Stelios Michalopoulous and Elias Papaioannou have a new working paper out reviewing the literature on the long-run effects of colonization and the international slave trade on African state capacity. They’ve summarized their findings in a piece at VoxDev.
Most of their discussion of colonial infrastructure investments and the slave trade was familiar to me, but I hadn’t previously seen much work on the role of African states’ arbitrarily-drawn borders in provoking conflict. They make a compelling case that borders which divided ethnic groups tend to increase local conflict.
Homelands of partitioned ethnicities are disproportionately affected by conflict between state forces and rebels that have an explicit agenda to overthrow the government. … Partitioned ethnicities are more likely to engage in civil wars that have an explicit ethnic dimension. Since the early 1960s, roughly a third of split groups have participated in an ethnic-based civil war, while the share of non-split groups that have engaged in an ethnic war is around a fifth. … Survey data show that education and public goods provision is significantly lower for individuals of split ethnicities, even when compared to Africans from non-split groups in the same town/village.
Definitely worth a read. I’ve previously discussed some of their earlier work on the long-run effects of precolonial political centralization in Africa.