does economics have an “africa problem”? some data and...
TRANSCRIPT
1
DoesEconomicsHavean“AfricaProblem”?SomeDataandPreliminaryThoughtsGrieveChelwaPostdoctoralFellowCenterforAfricanStudiesHarvardUniversityVisitingPostdoctoralFellowWitsInstituteforSocialandEconomicResearchUniversityoftheWitwatersrandgrieve_chelwa@[email protected],2017
VERYPRELIMINARYDRAFT–DONOTCITEORCIRCULATE
2
“The ideasofeconomists […],bothwhen theyare rightandwhen theyarewrong,aremore
powerfulthancommonlyunderstood.Indeed,theworldisruledbylittleelse.Practicalmen,who
believethemselvestobequiteexemptfromanyintellectualinfluences,areusuallytheslavesof
somedefuncteconomist.Madmen inauthority,whohearvoices intheair,aredistillingtheir
frenzyfromanacademicscribblerofafewyearsback.”
JohnMaynardKeynes1“Inthisdiscourseoftheblind,thesidewiththemoneyusuallywon.”
EboeHutchful2
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Origins
Thisessay,whichhasaspectsofthepersonal,ismyattemptatgrapplinginamorestructured
waywithmygrowingambivalencetowardseconomics,inparticularthekindthathascometobe
described as “mainstreameconomics”.3 I became fully aware of this ambivalence during the
northernhemisphericsummerof2014whilereadingandfollowingthedebatesaroundThomas
1Keynes,J.M.,1936.TheGeneralTheoryofEmployment,InterestandMoney.PalgraveMacmillan.2 Hutchful, E., 1995. “Adjustment in Africa and Fifty Years of the Bretton Woods Institutions: Change or
Consolidation?”,CanadianJournalofDevelopmentStudies,16(3).3 “Mainstream economics” refers to the dominant type of economics, sometimes referred to as “neoclassical
economics”, that is taught in “leading” universities, especially in theUnited States, andwhose research output
dominates“leading”scholarlyoutletsinthediscipline.Whenmostpeoplecriticizeeconomicsandeconomists,they
arelikelycriticizingmainstreameconomics.
3
Piketty’smuchacclaimedbookoninequality,CapitalintheTwenty-FirstCentury.4InSouthAfrica,
whereIwasdoingmygraduatestudiesatthetime,physicalcopiesofbooksreleasedinNorth
AmericaorWesternEuropetendedtoarrivewithadelay.Butthroughthemiracleoftheinternet,
whichinturnspawnedthee-book,IwasabletoreadCapitalandfollowdebatesarounditin“real
time”.Atthetime,mostofmyintellectualheroeswerebasedatuniversitiesintheUnitedStates
owingtoasteadystapleofthetypeofliteratureIwasmadetoconsumeattheUniversityofCape
Town.
Disagreementanddebatearethemainstayofacademia.Butwhatstruckmemostaboutthe
online debates and disagreements aroundCapital were the extents towhichmy intellectual
heroes were willing to go to discredit Piketty. I saw leading economists write in prominent
periodicals thatProfessorPikettyhadneglected todealwith issueXandyetXhadanentire
chapterdedicatedtoitinthebook.ThencamethescandalwiththeFinancialTimes(FT),aleading
newspaperbased in theUnitedKingdom,wherePikettywas accusedof fabricatinghistorical
data5inspiteofthefactthathisbookcamewith200pagesworthofnotesanda100pageonline
dataappendixanticipatingtheaccusations levelledbytheFT.Someof thecommentaryeven
tookonaspectsofbeingpersonal.6Allthis,atleasttome,wasunprecedented.
4Piketty,T.(2014).CapitalintheTwenty-FirstCentury.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress5“Pikettyfindingsundercutbyerrors”,FinancialTimes,availableat:https://www.ft.com/content/e1f343ca-e281-
11e3-89fd-00144feabdc06 “France’s ‘rock star’ economist Thomas Piketty ‘beat former lover’, Daily Telegraph, available at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/10807714/Frances-rock-star-economist-Thomas-
Piketty-beat-former-lover.html
4
Inthewakeoftheglobalfinancialcrisisandtherecessionthatensued,inequalityre-emergedas
an important topic of debate within economics inspiring several books, even within the
mainstreamvintagewhereinequalityhadtraditionallybeenviewedastheinevitableoutcomeof
a “meritocratic” process.7 Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz published The Race Between
Education and Technology8 in 2010while Joseph Stiglitz publishedThe Price of Inequality9 in
2013.SowhywasPikettyandhisCapitalsingledforwhatwaspatentlyunfaircriticism?
Was it because Piketty had challenged the adequacy of one of the linchpins ofmainstream
economics, namely that one’s income was determined by their incremental contribution to
production?
Hewasbynomeansthefirsteconomistworkingwithinthemainstreamneoclassicalparadigm
tochallengethe“marginaltheoryofdistribution”.JosephStiglitz,inthePriceofInequalityand
indeed inhisacademiccareerhadpointedout,withoutrelent, thepervasivenessofso-called
“market failures” – that is, instances where the workings of perfectly competitive textbook
7SeeMankiw,N.G.,2013.“DefendingtheOnePercent”.JournalofEconomicPerspectives,27(3):21-348Goldin,C.andKatz,L.F.,2010.TheRacebetweenEducationandTechnology.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress9 Stiglitz, J.E., 2013.ThePriceof Inequality:HowToday’sDivided Society EndangersOur Future.NewYork:WW
NortonandCompany
5
economics broke down.10 As far as I could tell, Stiglitz hadnot received the kindof criticism
reservedforPiketty.
TheonlyplausibleexplanationtomymindwasthatPikettyhadchallengedthehegemonicreign
ofAmericanand,toalesserextent,Britisheconomistsonowningtheconversationineconomics.
