2004
DOI: 10.1017/s0022278x04000084
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Political institutions and developmental governance in sub-Saharan Africa

Abstract: This article addresses the question of whether, or under what conditions, democratic institutions contribute to ‘developmental governance’ in sub-Saharan Africa, in forms such as coherent policy formulation, effective public administration, and limited corruption. While few dispute the desirability for Africa of democracy and good governance in theory, many remain sceptical about whether the two necessarily go together in practice. Using a simple framework informed by the new institutional economics, I analyse… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
72
0
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
3
72
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…We use the presence of collusion and corruption as negative indicators of autonomy, because these have been identified as major obstacles when developing and implementing REDD+ policies (Kanninen et al 2007). To gain an understanding of how autonomy plays out in the earlier forestry reform and in REDD+, we choose not to consider the diverse issues explaining the dependence of postcolonial states (see Kapoor 2002), but rather to examine how the exercise of public power generates private gain (Kaufmann et al 2009) and how behavior at the micro level compromises the state's ability to pursue national objectives (Alence 2004).…”
Section: Theory and Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We use the presence of collusion and corruption as negative indicators of autonomy, because these have been identified as major obstacles when developing and implementing REDD+ policies (Kanninen et al 2007). To gain an understanding of how autonomy plays out in the earlier forestry reform and in REDD+, we choose not to consider the diverse issues explaining the dependence of postcolonial states (see Kapoor 2002), but rather to examine how the exercise of public power generates private gain (Kaufmann et al 2009) and how behavior at the micro level compromises the state's ability to pursue national objectives (Alence 2004).…”
Section: Theory and Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, there is now considerable evidence that democratization, even in neopatrimonial contexts, can bring about expansions in civil rights and political freedoms (Lindberg, 2006;Edgell et al, 2017), the institutionalization of constitutional rule (Posner and Young, 2007), improvements in governance (Alence, 2004) and wider distributions of public goods and services (Stasavage, 2005;Burgess et al, 2015). Moreover, some have argued that patrimonialism may actually promote both democracy (Pitcher et al, 2009) and developmental governance (Crook, 1989;Booth and Golooba-Mutebi, 2012;Kelsall, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One broad implication of our findings is that modern regimes may be more deeply grounded in indigenous societies than previous theories have suggested. 6 Much of the literature on comparative regime development outside Europe has focused on the colonial legacies, effectively treating indigenous political history as secondary. 7 When carried over into the prescriptive realm, our findings suggest that external reformers' capacity for regime-building should not be exaggerated.…”
Section: Figure 1: Current and Indigenous Democracy Across Continentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This suggests that more developed indigenous groups were better able to influence national regime trajectories. 28 In the analyses that follow, we used the specification in column (6), since this provides the best description of the data as measured by R 2 . The data on light density at night in year 2000 is provided by the National Geophysical Data Center at NASA.…”
Section: Waltz 1979 131)mentioning
confidence: 99%