory’, the progression of the less developed countries is obstructed merely by two gaps, the investment and domestic savings needed for development and the import and export revenues required for advancement (Cogneau & Moradi, 2014). This theory is an extension of Harrod-Domar growth model. The economic growth of a State is regulated by its resources and its importing capacity. When the domestic savings are scarce, they result in ‘saving gaps’. However, the ‘foreign exchange gap’ refers that the capital transfers and exports value may be inadequate to offer maximum growth like the domestic saving (Ray, 1998). Growth rate formula (Kuper, 2014):
Figure 1: Colonizers Owned Africa Back in 1925
Source: Grinker, Af Roy Richard, Lubkemann S., Steiner C. (2010), Perspectives on Africa: A reader in culture, history and representation, Wiley- Blackwell (second edition)
Herbst (2014) explained this theory states that the foreign aid should have cut down the technology and production expenses as well as fended few foreign exchange deficits. Nevertheless, the Africans are not in a state to urge advancement by raising the domestic savings, the economists believe. Contrary, some developed the notion that few African countries are unable to import independently (ibid). Over a trillion dollar aid based development projects have had been introduced in the last couple of decades to upgrade the African living standards. Conversely, the poverty rate continues to intensify with a poor, declining economic growth with millions of people left to suffer. Over the decade, the poverty rates have augmented to 43% state the UNEC for Africa. According to which women make up to 80%, living on less than a dollar per day. The high ratios of HIV AIDS women patients and unequal resource distribution between the genders are said to be the primary causes as per Davidson (2014).
Loans and gifts given by the rich countries to the poor ones with desired amount of interests are defined as aids by Dambisa Moyo. The World War II event and the appalling conditions that occurred encouraged the implementation of the aid policy. These aids are usually taken to make investments in birth control, HIV/AIDs and educational programs along with the infrastructures. Aids provided to Africa were aimed at improvising different sections. For instance in the last 50 years, it worked towards infrastructure transformation, poverty eradication, raising interest rates and solving the economic issues. These measures were put forward in 1960, 1970, 1980 and 1990s respectively. The high interest rates resulted in accumulation of debt to the government and hence the western communities stepped forward to solve the financial crisis (Cogneau & Moradi, 2014).
According to Connant (1898), aid donation is regarded as an incentive to progress too, while other scholars view it merely a means of creating Western dependency. However, generally, higher life expectancies along with income support were observed, especially in Japan, Western Europe, Australia and North America. Gradually the life expectancies proliferated. By 1820 and 1998, these States had higher income levels than the rest of world, seven to one, to express as a ratio. Presently, the ration is twenty to one between Africa and the United States. This gap continues to widen. The burgeoning Asian countries in the last few decades have realized that significant level of catch-up is achievable. However, since 1973, the world’s economic growth has slowed down substantially.
This research paper further studies the causes of impoverishment and the colonialism effects on the society. Various explanations are offered by the slow African growth debate (Cogneau & Moradi, 2014).
External factors have contributed to the slow progression of Africa, it is widely believed. The exchange rates and trade policies during the 1980s were denunciated as the core grounds by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and external donors (Collier and Gunning, 1999). Additionally, several other factors contribute to the ill-development. Africa is a landlocked State emphasizes Jeffery Sachs and his co-authors. The technological developments in Africa are greatly halted due to the communication and transportation barriers that the continent dwellers face.
Until around 1500, the arrival of the first Europeans, the Atlantic coast and Sahara desert in the north had been cut off with the rest of the world (Cain & Hopkins, 2014). The unfavourable climatic conditions are one of the contributing factors to the ill-development of the State. Life expectancies are greatly reduced due to malaria and other diseases. Hence comparative, the life expectancies in Africa are low, see Table 2.1. The agricultural activities are affected by the unpredictable rainfalls and leached soils that happen due to the tropic influence. To ensure good agriculture and farming practices, it is necessary to fertilize and irrigate the soil since the basement complex is one of the very old types of rock that varies in proportion from localities to localities. It is low in micro nutrients (Acemoglu et al 2014).
It required people to invest on the properties that they did not own. Hence people preferred making use of the assets for personal use rather than investing on them. Another hitch to the African State is its dry climate, which stimulates low population density (30.51 km in 200511). Significantly the numbers of migrations elevated from 1960 to 2000, raising the figure from 9 to 16 million, estimate the United Nations (Zlotnik, 2004). The ethnic diversity and transportation costs pose challenge to the economy and market integration.
Moreover, due to the low population density, Africa has high natural benefactions per capita (Wood et al., 1998). Africa is a rich natural resource region with huge diamonds, gold, crude oil and strategic mineral deposit along with good production of rubber, coffee, cocoa and world’s tropical hardwood.
The high export rates make manufacturing less competitive along with appreciation of the exchange rates. Additionally, the high dependence on the natural resources stirs civil wars, which is quite common in Africa (Kuper, 2014). To develop a country, the natural resources are used to meet and satisfy the basic human needs, such as shelter, food, and clothes. Dutch disease is one of the theories that are employed to study the natural resources’ economics. This theory states that the sectors output and manufacturing competitiveness decline with increase in natural resources revenues. It de-stabilizes the nation’s economy by raising the exchange rates (Acemoglu et al 2014).
Davis & Tan (2014) discussed that in the resource boom creates two effects on an economy: the resource movement and spending effect. Resource movement can be defined as the transference of the labour force from a non-booming to a booming sector which in turn also leads to the significant units of factors of the production shifts. When the extra tax revenue collected from the booming sector is spent indirectly or directly by the employer or the government, then the spending effect occurs (ibid).