Pikettywas,bymanycounts,anoutsider.Exceptforaverybriefperiodintheearly1990s,hehad
spenthisentireacademiccareerinFrance.11Heofcoursepublishedhisworkinleadingscholarly
journalsinthediscipline,whichistosayinUS-basedoutlets.Butthisworkhardlyhadanyimpact
beyondthenarrowgroupofscholarswhowereworkingoninequality.Tomymind,whatwas
differentaboutCapitalwasnotsomuchthataneconomistwasmountingachallengeonthe
hallowed tenets of neoclassical economics but that such a widely publicized challenge was
comingfroman“outsider”.12
L’affairePikettyofthesummerof2014ledmetowardsmyownDamasceneConversion.Priorto
this, I uncritically read the economics literature paying no attention to suchmatters as the
10JosephStiglitzwas,asamatteroffact,awardedtheNobelMemorialPrizeineconomicsforhisworkonmarket
failuresin2001.11AftercompletinghisdoctorateinFrance,heservedasanassistantprofessorattheMassachusetts Instituteof
Technologyforthreeyears.HewritesinCapitalthathisreasonforhurryingbacktoFrancewasthathefoundthe
workofU.S.economistshighlyabstractwithlittleattemptgiventotestingtheorywithdata.12Ofcoursethewhole“insider”“outsider”perspectiveisrelative.ToeconomistsinAfrica,Pikettyisaninsider,after
allmanyofhispublicationshaveappearedinsuchmainstreamjournalsastheQuarterlyJournalofEconomicsand
Econometrica,amongothers.Whatisimportant,however,isthatfromtheperspectiveofU.S.economists,Piketty
wasanoutsider,evenifslightlylesssothanthetypicaleconomistinAfrica.
6
“politicsofknowledgeproduction”.Ihadbeensoldontheideathateconomicswasascience,
perhapsonparwithphysics.Therefore,itdidnotmatterthateconomics,particularlythekind
thatmatteredformypartoftheworld,wasdominatedbyvoicesatU.S.universities.Povertyand
underdevelopmentwerepovertyandunderdevelopmentregardlessofwhostudiedthem.Tomy
mind, thedominanceby theU.S.merely reflected the fact that economists based there had
better diagnoses of the ailments that afflicted us. In otherwords, the “market for ideas” in
economicswasperfectlyandfairlycompetitive.
Aftertheeventsof2014,Ibegantowonderifthismarketwasinactualfactamonopolywith
significant barriers to entry erected against “outsiders”. And just as the theory ofmonopoly
predicted“inefficiencies”,didthisstateofaffairs,atleastinpart,explainthedismalnatureof
ourknowledgeondevelopmentandparticularlyonthefailuretoproperlydiagnosetheAfrican
malaise?13,14
Mythoughtsonthiswereinitiallylaiddowninan800wordpieceontheonlineblogAfricaIsA
CountryinFebruaryof2015.15Ishowedinthatpiecethattherewasanunderrepresentationof
African-based scholars on the editorial boards of at least three leading scholarly outlets in
13A2005reviewoftheeconomics literatureongrowthand/ordevelopmentfoundthattherewereat least145
different explanatory variables of growth and/or development with 43 conceptually different theories in the
literature!SeeDurlaufetal.,2005.“GrowthEconometrics”inHandbookofEconomicGrowth.14 On the less than satisfactory state of the economics literature on Africa, see Jerven, M., 2014.Africa:Why
EconomistsGetItWrong.London:ZedBooks.15 “Economics has an Africa problem”, Africa Is A Country, available at:
http://africasacountry.com/2015/02/economics-has-an-africa-problem/
7
economicsthathadafocusonAfricaorhadthecontinentassubjectmatter.16Ireferredtothis
underrepresentationaseconomics’“Africaproblem”.Tomysurprise,thepiecereceivedalotof
attention particularly from U.S.-based economists. Some economists expressed shock at the
extentof theunderrepresentationwhileothers, especially themoreprominent voices in the
discipline who also had a large African research portfolio, suggested that Africans were
themselvestoblameforthisstateofaffairs.17
Thisessaycontinuestheconversationstartedbythatblogpostandextendsitinnewdirections.
First,IperformadeeperauditofnotonlytheeditorialboardsofleadingjournalsthathaveAfrica
asafocus(extendedto10)butalsoauditpatternsofauthorshipinthesejournalstofigureout
“whoiswritingaboutAfrica?”.Second,Idrawsomeimplicationsforeconomicsscholarshipof
theresultsofthisaudit.
16TheJournalofAfricanEconomies,JournalofDevelopmentEconomicsandJournalofEconomicGrowth.17Thisisabriefcollectionsomeofthecommentarythatfollowed:“Africaproblemineconomics”,byDavid
McKenziefortheWorldBankImpactEvaluationBlog,availableat:
http://blogs.worldbank.org/impactevaluations/blog-links-february-20-understandability-replication-debate-
continues-thoughts-africa-problem;“Doeseconomicshavean‘Africaproblem?’”,MortenJervenforAfrican
Arguments,availableat:http://africanarguments.org/2015/02/13/does-economics-have-an-africa-problem-by-
morten-jerven/;“EconomicshasanAfricaproblem?”,ChrisBlattman,availableat:
https://chrisblattman.com/2015/03/24/economics-has-an-africa-problem/;“EconomicshasanAfricaproblem:
take3”,MarkusGoldsteinfortheWorldBankImpactEvaluationBlog,availableat:
http://blogs.worldbank.org/impactevaluations/economics-has-africa-problem-take-3.
