Moving Forward in African Economic History: Bridging the Gap Between Methods and Sources

Literature › Works

Morten Jerven; Gareth Austin; Erik Green; Chibuike Uche; Ewout Frankema; Johan Fourie; Joseph E. Inikori; Alexander Moradi; Ellen Hillbom (2012). Moving Forward in African Economic History: Bridging the Gap Between Methods and Sources. African Economic History Working Paper Series No. 1/2012. African Economic History Network (Lund University).

Type	working paper
Scope	Comparative and methods
Method	synthesis review
Period studied	1500–2010
Regions	Sub-Saharan Africa, West Africa, East Africa, Cape Colony (South Africa)
Themes	methods data sources, comparative theory, origins segregation
Citation key	jerven2012

Argument

The paper reviews the recent resurgence of African economic history and the launch of the African Economic History Network (AEHN). It argues that the split between 'old' and 'new' African economic history, and between quantitative and qualitative approaches, should be bridged. The robustness of a claim depends on the quality of the underlying data and the question asked, not on econometric sophistication alone. It surveys network projects (historical national accounts, anthropometrics, real wages, population, institutions, fiscal states, business history) and calls for source criticism, new data and theory built from African evidence. South Africa appears mainly through Cape Colony studies, not apartheid.

Evidence and method

A literature review of members' ongoing projects and published work: colonial national accounts and trade data, blue books, probate inventories, military height records, colonial census and fiscal reports, and business and state archives.

Findings

• Robust knowledge depends on data quality and the question, not only on econometric sophistication. (p. 6)

  The most ‘robust’ way of asserting knowledge regarding phenomena is not always related to the econometric sophistication of the method applied, but must be judged carefully with regard to the quality of the underlying data

• Lack of reliable time-series data is the field's most fundamental challenge. (p. 6)

  the lack of reliable and consistent data over time is the most fundamental challenge for the practice of African economic history.

• The Nigerian national accounts example shows how arbitrary quantification can be. (p. 7)

  it is impossible to overstate the arbitrariness of the process of ‘quantification’

• The 1980s South African research on capitalism's development was a notable exception to the wider neglect of African economic history. (p. 5)

  Research on the development of capitalism in South Africa was an exception to this rule.

• Cape Colony incomes in the 18th century were high compared with England and Holland. (p. 9)

  Fourie and Van Zanden (2012) show that the incomes of the 18th century Cape were high in comparison to GDP per capita estimates of England and Holland at the time

• Real wages at the Dutch Cape rose over the period, challenging the view of a backward economy. (p. 11)

  use prices and wages paid to the Dutch East India Company employees to show that real wages increased over the period, equalling those of the citizens of England and Holland

• Fourie links Cape slavery to short-run living standards but long-run stagnation and persistent inequality. (p. 12)

  This use of slaves yielded high short-term living standards, but at the cost of a stagnant long-term trend.

• Wages under coercion cannot be compared directly with free-market wages, so filling data gaps needs caution. (p. 19)

  Wages in pre-colonial and colonial economies where coercion was an important component cannot immediately be compared to wages from free labour markets.

• Colonial-era data carry the administration's limited perspective, so qualitative sources are needed alongside them. (p. 18)

  the colonial administration had both a limited and a particular view of African economic development.