Theory presented by Simon Kuznets 12 suggests that at the primitive stages of development, inequality is high to the degree that it nosedives. Investment in physical capital is usually the primary method to boost economic growth. The high investors and savers are offered the high return on investments, the allocation of some resources, this encourages and promotes inequality. As a consequence, the booming sector employees receive comparatively high wages. The unbalanced theory refers to the fact that in order to substantiate advancement in all the economic sectors, the primitive investments, often referred as ‘big push’ should not be even. This theory suggests investment in the leading industries as part of the initial development measures, which accordingly can open up opportunities for the lingering companies (Kuper, 2014).
The extraction, exportation and contribution of the natural resources to the world’s development has had been a prime concern for the Africans for the last 40 years. Africa on average possess 8% of the world gas reserves, produces 9% of the oil and 5 % of the gas, however, it exports only 15% of its total produced oil. Additionally, 60, 40 and 30 % of the world’s diamond, phosphate and cobalt reserves are there in Africa, state the Deutsche Bank Research Report (2007) (Salisu, 2001). Hence, the oil gas and mining, the extractive industries are the major revenue generating sources to many African countries. Nevertheless, despite the huge natural reserves, Africa tends to be a backward country due to less technological development. The United States and other Asian countries believe that through technological introduction and development the economic issues can be alleviated.
However, natural resources do not solely contribute to the backwardness of Africa. Levine and Easterly (1977) identified language diversity as one of the important factors to contribute to the cause. There are around 900 language groups in Africa, as identified by the linguists. In actual it is wrong: because religious and ethnic diversity in reality result in peaceful and better societies (Collier and Hoeffler, 1999). Ethnic diversity influences politics. A democratic society is to remain unaffected with difference of opinion however under a dictatorship government is likely to face trials. Hence it can be said that it is not the ethnic diversity that poses issues but the presence or absence of democratic governance make the difference. Colonial heritage could be attributed as one of the slow-development causes. The African continent is divided into small countries, which often deprive them from the economic advantages that they could have otherwise availed. Under strict government funds, it might be difficult for a small state to maintain and run its affairs. With small domestic markets, the scale of production is also relatively very less. Hence, they cannot compete with the large economies (Collier et., al 1999). With high risks, the investors are reluctant to invest (Kuper, 2014).
The following section of the paper tries to explain and identify whether colonialism can be regarded as a contributing cause to Africa’s impoverishment or not. Few steps by the colonizers did bring benefit to the region however, not every effort paid off well. In old times, the economists due to restricted resources and materialistic availability were unable to reveal the many underlying challenges faced including several diseases. However, there has been a general awareness about the issues and hence the advanced states shall step forward to assist the country to tackle and resolve its issues (Acemoglu et al 2014). The political rulers in the twentieth century mismanaged and misruled and Africa was a neo and colonial rule territory. The generation after 1960s, began to blame the former rulers for corruption, bad leadership and lavish culture, the ignoring values of creativity and hard work, which according to them played significant role in destabilizing the economic state of the country (Tangie, 2006). Keeping in view all the conditions, it can be stated that the African themselves are responsible for bringing deterioration to the State. It is important for the African to realize their worthy contributions. Many African countries are contributing to the prosperity of the European countries by offering cheap labour services, the raw materials and markets etc. African labour played vital role in the development of the European and the United State and the Atlantic System. Slavery was a common practice. Most of the slaves brought to the coast were assisted by the African leaders. In fact, it was during the colonial rule that Africa integrated with the international system (Siemenson, 1999).
The term ‘colonialism’ refers to the European settlement and the exercise of their powers, state the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Hence, colonialism is understood as a relationship between the native innocent people and the rule exercised by the foreign invaders upon them. They affect the lives of the dwellers. And often try to reinforce their own tradition, norms and order while displaying superiority over them. The intervention of the post 1885 ‘Scramble for Africa’, the partition of the continent between European powers and encounter with West portrays the present picture of Africa. However, after then, the map of Africa changed with liberation from colonialism. Only Ethiopia and Liberia could free themselves, still they were not completely free. Significantly over a long period of times, for over sixty to eighty years, the colonial rule lasted. Various changes occurred in various aspects of life, including traditions and culture. The international integration emerged Africa as an inferior race. The African people, the leaders were humiliated at the hand of the colonial conquest. It demonstrated racial arrogance (Toyin, 2005).
Competition and conflicts emerged between ethnic groups as a result of colonialism. The question is: To what level can Africa self-develop? Before the arrival of the Europeans, Africa was self- developing. However, colonialism laid down new hindrances with different economic and political goals. The end of colonialism was the beginning of self- development for the Africans. With colonialism came the idea of state-building. The foreign invaders regarded themselves as the change agents. Good education facilities, infrastructures and advanced export systems were developed by the colonial powers to make the colonialism mission lucrative. The socially used land and properties with commercialization gained monetary significance (Cogneau & Moradi, 2014). The global market concept was unknown to the Africans before the colonial period and hence the peasants and farmers used to grow crops for their personal use or for trading purpose only. Transatlantic slave trade as process has both pros and cons. It benefitted the colonies and produce adverse impacts on several African countries. It elevated violence, drained people and gradually the economy became slavery dependent. The international trade brought deep negative impacts on the society, the African people and goods (ibid). Unpolished goods, one or two commodities are sold by most African nations. They intend to sell the goods in accordance with the global market prices. There are very few domestic industries in Africa, excluding the multinational companies. Hence, as a consequence of colonialism, the African countries cannot rely directly on the local industries. Therefore, the African States are likely to be prone to the global market trends. Largely same products and produced and exported, and hence there remains very slightly favourable trading terms for the African countries to bargain. Colonialism has resulted in high import and export dependency to the African countries. To survive, it is necessary for them to import all types of food, machines and cars (Cain & Hopkins, 2014).