8
1.2. Contributiontocontemporarydebates
Giveneconomists’ inabilitytopredictthe2007/2008globalfinancialcrisisandtheensuing,at
timesacrimonious,debateson theappropriatepolicy responsewhichexposedhow little the
professionknew18, there isnowadiscussionon theneed to reform theway thediscipline is
taught,especiallytoundergraduates,andthewayresearchisconducted.Thedebateto“rethink
economics”whichinitiallystartedoutasafringeissuenowseemstohavetakencenterstage
receiving coverage in such mainstream outlets as the Financial Times.19 Even the eminent
mainstream growth theorist Paul Romer,who incidentally is the new chief economist of the
WorldBank,hasrecentlyrebukedeconomistsfortheirextreme“mathiness”bywhichhemeans
theirall-to-oftenpracticeof letting“academicpolitics[or ideology]masqueradeasscience”.20
AngusDeaton, theeminentdevelopmenteconomistandNobel laureate,hasrecentlywritten
twoessaysessentiallymakingthepointthatthe“newdevelopmenteconomics”,withitsreliance
on“randomizedcontrolledtrials”andsophisticatedstatisticalmethods,isnotdelivering“deep
knowledge”beyondtellingus,forexample,that“villagers”innorthernZambiatendtosubstitute
mosquitonetsforfishingnetsiftheformerarehandedoutfree-of-charge.21Thecallistonow
18TheacrimonywithwhichthesedebateswereconductedistypifiedbytheexchangesbetweeneconomistsPaul
KrugmanthenatPrincetonUniversity,writingintheNewYorkTimes,andJohnCochraneoftheUniversityofChicago
writingonhispersonalblogTheGrumpyEconomist.19 “Crash and learn: should we change the way we teach economics?”, Financial Times, available at:
https://www.ft.com/content/0dc9b416-8573-11e6-8897-2359a58ac7a520 Romer, P.M., 2015. “Mathiness in the Theory of Economic Growth”,American Economic Review: Papers and
Proceedings,105(5):89–9321 Deaton, A., 2010. “Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development”. Journal of Economic
Literature, 48: 424 – 455 and Deaton, A. and Cartwright, N., 2016. “Understanding and Misunderstanding
RandomizedControlledTrials”.NationalBureauofEconomicResearchWorkingPaper22595
9
make economics more pluralistic22, that is open it to other methods of knowing beyond
mathematicsandstatistics,andtomakeitmoreinterdisciplinary.23
Second,thereisnowanacknowledgementthateconomicshasagenderproblemparticularlyin
the U.S. where recent work has shown that relative to other disciplines, female academic
economists are underrepresented at the highest levels and fair worse than their male
counterpartsonmanyotheroutcomes.24Thenthereisthediscussionaroundeconomics’“race
problem”–arecognitionthatthediscipline’scurrentsetofmethodologicaltools,atleastthose
ofitsmainstreamvintage,arenotappropriatefordistillingAmerica’sstructuralracialiniquities.25
Theinappropriatenessofthetoolshasbeenarguedtopartlystemfromtheunderrepresentation
ofminoritiesatthehighestlevelsofthediscipline.26Itcomesasnosurprise,somemightsay,that
theinitiativeconfrontingeconomics’“raceproblem”isbeingspearheadedbyAfricanAmerican
economists.27
22Forexample,theCambridgeeconomistHa-JoonChangwantsmoreaspectsof“heterodox”economicstofeature
in undergraduate training while economic historian Morten Jerven wants more of history proper to guide
developmenteconomicsresearchonAfrica.23ThispointismadequitestronglyandeloquentlybyPikettyinCapital.24Cecietal.,2014.“WomeninAcademicScience:AChangingLandscape”.PsychologicalScienceinthePublicInterest,
15(3):75–14125SeeParramore,L.,2016.“Here’sWhatEconomistsDon’tUnderstandAboutRace”. InstituteforNewEconomic
Thinking, available at: https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/heres-what-economists-dont-
understand-about-race26Bayer,A.andRouse,C.E.,2016.“DiversityintheEconomicsProfession:ANewAttackonanOldProblem”.Journal
ofEconomicPerspectives,30(4):221–24227SomeoftheprominentAfrican-AmericaneconomistsspearheadingthisareDukeUniversity’sWilliamDarityand
DarrickHamiltonoftheNewSchoolforSocialResearch.
10
Thelastsetofconversationsthatmyessayspeakstoisthemovementregainingtractionacross
muchof theGlobal Southon theneed to “decolonize”university curricula and research. For
example, students engaged in the #FeesMustFall movement in South Africa have made
“decolonization” an inseparable part of their call for free higher education in that country.
Whereasmostoftheactionanddebateistakingplacewithinthehumanitiesandsomesocial
sciences,economicsandthephysicalscienceshavenotbeensparedfromscrutiny.28
Myoverridingobjectivewith this essay is tohopefully start a conversationwithineconomics
similartotheonethathasbeentakingplacein“AfricanStudies”followingtheeventsofthe1969
AfricanStudiesAssociationmeetingsinMontreal,Canada.Atthatmeeting,theblackattendees
boycottedtheproceedings inprotestovertheunderrepresentationofblackacademics inthe
highestechelonsofthedisciplineaswellasprotestingtheEurocentricoutlookofmuchofthe
scholarship. Followingon fromthatmeeting, therehavebeenactiveattempts to redress the
deficitsidentifiedbytheblackacademiccaucuseventhoughthepaceappearsglacialtosome
observers,particularlyintheblack/Africanacademiccommunity.29Curiously,thisconversation
28 See Bassier, I., 2016. “UCT’s economics curriculum is in crisis”. GroundUp, available at:
http://www.groundup.org.za/article/ucts-economics-curriculum-crisis/; Chelwa, G., 2016. “Decolonizing the
teaching of economics”.Africa Is A Country, available at: http://africasacountry.com/2016/04/decolonizing-the-
teaching-of-economics/ ;Prescod-Weinstein,C.,2015.“DecolonisingSciencereadingList”.Medium,availableat:
https://medium.com/@chanda/decolonising-science-reading-list-339fb773d51f#.xwu5x5kpz29SeeOwomoyela,O.,1994.“WithFriendsLikeThese…ACritiqueofPervasiveAnti-AfricanismsinCurrentAfrican
StudiesEpistemologyandMethodology”.AfricanStudiesReview,37(3):77–101;Mkandawire,T.,1997.“TheSocial
SciencesinAfrica:BreakingLocalBarriersandNegotiatingInternationalPresence”.AfricanStudiesReview,40(2):15
11
hasnever takenplace ineconomicsespeciallygiven thedisproportionate impactofNorthern
economicsresearchonpolicymakinginAfrica.30
2. DATAANDMETHOD
Inthissectionoftheessay,Idiscussinsomedetailthemethodusedtocollectthedataonwhich
theauditisperformed.
2.1. TheJournals
Asdiscussed in the introduction, theaudit isperformedon10 “leading” scholarly journals in
economicsthateitherexplicitlyfocusonAfricaand/orwhosesubjectmatterisofrelevanceto
thecontinent.“Relevance”isdeterminedbywhetherthejournalhasafocusondevelopment-
related topics including a focus on poverty, land, agriculture, economic history and general
economicpolicy,amongothers.Thedeterminationofwhetherajournal isa“leading”journal
dependsonitsrankingaccordingtoasimpleimpactfactorcalculationforalltheyearsthatthe
journal has been in existence. These are compiled and calculated by the IDEAS/RePEc
bibliographicdatabasewhich,asofOctober2016,rankedatotalof1,691journalsineconomics.
