Why Do Colonial Investments Persist Less in Anglophone than in Francophone Africa?

Abstract

Comparisons of British and French colonialism in Africa have typically focused on institutions (e.g., directness of rule, forced labor, conscription) or the effect of those institutions on post-independence political reforms and development. Instead, this article focuses on colonial public investments in health and education in East and West Africa. I find that such investments are better predictors of today's development in Francophone than in Anglophone Africa. Why? While more political instability (e.g., violent conflict) should decrease persistence, I find---contrary to what might be expected---that Anglophone countries have not been more (or less) unstable since independence, as proxied by their number of coups, government turnovers, and constitutions. Instead, I suggest that the higher economic growth of Anglophone Africa in recent decades (compared to Francophone Africa) is one mechanism that erodes the persistence of colonial investments.