共同市场与“英属非洲”的非殖民化:经济学和经济学家的作用

IF 0.9 Q1 HISTORY
K. Button
{"title":"共同市场与“英属非洲”的非殖民化:经济学和经济学家的作用","authors":"K. Button","doi":"10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To facilitate an organized withdrawal from its African territories in the 1960s, the UK authorities undertook studies of the economic potential of each. What has been little studied is the nature and impacts of these exercises on subsequent policy. This paper looks at two such studies that examined ways existing ‘common markets’ in East and Central Africa could be retained after independence, and further developed. The institutions and structures governing the territories differed, one a common market and the other a fuller federation, as did the bodies conducting the analysis, one an official commission requiring public recommendations, and the other an advisory group to a senior government minister. The paper offers insights as to the way economists viewed common markets at the time, how they sought to quantify their economic benefits, and the ways in which these benefits were distributed across member states. It also considers the types of economic policy recommendations that were made and the reaction of the British authorities and the colonial politicians to them.","PeriodicalId":54115,"journal":{"name":"Economic History of Developing Regions","volume":"35 1","pages":"50 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Common markets and the decolonization of ‘British Africa’: The role of economics and economists\",\"authors\":\"K. Button\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT To facilitate an organized withdrawal from its African territories in the 1960s, the UK authorities undertook studies of the economic potential of each. What has been little studied is the nature and impacts of these exercises on subsequent policy. This paper looks at two such studies that examined ways existing ‘common markets’ in East and Central Africa could be retained after independence, and further developed. The institutions and structures governing the territories differed, one a common market and the other a fuller federation, as did the bodies conducting the analysis, one an official commission requiring public recommendations, and the other an advisory group to a senior government minister. The paper offers insights as to the way economists viewed common markets at the time, how they sought to quantify their economic benefits, and the ways in which these benefits were distributed across member states. It also considers the types of economic policy recommendations that were made and the reaction of the British authorities and the colonial politicians to them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54115,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic History of Developing Regions\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"50 - 70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic History of Developing Regions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic History of Developing Regions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20780389.2019.1669443","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了方便在20世纪60年代有组织地从非洲领土撤军,英国当局对每个地区的经济潜力进行了研究。很少有人研究这些做法的性质和对后续政策的影响。本文考察了两项这样的研究,它们考察了东非和中非现有的“共同市场”在独立后可以保留并进一步发展的方式。管理领土的机构和结构各不相同,一个是共同市场,另一个是更充分的联邦,进行分析的机构也是如此,一个是需要公众建议的官方委员会,另一个是向政府高级部长提供咨询的小组。这篇论文提供了关于当时经济学家看待共同市场的方式、他们如何寻求量化共同市场的经济利益以及这些利益在成员国之间分配的方式的见解。它还考虑了所提出的经济政策建议的类型以及英国当局和殖民地政治家对这些建议的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Common markets and the decolonization of ‘British Africa’: The role of economics and economists
ABSTRACT To facilitate an organized withdrawal from its African territories in the 1960s, the UK authorities undertook studies of the economic potential of each. What has been little studied is the nature and impacts of these exercises on subsequent policy. This paper looks at two such studies that examined ways existing ‘common markets’ in East and Central Africa could be retained after independence, and further developed. The institutions and structures governing the territories differed, one a common market and the other a fuller federation, as did the bodies conducting the analysis, one an official commission requiring public recommendations, and the other an advisory group to a senior government minister. The paper offers insights as to the way economists viewed common markets at the time, how they sought to quantify their economic benefits, and the ways in which these benefits were distributed across member states. It also considers the types of economic policy recommendations that were made and the reaction of the British authorities and the colonial politicians to them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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