towards post-modern identities in africa? · strengthen ethnic identifications, because of the...

Centre for Research on Peace and Development (CRPD) KU Leuven

Parkstraat 45, box 3602, 3000 Leuven, Belgium Phone: +32 16 32 32 50; Fax: +32 16 32 30 88; http://www.kuleuven.be/crpd

Towards Post-Modern

Identities in Africa?

An Analysis of Citizenship

Conceptualizations in Ghana

Amélie Godefroidt, Arnim Langer & Bart Meuleman

CRPD Working Paper No. 51

March 2016


1

Towards post-modern identities in Africa?

An analysis of citizenship conceptualizations in Ghana

Amélie Godefroidt, Arnim Langer and Bart Meuleman

Abstract

Many post-colonial African leaders were concerned about the lack of national unity and

integration at the time of independence. While classic modernization theorists were hopeful

that national unity would follow from political and economic modernization, second-generation

modernization theorists claimed that modernization caused more competition between ethnic

groups over new resources contributing to the continued salience of ethnic identities. This

article contributes to the modernization discussion by investigating the opinion of Ghanaian

university students (N=3,264) regarding their citizenship notions. Undermining both

modernization theories as well as the civic-ethnic dichotomy omnipresent in western research

on citizenship, the majority of the students tend to value both civic and ethnic items

simultaneously, leading to a complex citizenship conception. Moreover, a vast majority of the

students see themselves as equally Ghanaian and part of their ethnic group. Consequently,

we argue that Ghanaian university students adhere to a post-modern identity equally focusing

on the nation and ethnic affiliations.

Keywords: modernization; identity; civic and ethnic citizenship; nationalism; ethnicity; Ghana


2

Authors

Amélie Godefroidt is research assistant at the Centre for Research on Peace and

Development (CRPD), University of Leuven (email: [email protected])

Arnim Langer is director of the Centre for Research on Peace and Development (CRPD),

UNESCO Chair in Building Sustainable Peace, and associate professor in International

Relations at the University of Leuven (email: [email protected])

Bart Meuleman is associate professor at the Centre for Sociological Research (CeSO) and

the Centre for Research on Peace and Development (CRPD), University of Leuven (email:

[email protected])

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) project ‘Making

Citizens 'National': Analyzing the Impact of Ghana's National Service Scheme (NSS)’ (grant

reference G049513N) and the KU Leuven Special Research Fund. We would also like to thank

Tobi Oshodi and Maarten Schroyens for their help in the implementation of the National

Service Scheme (NSS) survey in Ghana.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected])


3

1. Introduction

Due to the arbitrary boundaries of their countries, numerous post-colonial African leaders were

concerned about the lack of national unity and integration at the time of independence. As a

result, many African countries decided to implement a wide range of nation-building policies in

order to strengthen their countries’ national unity and ‘to overcome and avoid the manifold

problems associated with [ethnic] heterogeneity and diversity’ (Bornman, 2006, p. 385). Even

after the immediate post-independence period, many African countries continued to implement

various (symbolic) policies and measures aimed at promoting national unity and integration,

including, for example, changing the colonial names of their countries, homogenizing religious

differences, centralizing states’ structures and decision-making institutions, changing their

national currencies, conducting non-ethnic censuses, relocating capital cities and changing

their names, promulgating one-party states, abolishing traditional kingdoms and introducing

military conscription and national service programs (Bandyopadhyay & Green, 2013; Kpessa,

Béland, & Lecours, 2011).

At the time of independence, classic modernization theorists thought that national unity would

also follow from political and economic modernization (Robinson, 2014). Based on their

analyses of Western societies, they argued that processes like urbanization, universal

education, access to mass media and industrialization would inevitably give rise to a stronger

national consciousness at the expense of other sub-national identities and affiliations (e.g.

Anderson, 1991; Deutsch, 1953, 1961; Gellner, 1993; Rostow, 1990; Weber, 1976). However,

because of the enduring relevance and salience of ethnic identities in many African countries,

some scholars started questioning whether modernization would indeed lead to a weakening

of ethnic identities and loyalties (Robinson, 2009). These so-called ‘second-generation

modernization’ scholars started theorizing that modernization was actually more likely to

strengthen ethnic identifications, because of the increased competition between different

ethnic groups over the control of the state and its resources (Bates, 1983, 1999; Melson &

Wolpe, 1970).

