Abstract
Economic history is mobilized by neo-institutionalists to explain the different paths to development observed in post-colonial countries. Acemoglu and Robinson have considered Haiti as an archetype of colonial institutional legacy to describe why Nations fail. Is this deterministic lecture sufficient to understand the troubled development journey of the first free Black Country? In this research, we show, with empirical and historical evidence, that institutional path-dependence theory is not the best analytical framework for the case of Haiti. Critical juncture theory appears to be more appropriate to capture what is really going on in neocolonial Haiti. We also contribute to the critical juncture theory with long-term historical evidence.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