Thesimpleimpactfactoriscalculatedasthe“ratioofthenumberofcitationsbythenumberof
–36;Mama,A.,2007.“Is ItEthical toStudyAfrica?PreliminaryThoughtsonScholarshipandFreedom”.African
StudiesReview, 50(1): 1–26;Pailey,R.N., 2016. “Where is the ‘African’ inAfricanStudies”.AfricanArguments,
availableat:http://africanarguments.org/2016/06/07/where-is-the-african-in-african-studies/30Mkandawire,T.,2014.“ThespreadofeconomicdoctrinesandpolicymakinginpostcolonialAfrica”.African
StudiesReview,57(1):171–198
12
items in the series”31 with a higher impact factor signaling influence among academics and
possiblyontheformulationofeconomicpolicy.32
Thiscriterionresultsinthe10journalslistedinTable1belowrankedaccordingtotheirsimple
impactfactorsaspertheIDEAS/RePEcdatabase.
Table1:The10JournalsTobeAudited
RankonIDEAS/RePEcoutof1,691Journals
NameofJournal SimpleImpactFactor
22 WorldBankEconomicReview 25
27 AmericanEconomicJournal:AppliedEconomics 22
36 JournalofDevelopmentEconomics 19
44 WorldBankResearchObserver 17
106 LandEconomics 8
133 AgricultureEconomics 7
135 WorldDevelopment 7
138 EconomicDevelopmentandCulturalChange 7
145 JournalofAfricanEconomies 6
Unranked AfricanEconomicHistory N/ASource:IDEAS/RePEcDatabase
Admittedly,thejournalsinTable1arearrivedatinarough-and-readyfashion.Ideally,onewould
wanttocompilethislistinamoresystematicmannerby,forexample,onlyconsideringthetop
10economics journalson the IDEAS/RePEcdatabase. Suchaprocedurewouldnot,however,
31Seemorehere:https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.journals.simple.html32Notwithstandingthestandardcriticismslevelledatimpactfactorsasameasureofinfluence.See“Hatejournal
impactfactors?Newstudygivesyouonemorereason”.ScienceMagazine,availableat:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/07/hate-journal-impact-factors-new-study-gives-you-one-more-reason
13
guaranteethatthejournalssocompiledwouldhavesufficientAfricacoverageorwouldcontain
topics of relevance to the continent. Therefore, the list in Table 1 is compiled in an eclectic
mannerat timesgoing for“bigname” journals like the JournalofDevelopmentEconomicsor
going for a leading journal in a particular subfield likeAgriculture Economics33or going for a
journalwithanexplicitfocusonAfricaliketheJournalofAfricanEconomies.Inanycase,allthe
journals in Table 1with the exception ofAfrican Economic History are ranked in the top 10
percentileofalleconomicsjournalsontheIDEAS/RePEcdatabase.Thesejournals,therefore,are
partoftheelitesetinthedisciplinewhosecontentnotonlyinfluencesfutureresearchbutalso
influenceseconomicpolicy.Anystudentofeconomics,particularlythestudentofdevelopment
economics,withaninterestinunderstandingthechallengesofAfricawillattheveryleastconsult
mostofthetitlesinTable1.
AfricanEconomicHistory(AEH)isnotrankedbecauseIDEAS/RePEcrequiresthatajournalhave
asizablenumberofarticlesforanimpactfactortobecomputed.Sinceitsinceptionin2004,the
journalhadonlypublished76articlesby2015.Inonethelessopttoaudititasopposedto,for
example, the Journal of EconomicHistorywhich is ranked on IDEAS/RePEc because ofAEH’s
explicitfocusonthecontinent.
A question that might arise is why focus on only 10 journals? The answer is simply one of
conveniencegiventhetediousandmanualnaturethroughwhichtheauditisperformed(see2.2.
33HereAgricultureEconomicsistheleadingjournalinthefieldofagricultureeconomicsbecauseithasthehighest
rankofanyjournalinthissubfieldontheIDEAS/RePEcdatabase.
14
below).Inanycase,thenumberofindividualjournalarticlesthateventuallygetaudited,at5,356
articles,islargeenoughtoalmostguaranteethereproducibilityoftheresultsobtainedwhere
thenumberoftitlestobeextendedbeyondthe10consideredhere.34
2.2. Theaudit
ThemainfocusofthisessayistoconductanauditofpatternsofauthorshipofthetitlesinTable
1tofigureout“whoiswritingaboutAfricaineconomics”.Theauditproceedsasfollows.First,I
needtodeterminewhetheranindividualjournalarticleorpaperiswrittenonAfrica,whereAfrica
referstothe54countriesthatmake-uptheentirecontinent.35Inordertodothis,Ifollowthe
rulethatanarticleisclassifiedaswrittenonAfricaif:
(1)Ithastheword“Africa”initstitleand/oratleastoneAfricancountryismentionedin
itstitle;and/or
(2)Theword“Africa”appearsinthejournalarticle’sabstractand/oratleastoneAfrican
countryismentionedintheabstract;and/or
(3) The word “Africa” and/or at least one African country is listed in the journal’s
“keywords”section.36
34In“econospeak”,theauditisa“largen”study.35IabstractfromthecommonpracticeofsplittingupthecontinentintoNorthAfricaandSub-SaharanAfrica.36Notalljournalshavea“keywords”section.Butwhentheydo,ittendstoappearrightbelowtheabstract.
15
OnceanarticleisclassifiedaswrittenonAfrica,thenextstepistoassignageographicallocation
fortheauthor(s)basedontheirself-declaredinstitutionalaffiliationatthetimeofthearticle’s
publication.Authorsareclassifiedas“African-based”iftheirinstitutionisinAfrica.Thosewhose
institutionisnotonthecontinentareclassifiedas“NotAfrican-based”withfurtherclassifications
for “NorthAmerican-based”, “European-based”or “other”.37 In theevent that anauthorhas
morethanoneaffiliationincludingoneinAfricaandanotheronein,forexample,Europe,then
theauthorisclassifiedas“African-based”irrespectiveofwhethertheAfricaninstitutionislisted
firstorlastbytheauthor.Bythisstandard,avisitingprofessorfromtheU.Sonsabbaticalatthe
UniversityofZambia(UNZA)wouldbecountedas“African-based”foraslongasUNZAwaslisted
asoneoftheauthor’sinstitutionsofaffiliation.Ifanauthorhasmorethanoneaffiliationin,for
example,NorthAmericaandEurope,thenthefirstlistedaffiliationistakenastheauthor’shome
affiliation.
