Explaining ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa

IF 5.4 1区 经济学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay , Elliott Green
{"title":"Explaining ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa","authors":"Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay ,&nbsp;Elliott Green","doi":"10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A burgeoning literature on ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa has found that Presidents favour their co-ethnic kin in the provision of public and private goods. However, this scholarship has largely remained empirically narrow in focus, inasmuch as it preponderantly examines only one outcome and/or country at a time and can be contrasted with a separate set of literature which finds a null or even negative relationship between co-ethnicity and goods provision. As such we conduct the largest examination to date of ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa using data from the Afrobarometer and DHS across both public and private goods and at both the individual and district level. We confirm the positive effects of individual-level co-ethnicity on a variety of outcomes, but also find that these benefits only accrue to the few co-ethnics living in non-co-ethnic areas and decline as the district-level proportion of co-ethnics increases. The positive effects of individual-level co-ethnicity are weaker for objective outcomes like access to infrastructure, asset ownership and employment but are stronger for subjective measures such as self-assessed living conditions and the quality of government services. We also find that the positive effects of co-ethnicity do not decline with the proportion of local co-ethnics for subjective perceptions of presidential and ruling party performance. This relationship does not hold, however, for perceptions of other non-political institutions like the courts or police, or for local governments. These results are consistent with the argument that co-ethnics derive non-material “psychic goods” from having a co-ethnic in power, rather than the standard “quid-pro-quo” theory common in the literature, and thus complicate the idea that ethnic favouritism in the provision of public and private goods is widespread in contemporary Africa. We supplement our quantitative findings with anecdotal evidence from Nigeria which supports our argument.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48463,"journal":{"name":"World Development","volume":"188 ","pages":"Article 106901"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Development","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X24003723","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A burgeoning literature on ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa has found that Presidents favour their co-ethnic kin in the provision of public and private goods. However, this scholarship has largely remained empirically narrow in focus, inasmuch as it preponderantly examines only one outcome and/or country at a time and can be contrasted with a separate set of literature which finds a null or even negative relationship between co-ethnicity and goods provision. As such we conduct the largest examination to date of ethno-regional favouritism in Sub-Saharan Africa using data from the Afrobarometer and DHS across both public and private goods and at both the individual and district level. We confirm the positive effects of individual-level co-ethnicity on a variety of outcomes, but also find that these benefits only accrue to the few co-ethnics living in non-co-ethnic areas and decline as the district-level proportion of co-ethnics increases. The positive effects of individual-level co-ethnicity are weaker for objective outcomes like access to infrastructure, asset ownership and employment but are stronger for subjective measures such as self-assessed living conditions and the quality of government services. We also find that the positive effects of co-ethnicity do not decline with the proportion of local co-ethnics for subjective perceptions of presidential and ruling party performance. This relationship does not hold, however, for perceptions of other non-political institutions like the courts or police, or for local governments. These results are consistent with the argument that co-ethnics derive non-material “psychic goods” from having a co-ethnic in power, rather than the standard “quid-pro-quo” theory common in the literature, and thus complicate the idea that ethnic favouritism in the provision of public and private goods is widespread in contemporary Africa. We supplement our quantitative findings with anecdotal evidence from Nigeria which supports our argument.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Development
World Development Multiple-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
320
期刊介绍: World Development is a multi-disciplinary monthly journal of development studies. It seeks to explore ways of improving standards of living, and the human condition generally, by examining potential solutions to problems such as: poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, disease, lack of shelter, environmental degradation, inadequate scientific and technological resources, trade and payments imbalances, international debt, gender and ethnic discrimination, militarism and civil conflict, and lack of popular participation in economic and political life. Contributions offer constructive ideas and analysis, and highlight the lessons to be learned from the experiences of different nations, societies, and economies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信