What Empires Left Behind

Researchers consider the fourth point the most enduring. Borders can be challenged and economies restructured, but governing habits are passed on: a new government inherits an apparatus designed for extraction.

The third point is still visible on the railway map. In many countries, it is easier to travel to the former colonial power than to a neighboring region, and this clearly limits internal trade.

One line of research explains current differences between countries through this legacy: where extractive institutions were created, development has been worse; where institutions for settlement were created, it has been better. The arguments are based on large-scale comparisons.

Another line objects that too much is being explained by a single factor, while differences within former colonies are enormous. Countries with similar histories have diverged sharply, so the past cannot be the only explanation.

There is also a third position: the legacy sets the starting conditions, but what happens next is decided by local choices. It is the least striking position and is therefore cited less often, but it better explains the range of outcomes.

There is another legacy: the language of government. In many countries, official paperwork and higher education remained in the language of the former colonial power, splitting the population in two: those who speak it gain access to the state.