An issue which is closely associated with the salience of ethnic and national identities has to

do with citizenship conceptualizations. These conceptualizations essentially refer to people’s

beliefs about the organization of a society and about who should be regarded as a national in-

group member (Bereketeab, 2011). Within the predominantly Western-based citizenship

literature, two broad citizenship conceptualizations are usually recognized: civic and ethnic

citizenship (Brubaker, 1990). Civic citizenship is generally associated with the territoriality

principle and based on political loyalty, while ethnic citizenship is commonly linked with the

‘law of blood’ and based on ancestry (e.g. Brubaker, 1992; Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010;

Shulman, 2002, 2004a). More recently, a cultural citizenship conceptualization has been


4

proposed holding the middle ground between civic and ethnic citizenship (Reijerse, Acker,

Vanbeselaere, Phalet, & Duriez, 2013). Interestingly, so far, the vast majority of research

concerning citizenship conceptualizations has been conducted in Western societies, despite

the obvious importance of these issues in other contexts, including the African one, as well.

The main objective of this paper is therefore to empirically investigate citizenship

conceptualizations in a specific African context and explore how the prevailing citizenship

conceptualizations correspond to classic or second-generation modernization ideas. More

specifically, we will analyze the prevailing citizenship conceptualizations among a large sample

of Ghanaian university students, which were interviewed as part of the National Service

Scheme Survey (N3S) (Langer et al., 2014). While the main objective of the N3S was to

determine to what extent Ghana’s National Service Scheme (NSS) contributes to improving

inter-group relations in Ghana (Ibid.), the N3S also contained a range of questions concerning

people’s perceptions on ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. Below we will discuss the N3S in

more detail and we will also reflect upon the limitations of focusing on Ghanaian university

students. While drawing on both the African-based modernization literature and the Western-

based citizenship literature, we aim to answer the following research questions in this paper:

Is there a civic-ethnic citizenship dichotomy prevalent among Ghanaian university students as

is generally argued to be the case in Western societies? If yes, what is the dominant citizenship

conceptualization among these students? And, how does the dominant citizenship

conceptualization correspond to classic and second-generation modernization ideas?

This paper proceeds as follows. In the next section we will review in more detail the competing

modernization ideas as well as the literature about citizenship conceptualizations. Section 3

will then contain our empirical analysis. The objective of this empirical analysis is to find an

answer to the research questions which were mentioned above. In the last section we will draw

some conclusions regarding the dominant citizenship conceptualization among the Ghanaian

university students and discuss some important avenues for future research.

2. Modernization, Identity and Citizenship in Africa

Drawing on the experiences of European countries, classic modernization theorists argued

that processes of modernization would necessarily lead to a weakening of sub-national

attachments and an increase in national identification (Coleman, 1954; Deutsch, 1953, 1961;

Gellner, 1993; Robinson, 2009; Rostow, 1990). Urbanization, for instance, was argued to

break the ties between individuals and their ‘tribal homelands’, thereby producing a socially

cohesive national community in which citizens of different backgrounds could communicate

and cooperate (Robinson, 2014, p. 713). Centralized education and mass media were other


5

aspects of modernization which were thought to help promote national consciousness by

advancing a shared national language and a common national history curriculum (Gellner,

1993; Rostow, 1990). Further, industrialization was argued to reduce people’s reliance on sub-

national networks for accessing land and maintaining livelihoods, and would simultaneously

stimulate new settlements, occupations and patterns of intensive social interaction (Robinson,

2014). Thus, in many ways, the age of modernization was seen as the age of nationalism

(Deutsch, 1961).

The expectation that political and economic modernization would lead to national integration

was to some extent reassuring for the leaders of the recently de-colonized African states. It is

worthwhile remembering here that many of these countries had borders which had been

arbitrarily drawn by the former colonial powers with little respect for social and linguistics

alliances (Herbst, 1989). Therefore, the postcolonial authorities were left with the difficult but

important task of developing stable nation-states and creating ‘an overarching supra-national

identity that should replace and/or subsume subnational identities and cultures’ (Bornman,

2006, p. 385; Miles & Rochefort, 1991). National integration of diverse populations was seen

as crucial to the survival of these new states. The process of modernization was in this respect

not only seen as a way of increasing people’s standard of living, but it was also a way to

advance national integration and consciousness (Robinson, 2009).

