In this study, the authors empirically assess the relationship between precolonial centralization and the implementation of modernization programs by African governments. Their findings indicate that current African countries tend to have better provisioning of public goods (including better access to education, healthcare, and infrastructure) when their ethnic groups' precolonial institutions were more centralized.

In this article, the authors seek to understand the trajectory of traditional political institutions in Africa and ask how these institutions have changed, if at all, due to colonial interference. They note that "institutions connect the past with the present", though the study of political institutions over time is often overlooked in discussions of institutional persistence and change despite their value to key components of governance and social stability. Thus, these authors investigate whether today's African institutions remain akin to their precolonial, institutional ancestors, and whether colonial governance strategies of indirect or direct rule employed by the British and French have impacted their persistence. They find evidence to support the endurance of traditional institutions in former British colonies (upward trend), whereas evidence for institutional destruction for former French colonies (downward trend).

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

This study investigates previous findings that indicate precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa. Using new survey data from public primary schools, the author shows that the failure of leaders of centralized regions to comply with federal regimes was punished with underinvestment in public infrastructure services, hindering development and limiting access to these services in recent populations. The author proposes that the extent to which precolonial centralization was beneficial for development in Africa is mediated by compliance of the local governing bodies with federal regimes.

In an attempt to explain communal conflict, this study investigated how customary institutions (i.e. legislatures, courts, and chiefs) may impact the communal conflict activity of groups in Africa. The authors suggest that customary authorities act as local enforcements to mitigate within-group conflict, therefore a higher number of customary institutions should decrease communal conflict. Using data from 143 politically relevant ethnic groups, the authors showed support for their hypothesis and demonstrated marginal support that more inclusive customary institutions would be associated with less communal conflict.