Onequestionthatmightariseiswhyistheclassificationbasedongeographicallocationandnot
descentiftheobjectoftheauditistogetattheheartofthe“Africanvoices”debate?Inother
words,whynotfocusonwhetheranauthor isan“African”scholar(i.e.currently livesonthe
continentorisfromthecontinent)asopposedtousinggeography?Thelattercasemightleadto
thewrongfulattributionofan“Africanvoice” to thevisitingAmericanprofessoratUNZA.Or
perhapsdiscountingthe“voice”ofanAfricanpresentlyemployedatanAmericanorEuropean
university. Whereas the concern is valid, resolving it would require much more detailed
37TheNorthAmericaclassificationcoversboththeUnitedStatesofAmericaandCanada.Theclassification“other”
referstoallinstitutionsnotbasedineitherAfrica,NorthAmericaorEurope.
16
informationthan isreadilyavailable.Forexample,downloadingandsiftingthrough individual
authors’curriculumvitaes(CVs).CVsareoftennotavailableonlineformanyauthorsandeven
when theyare, someauthorsopt tonot indicate theirnationalities. Inanycase, the“large”
numberofindividualjournalarticlesconsideredhereanddiscussedinSection3belowimplythat
these cases of what econometricians call “measurement error” are likely to be small and
hopefullyevenoutintheaggregate.38
Thecountingisdoneasfollows:AlljournalarticlesthathaveatleastoneAfrican-basedscholar
aregivenequalweightsof1regardlessofwhetherthearticleissingleauthored,lead-authored
ormerelyco-authoredbytheAfrican-basedscholar.This isdifferent fromtheapproachused
recentlybyBriggsandWeatherswho,intheirpaperauditingthepoliticsscholarshiponAfrica,
givegreaterweighttosole-authoredarticlesbyAfrican-basedscholars.39Lastly,iftheauthorsof
anarticleareallbased inAfrica, thenthatarticle is treatedas if itweresoleauthoredbyan
African-basedauthor.
TheauditisalsoextendedtotheeditorialboardsofthejournalsinTable1usingthegeographical
locationcriteriondetailedabove.
38 Inarecentexercisebut lookingatpoliticsscholarshiponAfrica,BriggsandWeathersuseasimilarmethodto
classifyauthorshipbasedonsimilarpracticalities.SeeBriggs,R.C.andWeathers,S.,2016.“GenderandLocationin
AfricanPoliticsScholarship:TheOtherWhiteMan’sBurden”.AfricanAffairs.39 For example, if a journal article has 3 authors andonly one of them is African-based, then the article gets a
weightingof1/3.Seeibid.
17
3. RESULTS
Thissectionoftheessaypresentstheresultsoftheaudit.In3.1.Ireporttheresultsonpatterns
ofauthorshipandin3.2Ireporttheresultsoftheauditofeditorialboards.
3.1. Patternsofauthorship
InTable2,Ilistthetotalnumberofjournalarticlespublishedfrom2005to2015andreportthese
byjournal.40IalsoreportthenumberofjournalarticlesonAfricaandthe“Africashare”,thatis
thepercentageofthetotalwrittenonAfrica.
Table2:Numberofjournals,numberofjournalsonAfricaandAfricaShares,2005to2015
NameofJournal Articlesfrom2005to2015
ArticlesonAfrica
%oftotalonAfrica
JournalofAfricanEconomies 364 364 100%
AfricanEconomicHistory 66 66 100%
EconomicDevelopmentandCulturalChange 291 92 32%
WorldDevelopment 1794 539 30%
AgricultureEconomics 784 205 26%
WorldBankEconomicReview 247 41 17%
JournalofDevelopmentEconomics 995 144 14%
WorldBankResearchObserver 116 13 11%
AmericanEconomicJournal:AppliedEcon. 263 28 11%
LandEconomics 436 26 6%
TOTAL/AVERAGE 5356 1518 28%
40Iexcludeerratagiventhelikelihoodofdouble-counting.Bookreviewsarealsoexcluded.
18
Thetotalnumberofjournalarticlespublishedfrom2005to2015inthe10journalsinTable2
was5,356andthetotalnumberonAfricawas1,518accountingfor28%ofthetotal.Thetwo
Africa-specificjournals,JournalofAfricanEconomies(JAE)andAfricanEconomicHistory(AEH),
naturallyhadthebiggestAfricashareoverthisperiod.Outsideofthesetwo,thebiggestAfrica
shareat32%wasfromEconomicDevelopmentandCulturalChangewiththelowestsharedueto
LandEconomicsat6%.WorldDevelopmenthadthehighestabsolutenumberofarticlesonAfrica
at539followedbyJAEwith364.Allinall,theinformationinTable2showsthatAfrica,atone-
thirdofthecoverage,isanimportanttopicofinquiryforthesejournals.
19
TogetasenseofthedynamicsbehindtheinformationinTable2,IpresentFigure1thatshows
theevolutionintheAfricashareovertheperiod2005to2015.
Figure1:EvolutionofAfricaShare,2005to2015
FromFigure1weseethattheAfricasharestartedoffin2005at21%andthenstayedaroundthe
averageof28%from2006to2010.Thereafter,ithasbeenincreasinghoveringabovetheaverage
formostofthe2010to2015period.
Figure2presentswhatcanbethoughtofasthemainresultofthisessay.Thefigureshowsthat,
onaverage,only25%ofjournalarticlesonAfricahadat-leastoneAfrican-basedscholaroverthe
period2005to2015.Conversely,onaverage,75%of journalarticlesonAfricadidnothavea
singlescholarbasedonthecontinentovertheperiod2005to2015.
20
Figure2:RepresentationofAfrican-basedscholars,2005to2015
Table3presentsthesameinformationasinFigure2butbyjournalandaveragedovertheperiod
2005 to 2015. The table also presents information on the Africa share taken from Table 2.
