African Political Systems

Abstract

This article proposes an historically oriented typology of contemporary African political systems: the polyarchic, the socialist, the civil-authoritarian, and the praetorian. Their performance after independence is evaluated then in terms of Gross National Product (GNP) per capita growth, improvements in the “physical quality of life,” indicators of “dependence,” and normative standards. Closer analysis reveals a differentiated pattern that contradicts many commonly held assumptions concerning the developmental advantages of (civil or military) authoritarian rule in Third World countries. Thus polyarchic systems fare quite well both in terms of GNP growth and the improvement of the basic quality of life. They also have the best record concerning normative standards (protection of civil liberties and freedom from political repression). Socialist systems show a poorer performance in terms of economic growth, but have a good record in improving the living conditions of a larger part of the population, especially in the fields of health and education. The civil-authoritarian states do well with respect to GNP per capita growth rates, but relatively little of this growth contributes to the improvement of basic living standards. Praetorian systems have the worst records in all regards. Dependence does not turn out to be a significant factor contributing to this differentiated pattern of performance.