Important political modifications and social order changes took place in several African nations, partly due to the European governance exercised in almost 10% of the continent in the year 1880 ( Mentan, 2002). Except Liberia and Ethiopia, all the States were divided among the European countries. Italy and Belgium had small portions while England and France exercised the greatest colonial powers. Tanganyika, Cameroon, Togo and Namibia colonies for a short period were under Germany control. Europeans with the investment objective resided in a scare populated area. Additionally, exploitation was the objective of the Europeans, say the Africans. Cash crop based economy was developed by them. The cash crops earned good amount to the farmers and traders, but price were higher for purchasing the food. Moreover, Europeans used people as ‘labour basket’ since the colony was short of resources (Toyin, 2005).
While American countries achieved their independence and Asia presents colonies in confined areas (northern Russia, Japan, China and the United States to the east, and France and England to the south), Africa is the continent that awakens desires of colonizing great powers in the nineteenth century. In it converge English and French; Belgian, German, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. In 1880 he was an unknown continent; in 1914, he was totally divided between the European powers and only survived by two independent countries: Libya and Ethiopia. Pennycook (2014) highlighted some interesting aspects of the intricate process of colonization are listed below.
- Occupation of the coast: The occupations are initiated on the coast, to move into with the ultimate goal of reaching the opposite shore and found a continuous territory, which was not met in any case (although England almost made it from north to south, France and Portugal east to west).
- Legal aspect: The Berlin conference says it is the effective occupation of the territory, not its discovery which grants the right to exploit the occupied country. Colonization of other powers is then accelerated.
- Penetration by river valleys: With the occupation of the valley, is considered to be entitled to occupy the entire watershed and colony formation on it. Such a case occurs in the Nile, the Congo and Niger. Colonization of other powers is then accelerated.
- Gradual and slow Occupation: At first I did not think of colonization itself, but in the formation of coastal factories use as bases. The imperialist doctrine form of late, when the colonies were settled.
- Strategic Point: The key to African occupation is in Egypt and the Nile Valley; between Englishmen who defend and French who want to reach him.
The Mediterranean coast is occupied by France, from 1830, under the reign of Charles X. In 1870, Algeria had 250,000 French, while in 1914 this figure had risen to 800,000. On Tunisia’s interest poured France and England; after the construction of the canal, also German. Protectorate in the 1881 Treaty of Bardo is established, allowing a temporary military occupation and the impossibility of self-government for protected, according to the convention of La Marsa in 1883.
In 1878, Egypt cannot pay the interest on the English and French Canal shares and is forced to entrust their financial management to the two great powers a nationalist movement causes the killing of Europeans, which serves England excuse to land troops and occupy the country, although he kept the administration. Sudanese attacks forced the British to move south along the Nile Valley.
Davis & Tan (2014) discussed that in the western coasts three rivers penetration point three countries: the Belgian Congo, which inherit the rights of international society, chaired by Leopoldo II are expanded. The complexity of colonization in this area causes the convening of the Congress of Berlin in 1885, which determines the existence of a Free State of the Congo, although under Belgian administration. Furthermore, the French zone is delimited and an international zone is established. Moreover, the French trace the Senegal and Niger English.
Salisbury and Bismarck in 1886 divided the land: for the English north and south for Germans arrangement under the German interest in the area and the need for the British to defend their bases in Zanzibar. The Italians, led by Francesco Crespi, from the port of Massawa on the Red Sea are expanded to Eritrea and then to Ethiopia. He recognizes the right of Somalia, as compensation.
The last chapters of African conquest are located on the Nile, when the French, with Russian support demanding the withdrawal of the British, while penetrating into Chad. In 1895, England warns France of an advance to the Nile. There is still an area unoccupied, Sudan. The British invade to help the Italians defeated in Eritrea. France advances to Sudan from west England from the north and south, being in Fashoda (Kuper, 2014). Then France withdraws and leaves exclusively control the Nile Valley to England, who achieved an almost continuous empire from Cairo to Cape Town, only interrupted by the German East Africa.
Africa has been divided; England has controlled the most prized areas, the Nile and Southern France has done the same with the west coast. has established two colonies on both oceans (Angola and Mozambique), but has not been able to join since the English controlling them in Rhodesia, as in France in Fashoda. They are crosses between an empire that runs north to south and another that goes from east to west (Kuper, 2014).
Africa was divided, too, including Spain, Belgium, Germany and Italy.
At the beginning of the twentieth century there were only two independent nations: the tiny republic of black
Liberia, on the northwest coast, formed by former slaves freed by the Civil War in the United States, and the empire of Abyssinia, in the northwest. It is because the movement of emancipation of the peoples of Africa, the political division of the territory varied fundamentally (Kahler, 2014).
By the influence of Marxist theories and propaganda, there is currently some confusion in the use of terms colonization and imperialism. The rule of power is, according to a widespread version, all its colonies, however, in classical antiquity, colonies and empires differed profoundly, both in extent and nature (Acemoglu, Johnson & Robinson, 2002). The former colony was a phenomenon analogous to the spread of plants or multiplication by segmentation of the lower animals. The political divisions or the desire for independence in new lands led to a series of new groupings. The colony was therefore primarily emigration. But emigration with a precise political nature: the creation of a different country of origin state, but joined this by generating beliefs alliances in case of danger (Woolman, 2001). The empire had a different dynamic; Imperator in Latin is generally imperium is over. The rule does not have a demographic, but military base; is not the emigration but the conquest. It is a phenomenon of expansion that leads to the total absorption of the people subjected. The rule is, then, an amalgam, a balance, according to the respective power of dominator and dominated. It is both a factor of unity, peace, movement, change and therefore of civilization and progress (Joseph, 2003).
Imperialism in the modern sense is applied to the intention of a country that aspires to impose its political, cultural and economic influence in other territories beyond their own borders (Lange, Mahoney & Vom Hau, 2006).