AgricultureEconomicsat41%hadthehighestpercentageofpapersonAfricahavingatleastone
African-basedauthor.TheWorldBankResearchObserver(WBRO)hadthelowestpercentageof
representationat0%. Inotherwords,noneof the journalarticles thatappearedonAfrica in
WBROfrom2005to2015hadanAfrican-basedauthor.Laterintheessay,Idiscussinsomedetail
theimplicationsofthisfindingespeciallygivenWBRO’scrucialroleofprovidingnon-technical
summariesof“researchbeingundertakenwithinthe[World]BankandoutsidetheBankinthe
areasofeconomics relevant fordevelopmentpolicy”.41Given its relativelyhigh impact factor
41See:http://wbro.oxfordjournals.org/
21
(seeTable1),WBROsetsthetermsaboutwhat“we”knowordonotknowaboutaparticular
problemineconomicdevelopment.
Table3:Africasharesandrepresentationshares,2005to2015
NameofJournal%oftotalarticlesonAfrica
%withAtleastOneAfrican-basedAuthor
AgricultureEconomics 26% 41%
JournalofAfricanEconomies 100% 28%
LandEconomics 6% 28%
WorldDevelopment 30% 24%
AfricanEconomicHistory 100% 19%
EconomicDevelopment&CulturalChange 32% 16%
JournalofDevelopmentEconomics 14% 14%
WorldBankEconomicReview 17% 11%
AmericanEconomicJournal:AppliedEcon. 11% 10%
WorldBankResearchObserver 11% 0%
ThesharesofAfrican-basedscholarsintheAfrica-specificjournalsAEHandJAEwererespectively
19%and28%.These shares areworth keeping inmindwhen thinkingaboutwhetherAfrica-
focusedjournalsarethebestwaysoftacklingtheproblemofunderrepresentation.
RecallthatFigure2reportsthepercentageofarticlesonAfricathathaveat-leastoneAfrican-
basedauthorirrespectiveofwhethertheyareasole,leadorjustanordinaryco-authoronthe
paper.ItisusefultoknowthepercentageofpapersonAfricawhereAfrican-basedauthorsare
leadorsoleauthorsifonlybecausethesetwocategoriesaremeasuresofinfluenceorsignificant
22
inputontheresearchitself.42InFigure3,Ireportthecombinedpercentageofsingleauthored
andlead-authoredpapersbyAfrican-basedauthors.IalsoreportfromFigure2,thepercentage
ofpaperswithat-leastoneAfrican-basedauthorregardlessofwhethertheauthorissole,lead
oramereco-author.
Figure3:LookingcloselyatLead/SoleAuthorship,2005to2015
42 Although, it appears that economics is unique in this respect. Author names on multi-authored papers in
economicstendtobearrangedalphabeticallyincontrasttootherdisciplineswhereorderingispresumablybased
oncontribution.Onestudyput theestimate for theprevalenceofalphabeticordering in five leadingeconomics
journals(noneofwhichareconsideredinthisessay)at85%.SeeEngers,M.,etal.,1999.“First-AuthorConditions”.
JournalofPoliticalEconomy,107(4):859–883
23
InFigure3weseethatthemore“stringent”criterionofonlyconsideringsoleandleadauthored
papersgivesasmallerlevelofrepresentation:Onaverage,only15%ofjournalarticlesonAfrica
aresole-authoredorlead-authoredbyacademicsbasedonthecontinent.Inotherwords,only
examining the information in Figure 2 might lead to an overestimate of the degree
representation.Figure4reportsseparatelythepercentageofarticlesthataresoleauthoredand
leadauthoredbyAfrican-basedscholars.IalsoretaintheaggregatemeasuresfromFigure3for
purposesofcomparison.
Figure4:Breakingdownleadandsoleauthorship
24
InFigure4weseethatsoleauthoredandleadauthoredpapersbyAfrican-basedscholarswere
publishedataboutthesamerateoverthisperiod.Theaverageshareofsoleauthoredandlead
authoredpapersasapercentageofthetotalwasabout8%inbothcases.Althoughthesharefor
soleauthoredpapersislikelybiasedupwardsgiventhewayIdefinesole-authorshipinthisessay
(seeSection2).What the information in Figure4 shows,however, is that itwasmuchmore
difficulttopublishsinglyorasaleadauthoronanAfricancountryinthejournalsinTable1ifyou
werebasedonthecontinent.
Recall fromFigure2 that, onaverage, 75%of journal articlesonAfricadidnothavea single
African-basedauthorovertheperiod2005to2015.Wethenmightwanttoknowhowthese
“spoilsofexclusion”aresharedbetweenNorthAmerica,Europeandotherpartsoftheworld.
ThisinformationiscontainedinFigure5.43
43RecallthatforpaperswithoutasingleAfrican-basedauthor,Iassignthegeographicallocationoftheleadauthor
(seefootnote42forcaveatsaroundtheinterpretationofauthorpositionalityineconomics).
25
Figure5:SpoilsofExclusion,2005to2005
From the figure we observe that the “spoils” are mostly shared between North American
institutions(mostlyintheUS)andEuropeaninstitutions(mostlyintheUnitedKingdom,Germany
andScandinavia).Onaverage,halfofthepapersonAfricawithoutasingleAfrican-basedauthor
werewrittenbyNorthAmericanauthorswhiletheaverageforEuropewasslightlylessthanhalf.
Thecontributionofthecategory“Other”wasrelativelysmallat6%.44
44ThisismostlyAustralia,JapanandoneortwocountriesinAsiaandLatinAmerica.
26
3.2. EditorialBoards
PerhapsonewayofmakingsenseoftheresultsinSection3.1istolookatthegeographicalmake-
upoftheeditorialboardsofthejournalsstudiedinthisessaygiventheevidencethateditorsdo
influencewhoandwhatgetspublishedineconomics.45Thissubsectionpresentsinformationon
thegeographicallocationoftheeditorialboardsofthejournalsinTable1asreportedbetween
May and October of 2016. Unfortunately, I cannot report the dynamic aspects of board
membershipsimplybecausejournalsdonotpubliclyreportinformationonpasteditorialboards.
