Long-Run Impacts of Slavery in Africa - Nunn (2010) Flashcards
slavery in African history
large numbers of Africans forcibly enslaved starting from the 15th century
- started with the Portuguese in Congo
Kongo Kingdom as one of the first affected by European slave trade
even in early days, attempts to limit slave trade were met with deaf ears as Europeans made lots of money in the slave trade
the African slave trade
three distinct, large-scale slave trading routes through the end of the 19th century
- atlantic ocean trade
- sahara red sea trade
- indian ocean trade
data on the atlantic slave trade
at the peak of the trade in the 18th century, huge umbers of Africans being captured annually (30-50k)
after the early 1800s, major European powers made the slave trade illegal but it still continued so data/records aren’t as complete and reliable
- major economies like the US only banned the slave trade very late
1848 census of Freetown in Sierra Leone indicated that many enslaved people were taken in war, kidnapped, enslaved after committing a crime or sold by relatives (1/3 each)
slave trade and commodities
Europeans traded enslaved people for horses, textiles, metal goods/tools, guns
- military power brought them more enslaved people and political power
- slave traders became wealthy and political influential in much of coastal west Africa
why was Africa targeted by slave traders?
location relatively close to the Americas with booming sugar plantations
- European countries had colonies close to the western hemisphere and set up massive plantation economies
pre-existing internal slave networks
- in the late 1800s, 18-44% of Africans enslaved by other Africans were domestic workers
- already a population of enslaved people which facilitated the external slave trade
less military might (e.g. compared to Asia)
impact of the slave trade on society
lower population density - less urbanisation
- affects development with a decreased possibility of urbanisation/creating cities, less economic specialisation, fixed costs for public goods
strategies to avoid capture - lower output
- population movements to remote areas increasing trading costs (Bloom and Sachs)
shorter time horizons - less investment
- sense of fatalism about the future
effects diverted into slaving away from production
- shifting production efforts from other industries like agriculture and commerce towards the slave trade (huge profits)
- development of skills that have negative spillover (raid organisation, etc.)
breakdown of social cooperation/cultural changes
- ethnic divisions, fatalistic attitudes, rule of law/legal norms, social cooperation
changes in the nature of political power
- rise of militarised states (gun-slave cycle)
- 16th century as a period of tremendous political instability in SSA as ancient kingdoms/empires destabilised by the slave trade
- new political forces rising with armed groups
flourishing of internal domestic slavery
anti-African racism interconnected with slavery and the slave trade
question Nunn asks
are areas more exposed to the slave trade poorer today and what are the political differences?
compiled shipping data and detailed data with ethnicity, language and origins
main findings
consistently negative impacts of slavery exposure on later economic and political development outcomes in Africa
- countries exposed the most and earliest (DRC) are among the poorest countries
- countries like Namibia, Lesotho, Rwanda that were left alone tend to be better off even though there’s a range of income levels
slave trades had adverse negative impacts on African economic development, perhaps explaining 30% of the total income gap with other low- and middle-income regions
interpretation of Nunn’s results
countries most exposed to European slave trading look much worse off today than other African countries
- several of Africa’s success stories like Botswana were largely untouched by the trade
unclear what the cause of this is
- many mechanisms through which slavery can affect current outcomes
type of areas targeted
high population density areas
- likely to not be the poorest parts of Africa
political centralisation and ethnic homogeneity
weaker 19th century states in areas more impacted by the slave trade
- less centralised political units (maybe because of political disruption) for those impacted by the slave trade
more exposure to the slave-trade also leads to greater ethnic diversity today
- if the slave trade disrupted states/empires/kingdoms, it limits the use of political power over space and slows down ethnic and linguistic homogenisation