According to Englebert (2000) although imperialism and colonialism voices have a similar meaning and can be used interchangeably at times, should establish certain differences between them; colonialism involves a formal political control implies territorial annexation and loss of sovereignty of the colonized country. Imperialism has a wider meaning which refers to control or influence exerted on another region, whether or not formally and directly, and whether they affect the economic or political terrain (Nunn, 2007).
Then it is possible to speak of colonialism when a people or government extends its sovereignty and establish political control over another territory as a source of wealth and power. This relationship ends when the subjugated people reaches its sovereignty or incorporated into the political structure of the metropolis on equal terms (Acemoglu, Johnson & Robinson, 2000).
Trade relations have changed considerably throughout history. Some colonies have been densely populated, while barely reaching new population to another (Herbst, 2014). Some have been subjected to stringent control, while in others there has been a brief and informal control. Some are based overseas, while others have settled in adjacent territories. Colonialism of the modern era began in the mid-fifteenth century and can be divided into two phases. The first extends from approx. 1415-1800 and the second from 1800 to World War II
Colonialism, as we have seen, can be analysed from various historical edges, but in this report, like many scholars, we will understand the historical process as occurred between the sixteenth and twentieth centuries, through which Europe expands to other continents conquering territories and establishing colonies on them, a process that would have consequences for commercial, political and ideological sense. Special emphasis is given to the second stage of this process (Ashcroft, Griffiths & Tiffin, 2003).
The tendency of people to achieve their territorial expansion and political domination has appeared from remote antiquity (already in the beginning of the story), until recent times, presenting, in the course of humanity, various shapes and obeying different causes. We have witnessed the emergence and disappearance of great empires in all parts of the world (Spear, 2003).
In the sense of empire and dominion and universal expansion, the Egyptian empire (Menes, 3,300 BC), the Akkadians in Chaldea (Sargon, 2700 BC), Mesopotamian (Babylonian, Assyrian) were established (Mbembé & Rendall, 2002); which arose in the Mediterranean coasts (Medes, Hittites, Persians and Alexander the Great) Sea in old age; the Arab empires, Sassanid and Turkish in the Middle Ages; or Spanish, French, Dutch and British colonial empires in the modern age (Mbembé & Rendall, 2002).
Between antiquity and modern times include Greek and Roman, with very different characteristics each other, but both of profound influence on the subsequent history. The Far East has known the existence of Chinese and Mongolian empires, and pre-Columbian America flourished the great Mayan, Inca and Aztec empires (Austin, 2008).
These ancient empires can also be understood as political forms that allow the spread of ideas that are an expression of interest for many human groups. Phoenicia, consisting of a village of explorers and merchants, is regarded as the first colonizing nation; the Phoenicians established settlements along the Mediterranean coast in 1100 (Irobi, 2005). Colonizing spirit was guided mainly by its desire to expand and control the trade. By the eighth century many of the Greek city-states began their rapid expansion along the coast of northern Aegean, the Black Sea and the south of the Italian peninsula (Irobi, 2005). They moved the need for arable land to sustain a growing population and the desire to improve trade. The two most famous, Sparta and Athens were colonial powers to the VI and V centuries (Irobi, 2005); the first expanded into the mainland of Greece; the second from overseas. The city of Carthage was originally a Phoenician colony, but ended up being a colonial power. Roma challenged Carthage, overcoming it in the Punic Wars.
The period of the Middle Ages was not a period of major settlements overseas, but the Vikings expanded their domains in the North Atlantic at this time (Englebert, 2000). From the late fifteenth century, Europe was conquering America, most of the islands of the Pacific, much of Southeast Asia, Africa and, since 1919, the Middle East. Even countries that remained independent (Persia, Thailand, Liberia and Abyssinia) suffered political influence and economic tutelage of the West (Englebert, 2000).
Since 1960, the Sub Saharan Africa, the lowest of any major world region has expanded slowly and haltingly, with notorious output per head. However, over the time, there have been alterations in performance and policy. The 1980s witnessed a watershed with structural adjustment in policy: a fundamental shift from administrative to market means of resource allocation. Except Guinea, the change was less dramatic in most of the former French colonies. Outside the franc zone, in the mostly former British zone, the maintenance of a convertible currency had enabled governments to avoid some of the imposed quality controls and supplementary prices. Until 1973-1975, the aggregate performance in growth has been pretty respectable (Jerven 2009). The adoption of structural adjustment in the decade or following; paradoxically they were negative or stagnant. The gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate at an average of 5% a year was observed before the Chinese-led boom in world commodity prices eased the region, before the food and fuel price hikes, the international financial crisis and great recession in 2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively (IMF 2009).
Both before and after the turning point in the early to mid-1970s, there were notable exceptions to the general growth trends. A general interesting contrast was developed by Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire: different colonial heritages with similarly-sized neighbors with relatively similar factor endowments and geographical features. A magnified version of the standard growth trajectory was done by Cote d’Ivoire. From 1960-1978 (Berthelemy and Soderling 2001, 324-5) an annual growth of 9.5% GDP was observed. However, following the civil war the progression remained halted. A completely opposite thing in the meantime was done by Ghana. In 1983, the Ghana GDP per capita was barely high, in 1957 at independence the structural adjustment. After 1983, during the quarter century, annual growth of Ghana reached nearly 5%. With the falling of Ghana region, Cote d’Ivoire was emerging. Since its independence in 1966, Botswana was the only Sub-Saharan economy to sustain growth over three and four decades. 9.3% was the average annual growth of Botswana (Berthelemy and Soderling 2001, 324-5).
Through various political and scholarly starting-points, similar conclusion can be drawn about the history of economic development in Africa, the ideological and theoretical feature debates. A year ago, the radical nationalists and dependency theorists regarding the colonial impact, strongly urged the prosecution case (Amin 1972; Rodney 1972), which however is now under hegemony of the ‘’rational choice’’ growth economists. The European colonialism in the subcontinent is the largely attributed cause for Africa’s poverty end at the end of the 20th century, argued by James A. Robinson et al (2001; 2002). According to Robinson, Johnson and Acemoglu, the European colonies in North America and Australia and the economic development in its areas, are the results of its extraction based settlements and introduction of its various institutions (the government systems and private property rights).