Figure6reportstheresultsofclassifyingjournaleditorsaccordingtogeographicallocation–the
10 journals inTable1hadatotaleditorialboardmembershipof269.Thefigurealsoreports,
fromTable2,thepercentageofpaperswrittenonAfricapresentedasthebarinred(thefirst
bar). A rough criterion of “fairness” would be one where the editorial membership closely
reflectedthegeographicalcoverageofthejournals.However,inFigure6weseethatwhereas
aboutone-thirdofthepaperswereonAfrica,only3%oftheeditorialboardwasbasedonthe
continent.46The lion’sshareofeditorialboardmembershipbelongstoNorthAmerican-based
scholarsat69%.
45See:Laband,D.N.andPiette,M.J.,1994.“Favoritismversussearchforgoodpapers:empiricalevidenceregarding
thebehaviorofjournaleditors”.JournalofPoliticalEconomy,102(1):194–203;Hodgson,G.M.andRothman,H.,
1999.“TheEditorsandAuthorsofEconomicsJournals:ACaseofInstitutionalOligopoly”.TheEconomicJournal,109
(453): 165 – 186; Innes, R., 2008. “Editorial Favoritism”. Unpublished Working Paper. Available at:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/A/bo10444942.html46OnecritiqueofthiscomparisonisthatIamcomparingadynamicaveragewithastaticone.Thatis,Iamcomparing
anaveragetakenover10yearswithonefromasingleyear.Butevenifwelimitedthedynamicaveragetopapers
27
Figure6:Editorialboardmembership,2015
InFigure7,IcastthespotlightontheeditorialmembershipofthetwoAfrica-focusedjournals
AfricanEconomicHistory(AEH)andJournalofAfricanEconomies(JAE).WeseefromtheFigure
thatbothAEHand JAE fall shortofmy“fairness”criterion.Theybothdedicate100%of their
coveragetothecontinentandyettheeditorialboardsofAEHandJAEhaverespectively14%and
7%oftheireditorsbasedonthecontinent.Thisputsinperspectivetheargumentthatintroducing
moreAfrica-focusedjournalsistheantidotetothecrisisofunderrepresentation.
publishedin2015orinthetwoorthreeyearsleadingupto2015,theconclusionwouldstillremain.Ifanything,
thingswouldworsenbythisroughcriterionof“fairness”.
28
Figure7:EditorialboardmembershipofAEHandJAE,2015
AnotherinterestingtalkingpointfromFigure7istheapparentrelationshipbetweenajournal’s
geographicalhomeandthegeographicalmake-upofitseditorialboard.AEHwhichisbasedin
NorthAmerica (at theUniversityofWisconsin)has86%of itseditorialboardbased inNorth
America.NoneofitseditorialboardisbasedinEurope.JAE,whichisbasedatOxfordUniversity,
hasmorethanhalfofitseditorialboardbasedinEurope,farexceedingtheaverageforEurope
reportedinFigure6.
29
4. IMPLICATIONS
In his 2015 book surveying the last 3 decades of the economics scholarship on Africa, the
economichistorianMortenJervenarguesthat“economistscontinuetogetAfricawrong”47with
the result that “[economic] growth in Africa has been misunderstood, and as a result the
disciplineofeconomicsiscurrentlyunabletogiveusefulpolicyadvice,letalonesimplyexplain
whatishappeningrightnow.”48Mycontentioninthisessayisthatonecannotfullyappreciate
thecritiquesofthelikesofJervenwithoutsomereferencetothedatapresentedintheprevious
sectionof this essay. Tobe sure,African scholars like thedistinguishedMalawian economist
ThandikaMkandawirehaveoftenspokenabouttheunderrepresentationof“Africanvoices”and
how this impacts scholarship.49 These statements have, however, often been anecdotal and
madeinreferencetothegeneralstateofsocialscienceresearchaboutthecontinent.Whatthis
essaydoesisobtainaprecisetriangulationoftheabsenceof“Africanvoices”withspecificfocus
oneconomics.
Before concluding the essay, I would like to highlight four direct implications for economics
researchandeconomicpolicythathavebeendiscernedfrommyworkperusingthemorethan
1,500 individual journal articles onAfrica that I had to consult in collecting the evidence for
Section3.
47Jerven,M.2015.Africa:WhyEconomistsGetItWrong,p248Ibid.,p8–949 See Mkandawire, T., 1997. “Social Sciences in Africa: Breaking Local Barriers and Negotiating International
Presence”,AfricanStudiesReview,40(2):15–36
30
4.1. FauxConsensus
Goodeconomicpolicyshouldbepredicatedonconsensus.MuchofAfrica’spolicymakinghas,
however,beenbasedonthe“consensusofthefew”.Thenowwidelyacknowledgedmistakesof
theStructuralAdjustmentyears50were theresultofa typeofconsensus-drivenpolicymaking
thatwaspreservedfortherevolvingdoorbetweenInternationalFinancialInstitutions(IFIs)and
Northernuniversities.OneofthelinchpinsofStructuralAdjustmentPolicies(SAPs)inAfricawas
theneedtoscalebackthestate.ThisfeatureofSAPsdrewitsinspirationfromscholarlyworkby
“[academics] based in North American universities and [was] immediately embraced by the
World Bank as it developed its political-economic analysis of African policymaking”.51 As the
writingonSAPsbyMkandawireandSoludoshows,suchpitfallsmighthavebeenavoidedhadthe
circleofconsensusbeenextendedtoincludevoicesonthecontinent.52
Themodusoperandiofthe“consensusofthefew”,however,seemstobecarryingonunabated.
A recent special edition of the journalWorld Development on the rather important topic of
industrializationandstructuraltransformationinAfricadidnothaveasinglecontributorfrom
thecontinent.53AndasreportedinSection3,allthepapersonAfricaintheWorldBankResearch
50SeeOstry,J.D.,etal.2016.“Neoliberalism:Oversold?”.FinanceandDevelopment,53(2).51Mkandawire,T.andSoludoC.C.,1999.OurContinent,OurFuture:AfricanPerspectivesonStructuralAdjustment.
Trenton:AfricanWorldPress,p.2452Ibid.53McMillan,M.S.andHeady,D.(Eds).,2014.“EconomicTransformationinAfrica”,WorldDevelopment,63:1–
124
31
Observer,ajournalwhoseprimarypurposeistosynthesizeresearchfindingsforthepurposesof
policy,didnothaveasingleAfrican-basedauthor.