However, when ethnic loyalties did not wane and sometimes even seemed to become more

salient, scholars of African politics began to question the hypothesis that modernization would

inevitably lead to national integration and a stronger national consciousness. Indeed, both

Bates (1983, 1999) and Melson and Wolpe (1970) argued that processes of modernization

were actually more likely to increase the salience of ethnic identities in post-independence

Africa and sometimes processes of modernization even created the conditions for the

formation of new ethnic groups. Bates (1983, 1999) argued in this respect that this was

because the benefits of modernization flowed through state governments, and ethnic groups

were considered useful ‘instruments’ in order to capture these benefits (Bates, 1999, p. 7).

Other scholars emphasized that the different processes of modernization did not necessarily

have to result in a weakening of ethnic loyalties, as was claimed by classic modernization

scholars. It was argued, for instance, that urbanization could equally lead to urban segregation

by bringing members of the same ethnic background together in segregated communal

compartments instead of promoting interethnic cooperation (Melson & Wolpe, 1970). Similarly,

second-generation modernization scholars argued that the selection of a particular language

as the national language or a curriculum taught in national schools may cause disagreements

which could inflict ethnic tensions and conflicts, instead of advancing national integration as

argued by classic modernization scholars (Robinson, 2014). In sum, second-generation


6

modernization theorists claimed that modernization was likely to cause new incentives for

competition in post-independence Africa and that this competition would probably be

organized along ethnic lines, thereby contributing to the continued salience and relevance of

ethnic groups and identities (Bates, 1983; Melson & Wolpe, 1970; Robinson, 2009, 2014).

As mentioned in the introduction of this paper, the issue of the salience of ethnic and national

identities is closely associated with citizenship conceptualizations. Conventional wisdom

traditionally assumes that citizenship models can be divided into two1 broad but still distinct

categories: civic and ethnic citizenship. Civic citizenship is traditionally associated with the

territoriality principle (ius soli) and can, therefore, be regarded as open based on political

loyalty; whereas ethnic citizenship is derived from the law of blood (ius sanguinis) and is, thus,

considered as rather closed based on ancestry (Brubaker, 1992; Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010;

Shulman, 2002, 2004b; Smith, 2010). In recent years, several cross-national studies have

used factor analysis to investigate to what extent these citizenship conceptualizations are

prevalent among the general population in different Western societies (e.g. Janmaat, 2006;

Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010; Reijerse et al., 2013). This inquiry into the latent structure of

identity ideas has yielded information into what it entails to hold a civic or an ethnic citizenship

notion, by assessing to what extent different identity traits are incorporated when evaluating

someone as a citizen of the state or not (Wright, Citrin, & Wand, 2012).

It is intriguing that the association between the modernization literature and the citizenship one

has hardly been made so far. Citizenship analyses provide information on what it entails to

adhere to a civic or to an ethnic citizenship notion, which closely corresponds with the concepts

of a national or ethnic identity. In other words, if citizens have the tendency to be more ‘national’

–as expected by classic modernization scholars– one could equally expect them to endorse

more civic requirements proposed by the citizenship scholars. In contrast, if people turn more

to their ethnic loyalties –as argued by second-generation modernization theories– they should

adhere more to ethnic criteria. Modernization theories propose competing expectations the

salience of national and ethnic identities while the citizenship literature offers us operational

tools. Interestingly, although its relevance in the African context, the vast majority of research

on citizenship conceptualizations has been conducted in Western societies so far and it is,

thus, still unknown to what extent the civic/ethnic dichotomy is valid in the African context.

1 More recent, a cultural notion of citizenship has been proposed holding the middle ground between civic and ethnic citizenship. It is not entirely open or voluntary nor completely closed or inherited. Cultural citizenship is based on adhering to and preserving the nation’s culture, including its language and religion (Kymlicka 1999, 2001; Nielsen 1999; Reijerse et al. 2013). Nonetheless, whether a distinct cultural representation of citizenship is manifested at the individual level remains a highly contested issue (Reijerse et al. 2013).