Palmer and Parsons (1977) believe that formation of European colonies in Africa was a strategy to obtain secure and cheap land from the natives and to oblige them to sell their labour to mine-owners, planters and the European farmers. The Europeans effectively monopolized the major private sector segments-the ‘’peasant colonies’’, the areas that were under significant African ownership. The colonial administrations then coercively recruited labour for its State and private enterprises (Fall 1993; Northrup 1988). The colonial government considering their long term goal, were however, reluctant in promoting the emergence of markets in African occupied lands, both in ‘’peasant’’ and ‘’settler’’ colonies (Philips 1989). The non-introduction of a complete capitalist system in the privately owned properties was the most wrongful work of the colonist, state the ‘’rational choice’’ and ‘independence theory institutionalisms. Hence, in order to drive the self- sustained economic growth, they gave intensive rise to competition.
The small group of liberal development economists from 1950-1970 made a narrower but important argument. In search of development in mixed economies, when the development economists (particularly but not exclusively to those writing in French) tended to a favor in the leading role for the State ( Hugon 1993; Kilick 1978). For introducing the statutory marketing boards, P.T. Bauer (1953; 1972) attacked the colonial state. Thereby, laying the foundation of what he considered to be deadening State interventionism.
The secondary research for this study began a few months before the actual one in the form of pilot study effects of British Colonialism on contemporary African Development. This chapter focuses on the research methodology, design and procedures that are determined to complete the study goals. In the particular chapter, validity and reliability of the research purpose and research goals are considered relying on the research design, problem statement, research question, and population, informed consent, sampling frame, confidentiality, instrumentation and data collection. The adopted methodology for this research is secondary.
The literature responding for the research development was then informed of the initial study and interested literature was coordinated in a manner of trust and confidentiality through online means of communication as well. In order to have more searches for the online procedure and availing searches for the research modulation, several other emails were sent for the cause in another round because persuasion of that sort was made to believe and communicated in a feasible and assisting manner.
All research searches had the option to withdraw from the study at any time without any obligation and penalty. The results of the study may be published, but the names of research searches will not be used. The main purpose of this research is to create an understanding within the literature about the effects of British Colonialism on contemporary African Development in a long run which is why portability and derivation of literature from such backgrounds and memberships is vital; creating a balanced amount of discussion within the searches was only possible with the help of credibility and a fair responses to the database systems.
Keyword search is the first step when it comes to talking about research methods about epidemiology programs because there are multiple implications and considerations to make when things like literature information and derivation of information from prevailing information are involved. The stock level developments are shown and described within the literature review and keyword search is important to know about the things which are coming in the orderly manner and the ones which will be implied to sustain a continuous production level and services along with the dealings and several other management plans.
During the European ‘’Scramble’’ from 1879 to circa 1905, the Sub-Saharan Africa witnessed the beginning of the colonial rule. Hence in order to understand the colonial legacies, we need to comprehend the differences between the situation and the set trends. Comparative to its low labour, the cultivable land of the area (not everywhere all the time) was the characterizing feature of the area (Hopkins 1973; Austin 2008a). With pre-industrial technology, Africa’s mineral ‘gift’ was either undiscovered or remote to be extract and hence the ‘’resource abundance’’ could do little to benefit them. It was only during the period of decolonization that several chief findings (remarkably of diamonds in Botswana and oil in Nigeria) took place. Pursing intensive cultivation, especially in the absence of animal manure either cost high or made it utterly difficult to carry out the whole process.
The fragile or almost infertile land contributed to the problem. The use of animals, either for transport or ploughing in savannahs and the forest zones was thwarted due to sleeping sickness. There was less farm work largely due to the prevalent dry season that happened majorly because of the extreme seasonality of the annual distribution of the rainfall. The incentive to raise labour productivity in craft production was reduced due to the consequent low opportunity of the dry –season labour. Despite the labour saving and land-extensive characteristics of farming techniques choices, the returns on labour were comparatively low due to the soil thinness (Austin 2008a). And hence, all these reasons explain why the efficiency of African labour was seemingly higher outside Africa. However, over the centuries, Africa witnessed aggravated labour scarcity due to its external trade concept to boost its economy (Austin 2008b; Manning 1990).
A high-degree of self -sufficiency within Africa was encouraged through incentives structure. By the middle of the 20th century, the pre-colonial economies were widely believed to be prodigiously subsistence oriented. This assessment greatly changed in the half- century of the research, particularly for West Africa, where in the 16th and 17th centuries, the strong tendency towards extra-subsistence production was evident. The tendency was immensely damaged by the intensified ‘’Dutch disease’’ effects of the Atlantic slave trade (Inikori 2007; Austin; forthcoming). However, with the abolition of trade and expansion of the West Africans in the local and international market, the tendency was strongly resumed by the first decade of the 19th century. The absence of significant economies of scale in production particularly combined with the relative labour scarcity made the reservation wage rare (the minimum wage rate adequate to motivate people to sell their labour rather than work for themselves) low enough for a would be employer to afford and pay it. Therefore, the slave trading form was majorly adopted by the pre-colonial African markets (Austin 2005; chapter 6, 8; Austin 2008a).
Sustainability and obtainability of political centralization became difficult due to the abundance of land (Herbst 2000). The Atlantic slave trade was greatly facilitated by political fragmentation by allowing the larger States to have stronger incentives and rejection participation capacities in it (Inikori 2003). This fragmentation later aided the Europeans contest. Due to its strong economic base, Ethiopia, as an exception was only successfully able to resist ‘’Scramble. It was the only State that proved the rule, supported long-established and modernizing country with its large agricultural surplus and fertile central provinces.
