Much of the literature on electoral politics in Africa has focused on one mechanism of electoral mobilization: reliance on shared ethnic identity between politicians and voters. On the contrary, the author argues that politicians pursue two distinct modes of nonprogrammatic electoral mobilization: (1) by directly relying on the support of voters from one's own ethnic background, and (2) by indirectly working through electoral intermediaries—local leaders who command moral authority, control resources, and can influence the electoral behavior of their dependents. Yet the power of local leaders varies greatly; hence the option to use electoral intermediaries is not available in all settings. The choice of electoral mobilization affects national electoral outcomes: by severing the direct link between politicians and voters, intermediaries reduce a campaign's reliance on shared identity and create cross-ethnic electorates. The evidence for this argument is based on original interviews with political leaders collected during fieldwork in Senegal and Benin during the 2006–7 electoral season, media coverage of elections, and a historical analysis of first mass elections in the 1950s.

One of the most striking voting patterns in many African elections is the marked difference between urban and rural voters in their willingness to support the incumbent. In many countries, incumbents receive their worst electoral scores in the cities, whereas the countryside votes overwhelmingly for them. This pattern is puzzling because there is no evidence that rural areas benefit more from government policies. On the contrary, most governments in Africa exhibit a pro-urban policy bias. Why then do rural voters support incumbents at higher rates? Using evidence from original interviews with politicians in Senegal, coupled with media coverage from several elections, I contend that incumbents enjoy higher success in rural vis-à-vis urban areas because rural voters are more susceptible to clientelism. Tight social structure, cohesion and the prominent role of local patrons facilitate the acquisition of entire blocs of rural voters for the incumbent. These findings are independent of ethnic, religious or party identity.

No abstract

No abstract

National identity in Africa is routinely viewed as underdeveloped relative to ethnic identity because most states did not follow classic forms of nation-building, such as mass schooling with nationalist content. Yet recent survey data show that national identity across the continent is more robust than most scholars predicted. What is driving national identification in Africa? What unifies Africans around common national identity? Existing theories are not well suited to explaining this question, because factors that they see as essential, such as higher levels of development and cultural cohesion, often do not exist. In this article, I suggest a new understanding of the strength of national identity, based on the impact of political events, such as peace, political stability and conduct of elections. Drawing on over 200 original interviews with Ghanaian respondents, I demonstrate how political stability in Ghana, contrasted with political turmoil in neighbouring countries, produces narratives about national identity.