4.2. HegemonicTheories
The point of departure for scholarly enquiry into “policy failure” in Africa are the dominant
frameworksof‘neopatrimonialism’andthe‘publicchoiceschool’that“pointtowardsomeform
ofmalevolentstatesimplyactingonbehalfof,oratthebehestof,rulinginterests”.54Thepublic
choiceapproachtopolicyfailurehasinspiredmanymindsworkingonAfricasinceRobertBates
published his Markets and States in Tropical Africa.55 For its part, neopatrimonialism is
consideredindispensableformakingsenseofpolicymakingduringtheSAPyears.Thego-tobook
formanyeconomistsandpoliticalscientistsonSAPsisNicolasvandeWalle’sAfricanEconomies
andthePoliticsofPermanentCrisis.56VandeWalle,workingfirmlywithintheneopatrimonial
framework,reachestheratherincredibleconclusionthatSAPswereneverreallyimplementedin
Africabecausedoingsowouldhavejeopardizedtheinterestsoftherulingelites.Inspiteofthe
voluminousliteraturethathasdetailedtheimplementationofSAPsacrossthecontinent57,van
54Mkandawire,T.,2015.“NeopatrimonialismandThePoliticalEconomyofEconomicPerformanceinAfrica:
CriticalReflections”.WorldPolitics,67(3),p56755Bates,R.H.,1981.MarketsandStatesinTropicalAfrica:ThePoliticalBasisofAgriculturalPolicies.Berkeley:
UniversityofCaliforniaPress56VandeWalle,2001.AfricanEconomiesandthePoliticsofPermanentCrisis,1979–1999.Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress57See,forexample,Mkandawire,TandSoludo,C.C.,1999.OurContinent,OurFutureandMkandawire,T.and
Soludo,C.C.(Eds),2003.AfricanVoicesonStructuralAdjustment:ACompanionToOurContinent,OurFuture.
Trenton:AfricanWorldPress
32
deWalle’s book is highly favourably cited and is required reading in leading economics and
politicscoursesintheNorth.58
4.3. TheConfluenceofResearchonSomeQuestions
OnestrikingfeatureabouttheeconomicsscholarshiponAfricaisthepreponderanceofresearch
onHIV/AIDS,conflictandcorruption.There isobviouslya“demand” for this typeof research
giventhatthecontinenthashistoricallycarriedafairburdenoftheseunfortunateills.However,
giventrade-offsinherentintheresearchprocess,havinglotsofresearchonconflictorcorruption
impliesthatwearenotlearningaboutother,perhapsequallyimportant,matters.Forexample,
oneofthemostsociallyandeconomicallydisruptiveepisodesinrecentAfricanhistoryhasbeen
theeraofSAPs.Sadly,weknowlittle,atleastaseconomists,aboutthemediumtolong-term
impactsofSAPpoliciesonvarioussocialandeconomicoutcomes.Further,importantresearch
questionsareoftenconceptualizedinwaysthatdonotfacilitatedeeplearning.Forexample,the
economichistorianMortenJervenhaspointedoutthatthestandardresearchquestioningrowth
economicsonAfricahasbeen“whydidAfricanotgrow?”asopposedto“whyhasAfricagrown
atcertaintimesandthensloweddownatothertimes?”.59Thepolicyimplicationsofthesecond
questionareprofound.
58ThebookfeaturesprominentlyonChrisBlattman’s“PoliticalEconomyofDevelopmentCourse”atColumbia
University.Blattmanconsidersthebooktobe“oneof[his]favoritebooksonAfricanPoliticalEconomy”.See:
http://chrisblattman.com/2007/12/09/dear-donors-please-stop-helping-us/59Jerven,M.,2015.Africa:WhyDoEconomistsGetItWrong?
33
4.4. TheLimitsof“Data”
InPoorNumbersMortenJervenmarshalstheevidencetoshowthatAfricanstatisticaldata is
plaguedby“systematicvariationinerrorsandbiases”andwarnsthat“themostbasicmetricof
development,GrossDomesticProduct(GDP),shouldnotbetreatedasanobjectivenumberbut
ratherasanumberthatisaproductofaprocessinwhicharangeofarbitraryandcontroversial
assumptionsaremade”.60ThisisworthbearinginmindparticularlygiventheresultsofSection
3thatexemplifywhatJervenelsewheredescribesastheever“increasingdistancebetweenthe
observedandtheobserver”ineconomicsresearchonAfricawhere“analystsincreasingly[make]
useofdownloadabledatasetstotesteconometricmodels”61.AphenomenonBrankoMilanovic
describesas“Wikipediawith[statisticalanalysis]”.62
60Jerven,M.,2013.PoorNumbers:HowWeAreMisledByAfricanDevelopmentStatisticsAndWhatToDoAboutIt.
Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress61Jerven,M.,2015.Africa:WhyEconomistsGetItWrong,p12062 Milanovic, B. 2014. “My take on the Acemoglu-Robinson critique of Piketty”. Available at:
http://glineq.blogspot.com/2014/08/my-take-on-acemoglu-robinson-critique.html
34
5. CONCLUSION
ThisessayhasprovidedsomeofthefirstevercomprehensiveestimatesofwhatIhavedescribed
elsewhere as economics’ “Africa problem”. About 75% of the papers published on Africa in
leadingeconomicsjournalsdidnothaveasingleAfrican-basedauthorovertheperiod2005to
2015.ThismeasureofunderrepresentationworsenswhenIexcludethosepaperswhereAfrican-
basedscholarsweremereco-authors.Overtlymissingfromthisessayisadeepdiscussionofthe
likelycausesoftheresultsdiscussedinSection3.Suchadiscussionwouldhoweverrequirethe
gatheringofmuchmoreinformationthanthatpresentedhere.Ifanything,thehopeisthat,ina
smallway,thisessaysparksalongoverdueconversationaboutthepoliticsandimplicationsof
thepatternsofknowledgeproductionineconomicsonAfrica.Onceconfrontedwiththeresults
inSection3,itisdifficulttothinkaboutanythingelse–toparaphraseRobertLucas’famousquote
oneconomicdevelopment.63
63Lucas,R.E.,1988.“OnTheMechanicsofEconomicDevelopment”.JournalofMonetaryEconomics,22:p5