By no happenstance, majority of the Sub- Saharan Africa was colonized at a time when the Europeans were expanding their industrialized markets in Africa for various products that could be profitably produced in the region. The land -extensive primary production was comparatively better to be done in Africa because of the environmental constraints on intensive agriculture, the land-labour ratio and majorly owing to the specific qualities of particular kinds of lands in various parts of the continent. The native populations, in the West Africa, were progressively taking benefit of the combination of these supply-side characteristics and of access to growing overseas markets. From the 1880s rubber to thousands of tons of palm oil and ground nuts were produced from Senegal to Cameroon, for sale to European merchants (Law 1995).
For the taxpayers in Europe, the Colonial rule in Africa was intended to be cheap. According to the British doctrine, each colony should be fiscally self-supporting. Hence the high revenues were to be utilized to meet the government expenditure. The Ghana Governor Guggisberg in the 1920s through its exports of cocoa beans met the funds required for the creation of a new harbor, more roads and railways to establishing to one of the country’s best known school and hospital. In practice, the French were equally committed to covering costs. In the 1920s, there was a major program of public works in French West Africa. Similarly, the expenditures in Ghana halted for few years, after the State witnessed revenue growth standing along with considerable decline in its export prices (Hopkins 1973, 190).
After the reduction of expenditure during the 1930s depression, particularly during the Second World War, colonial administrations for a variety of reasons found themselves entering the post war era with a new public commitment to accelerate the economic growth of the ruling States. The higher spending redeemed the ‘’developmental’’ language. The metropolitan taxpayers brought out this principle. Nevertheless, Patrick Manning (1998, 123-5) in the French case calculated that relative to the investment done, Africa generated higher tax. Substantial surpluses were accrued by the new statutory export marketing boards in British West Africa by keeping a large edge between the price paid to the producers and the price the boards received for the crop in the world market. In British government bonds, the surpluses were kept in London, as forced savings from African farmers (Rimmer 1992, 41-2). It helped the British metropolitan economy to recuperate from the post-war dollar unavailability.
The specific characteristic of the colonial power made some differences to the European rule afflicted population. The French doctrine of embracing a small minority of Africans into French culture and citizenship and the British dependence on African chiefs as intermediaries (indirect rule) defined the contrast between the two largest empires in Africa. Except the revival of the French from the composition of their respective empires in Africa, economically, the empires shared greater similarities. Like British, the French rule depended on African intercessors, including chiefs, even though, France was much more adamant on ending African monarchies (as in Dahomey, in contrast to the British treatment of the structures and State dynasties of Lesotho, Buganda, Botswana and, after an bungled bid at obliteration, Ashanti). Due to low earning and instable wage paying state, the French in the West Africa made greater use of the forced labour. Because of the particular policy, Colivee, and its use to benefit the white planters rather than the African farmers, the colonial legacy in Cort d’Ivoire and Ghana changed.
Since African cocoa farming took off much more quickly, Ghana was much wealthier at the time of independence while Cote d’Ivoire after a late start by the 1980s was in the process of grabbing up (Hopkins 1973; 218-9).
In the light of valuable research by Denis Cogneau and Thomas Bossuroy (2009), the differences between the legacies of the British and French rule in Africa as a contention in the formation of the African empires, needs to be accepted. Out of the five African countries studied to analyze the social mobility, comparative to the French colonies, i.e. Guinea and Cote d’Ivoire, the British colonies, Uganda and Ghana in their samples appeared to be slack in their links between the occupational achievement, education, migration and origin (Bossuroy and Cogneau 2009, 2). In their sample, they emphasize in comparison to the French colonies, they lay great importance to the investment in education in British colonies. This is a novel and important line of inquiry. Uganda and Ghana were the two major developers of structural adjustment in Africa and were somehow connected with the British legacies hence all these reasons contribute to the favourable conclusion about the former British colonies. And hence, since the mid-1980s they were well suited to offering greater openings for physical, educational and occupational mobility, which was early enough to be partly reflected in the data and which coincided with economic stagnation and then civil war in Cote d’Ivoire. The economy took off in the 1950s and 1960s. The legacy of the era of Corvee and ‘’settler’’ agriculture in Cote d’Ivoire with a difference in the economic landscape is depicted through the contrast. The Ivorian ‘’miracle’’ in the 1990, helped the French colonies in tropical Africa (excluding southern Africa) to earn competitive edge from the 26 former British colonies. The French colonies, in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) had 30% higher per capita incomes (Bossuroy and Cogneau 2009, 45, citing World Bank data).
As a victory of colonial interests over African interests, the ‘’extraversion’’ and ‘’monoculture’’ of African economies if widely denounced and rebuked. The exploitation is likely to reap great monetary benefits however the risks entailed in extreme specialization should be carefully set. Nevertheless, considering the execution of capitalism system in the colonies sooner or later, several questions were raised about the distribution of cost and benefits, and the investment measures needed to make the difference to earn a competitive advantage owing to the colonies location. The concept of balance of powers, and ideology conflicts between various interest groups gripped the African colonies. The diversions between the ‘’settler’’ and ‘’peasant’’ economies were the basic differences. Now let us consider the distinct cases of export agriculture and mining in West and South Africa respectively.
In the nineteenth century, capitalism and the industrial revolution have settled in Europe, with the need to expand in search of raw materials and new markets. In this context, colonialism appears as development doctrine according to which all imperialist power had to build a colonial empire. Also among the European countries began a race for control of Africa. This race will have its formal expression in the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, in which European countries divided the African continent, giving rise to new political and socio-economic units today are African states.
After the supposed independence, many countries changed their name until they tried to redefine their boundaries. But the divisions established Europeans were firmer. The need to consolidate the new state by adopting an official language (Metropolis) has emerged as a puzzle for the new African political configurations. Similarly, they are not the most serious border conflicts in the region, but the internal power struggles and efforts of nation building. Although decolonization, economic relations with former colonies remain privileged but forced. In short, say that European countries control the economic and political life in Africa. This panorama is a commodity of great weight to investigate the ups and downs that have been faced African states today, plying between crises and conflicts of all kinds.
At least three factors define and determine the fundamental bases of the state. It is first of territorial or national space; secondly, of the population whose features vary between States and lay the foundations in human resources of the State; third, the economic resources that allow the survival of the state. Efficiency or weakness of states depends largely control these factors. In Africa, these factors have known a particular evolution that somehow explains the problems that occur there.
Indeed, for more than two decades, the African state has been discussed several times in the intellectual and political circuits, with respect to all aspects of the current experiences of the continent. The reasons for these concerns are manifold; some are related to certain well-founded concerns about the origins, structure, history and the legitimacy of the African State; others, motivated by a biased anti-statism that has, to some extent, come to deny the existence of such State.
In this regard, the African state is about to break the record of the number of qualifiers ever used to describe an institution. It has been described as underdeveloped, corrupt, patrimonial / neo-patrimonial, sold, nepotism, hesitant, hierarchical, community, lazy, Machiavellian, amputee, traditional, conservative, international, Ghost, chimeric, unbalanced, etc. Although most of these adjectives were built and sustained by political economy approaches that prevailed in the discussions on Africa during the 1980-1990 decades, there is no doubt that its use transcends disciplinary barriers.
However, stresses that the problems of the African state acquires its relevance in the academic field in which the boundaries between the different theoretical and conceptual addressing its dimensions (political, economic and social) approaches remain ambiguous. Several researchers have concluded that this situation is a clear reflection of the conceptual and theoretical confusion that exists today to analyse the African state
On that basis, one can achieve better way to understand not only the operation of postcolonial African states, but also the vicissitudes of his painful journey towards finding a real legitimacy and sovereignty. From this analytical platform, it is conceivable to current African States, not a single phenomenon transplant or transfer of State for European-centred, but as the result of a process of hybridization and re-invention wherein intersect, face and combined logical and experiences of State for traditional, colonial, postcolonial type and neo-colonial.
Also, instead of imagining the African state as a mere theorem political science with an invariable and essentially normative approach, it is here to reconstruct the trajectory of African States in their historical dimension, to show that its dysfunctions have an explanatory base. It is in this sense that it can be regarded as an obstacle to any integration effort in Africa. We are also interested raise some background that can explain the current dysfunctions of African states.
From the nineteenth century, most of the African continent became incorporated into the flow of global history in just three generations. European occupation was extraordinarily rapid. In 1879, 90% of the territory was still ruled by Africans. The ratio was reversed in 1900. And in 1914 the consequences of the occupation reached because most Africans.
The Berlin Conference, convened jointly by France and Germany, was held on November 15, 1884 and February 26, 1885. The attending nations were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, Spain, USA France, Britain, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Sweden, Norway and Turkey; as we see, no African country was represented. The Conference was chaired by Bismarck, who in his speech said that the purpose of the conference was to promote the civilization of the African continent opening inside the trade. Then he defined the specific objectives of the meeting: free trade in the Congo and Niger and agreement on the formalities for a valid annexation of territories in the future. He noted also that not enter into questions of sovereignty. And after insisting that the Conference would serve the cause of peace and humanity, Bismarck concluded by giving an impression of uncertainty and ambiguity.
During this conference, occupying three projects were realized: France, with the east-west, between Senegal and Gabon in the Sahara and Sudan to Somalia; Portugal, Africa south of Ecuador, between Angola and Mozambique, and Britain, the north-south axis, from Cairo to Cape Town for East, Central and Southern, and this axis to be imposed after clashes the crisis of the ultimatum (1890) between England and Portugal, and Fashoda incident (1898) between England and France, which resolved with wins British.
Because the European policy of Bismark, Germany joined relatively late colonial deal. Indeed, Chancellor resisted what he could to pressure from supporters of expanding economic groups. In 1882 establishes a German Colonial Society. The best lands were already dimensioned such that Germany occupied some of the less interesting: Togo, Cameroon, South West Africa (now Namibia) and German East Africa (Tanzania).
Around 1904, virtually all of Africa had been divided and subjected to European colonial rule, except some limited areas that were incorporated into his mastery over the early years of the twentieth century. Only two African states were independent, one traditional, Ethiopia, and another relatively recent, the Republic of Liberia. European cities controlled virtually all African territories, which built institutions of government, establishing a domain that is expressed in all aspects and activities.
European action on African colonies, can be viewed from three dimensions: in politics, the establishment and maintenance (with variations) of a compartmentalized administration and colonial regime under control and / or European direct rule. A socioeconomic level, dependency and linking African European capitalist system resources brought a new paradigm of economic activity, (different from that which existed before in Africa), as provided under the initiative and the interests of the European economy with the configuration of a certain social realities; finally, in the ideological-cultural field, a lack of fit between both sets of cultural values, marked by the subjugation of the African to European, and later by a feeling and movement of resistance and opposition to Europe, aimed at reaffirming the African values.
Also, trends and Western conceptions of State were transferred to Africa, i.e. the Westphalian state model was imposed on pre-colonial models.France imposed the idea of an absolutely central in all its colonies unitary state. The British colonial territories were subjected to the tradition of self-government, with a hint administration (indirect rule). This method of administration could entrench the idea of a unitary or federal state, relatively decentralized at the administrative level.
The Belgian colonization in turn, reshaped the social organization of the current Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Rwanda and Burundi towards a neo-feudal structure, which is characterized by an increasing justification of social organization and power. Other colonial administrations followed the same logic imposition of a management model according to your interests. The result of this policy was disastrous, as it led to the emergence of ethnicity as a dominant political factor.
In fact, the incorrect analysis of the colonial powers (who thought bring civilization to Africans) and ethnocentrism of settled government, led manipulations and deviations. Also, at the time of independence, the state formally appeared as the product of a technique of government inherited exclusively from the ancient metropolis, although the authorities should make it work or follow its directives, remained largely influenced by the principles that prevailed before the implementation of the Europeans. It is in this context of domination that new and fragile African states, domination which was coupled by the principle of territoriality formed.
Overtly, constructive overviews of colonial rule in Africa are odd (but see Duignan and Gann 1975). The infrastructure investment, the introduction of mechanized transport, the modern manufacturing development in Belgian Congo and settler economies, the abolition of internal slavery and slave trading and the suppression of intra-African warfare are however, mentioned in many studies. Some economic liberals, excited by the late 20th century wave of economic globalization argue that the British empire pioneered the process through its general opposition to tariff protection (1846- 1931) and by other pro-market measures ( Ferguson 2003; Lal 2004). Due to the high security of the French empire, the tariffs could not be strongly executed in the French colonies. The last 30 years of British rule in Africa did not only see tariffs but also the marketing boards’ creation. John Sender and Sheila Smith (1986) highlighted a fundamental application to the region from the perspective of institutional change. Writing in the tragic optimist convention of Marx’s writings on British reign in India, they highlighted that pay labour was unusual at the starting of colonial leadership and gradually usual by the end of it. For them, as for Bill Warren (1980), colonization was the pioneer of capitalism.
Besides positivity and negativity, another view of colonial leadership, and by inference of its legacy, is that its significance has been very over-rated. There are many ways to this conclusion. Many historians are hit by the swiftness of colonial leadership south of Sahara that is just about sixty years in most of tropical Africa (Ajayi 1969), and by the vulnerability of the colonial State (Herbst 2000). In this context it can probably be claimed that went good in the peasant economies (and cash and crop increase enormously) was mostly the duty of Africans, through their economic consistency and private enterprise, a position represented by Polly Hill (1997). More uncertain are the arguments of Jean-Francois Bayart (1989; 2000). Building on the similar inspections that leaders in Africa have frequently found it difficult to increase big incomes from domestic sources, Bayat claims that, throughout colonial leadership and since, African leaders became consumers of colonial or foreign States. Thereby they faked relations which were imbalanced that helped themselves and the foreigners. Whereas dependence concept highlighted the importance of foreign organization in verifying historical results, Bayart asserts that African leaders played a vital role in starting the extraverted pattern of African governmental economy.
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2000). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation (No. w7771). National bureau of economic research.
Acemoglu, D., Chaves, I. N., Osafo-Kwaako, P., & Robinson, J. A. (2014).Indirect rule and state weakness in Africa: Sierra Leone in comparative perspective (No. w20092). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Austin, G. (2008). The ‘reversal of fortune’thesis and the compression of history: Perspectives from African and comparative economic history. Journal of international development, 20(8), 996-1027.
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2002). An african success story: Botswana.
Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (2003). The empire writes back: Theory and practice in post-colonial literatures. Routledge.
Cain, P. J., & Hopkins, A. G. (2014). British Imperialism: 1688-2000. Routledge.
Cogneau, D., & Moradi, A. (2014). Borders that divide: Education and religion in Ghana and Togo since colonial times. The Journal of Economic History, 74(03), 694-729.
Davidson, B. (2014). Modern Africa: A social and political history. Routledge.
Davis, N. R., & Tan, B. S. (2014). Evaluating Three Theories of Democratization in the Middle East and North Africa.
Englebert, P. (2000). Pre-colonial institutions, post-colonial states, and economic development in tropical Africa. Political Research Quarterly, 53(1), 7-36.
Herbst, J. (2014). States and power in Africa: Comparative lessons in authority and control. Princeton University Press.
Hargreaves, J. D. (2014). Decolonization in Africa. Routledge.
Herbst, J. (2014). States and power in Africa: Comparative lessons in authority and control. Princeton University Press.
Irobi, E. G. (2005). Ethnic conflict management in Africa: A comparative case study of Nigeria and South Africa. Development Policy Management Network Bulletin, 13(3).
Joseph, R. A. (2003). Africa: states in crisis. Journal of Democracy, 14(3), 159-170.
Kahler, M. (2014). Decolonization in Britain and France: the domestic consequences of international relations. Princeton University Press.
Kohli, A. (Ed.). (2014). The State and Development in the Third World: A World Politics Reader. Princeton University Press.
Kuper, A. (2014). Anthropology and anthropologists: the modern British school. Routledge.
Lugard, L. F. J. (2013). The dual mandate in British tropical Africa. Routledge.
Lange, M., Mahoney, J., & Vom Hau, M. (2006). Colonialism and Development: A Comparative Analysis of Spanish and British Colonies1. American Journal of Sociology, 111(5), 1412-1462.
Mbembé, J. A., & Rendall, S. (2002). African modes of self-writing. Public culture, 14(1), 239-273.
Nunn, N. (2007). The long-term effects of Africa’s slave trades (No. w13367). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Spear, T. (2003). Neo-traditionalism and the limits of invention in British colonial Africa. The Journal of African History, 44(01), 3-27.
Woolman, D. C. (2001). Educational reconstruction and post-colonial curriculum development: A comparative study of four African countries. International Education Journal, 2(5), 27-46.
Pennycook, A. (2014). The cultural politics of English as an international language. Routledge.
Woods, D. (2014). Monarchical rule in Swaziland1: power is absolute but patronage is (for) relative (s). Atlantic.
Fenske, J. (2014). ECOLOGY, TRADE, AND STATES IN PRE‐COLONIAL AFRICA. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(3), 612-640.