7

3. Citizenship conceptualizations among Ghanaian university students

Because most studies on citizenship conceptualizations have been conducted in Western

countries (e.g. Kohn, 1945; Meinecke, 1907; Moreno, Arriba, & Serrano, 1998; Moreno &

Arriba, 1996; Moreno, 2006; Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010; Reijerse et al., 2013; Shulman, 2002,

2004b), we know relatively little about these issues in non-western contexts, in particular in

Africa. Indeed, it is unclear whether or not citizenship can be conceptualized into a civic and

ethnic conception in Africa as is commonly found in Western contexts; and what the dominant

citizenship conceptualizations would be in this specific context. The lack of systematic

empirical research on citizenship conceptualizations in Africa is somewhat surprising given the

far-reaching social and political consequences of the topic. Fostering a national identity

overriding ethnic affiliations remains a fundamental challenge in multi-ethnic societies in

general and in post-colonial African countries in particular (Langer et al., 2014). In what follows

we will analyze the prevailing citizenship conceptualizations among a large sample of

Ghanaian university students. The Ghanaian context is a particularly interesting case for

investigating citizenship conceptualizations because of its post-colonial efforts of nation-

building. Indeed, from independence, Ghanaian political elites have tried to promote national

integration through implementing a range of nation-building measures in the institutional,

policy-oriented and symbolic spheres (Langer, 2007).

3.1. Data and measurements: National Service Scheme Survey (N3S)

The analyses are based on empirical and recent data gathered in one African country, namely

Ghana. The 2013 ‘National Service Scheme Survey (N3S)’, carried out in three Ghanaian

universities, aims to analyze ‘to what extent Ghana’s NSS program contributes to improving

inter-group relations and fostering stronger national identities’ (Langer et al., 2014, p. 5). It,

thus, also contains unique data on national identities including the required citizenship items.

Although we acknowledge that focusing on Ghanaian university students limits the

generalizability of the study, we argue that it is nevertheless relevant. Ghana was chosen as

a first case study because of the immense lacuna on African countries in the literature and its

specific post-colonial nation-building policies. An in-depth case study is in line with the

contextual and culture-dependent nature of identities (Chandra, 2012; Svallfors, 1996). The

constructivist understanding of identity shows that the relative importance of different identities

is sensitive to context. It is, therefore, of crucial importance to investigate the countries

separately. University students are of special interest because they compose a particular

subgroup of the population in terms of educational level, literacy, financial resources, mobility

and access to new technology. Besides the fact that students are therefore a ‘modern’ group

par excellence, these students also form the future political and economic elite of Ghana which


8

makes their ideas on citizenship especially relevant. A total of 3,264 students participated

ranging in age from 16 to 53 with a mean age of 23 (67.5% male, 32.5% female). More

information on socio-demographic variables can be found in Appendix 1.

This paper aims to empirically analyze the structure of citizenship in order to see to what extent

ideas on identity corresponds with the classis modernization theory (civic requirements are

considered more important) or the second-generation modernization theory (ethnic

requirements are conserved more important). In order to do so, respondents were questioned

about the criteria they considered as important for being truly Ghanaian. More specifically, they

could rate eight different criteria on a 10-point Likert scale ranging from ‘not important at all’ to

‘very important’. The citizenship items were: being born in Ghana, respecting Ghana’s political

institutions and laws, having lived in Ghana for most of one’s life, speaking English, feeling

Ghanaian, having Ghanaian ancestry, speaking the a locale language and being married to a

Ghanaian. These items provide us with specific information about the importance attached to

national or ethnic elements. According to the western literature, these questions cluster into

two variables: a civic citizenship conception and an ethnic one. If this is also the case in our

sample, we can analyze whether Ghanaian students will apply a civic above an ethnic

citizenship notion or vice versa when interacting with other people. It is, however, equally

interesting to investigate whether we will find the dichotomy in our sample in the first place as

this will be one of the first studies to analyze citizenship conceptions in a non-western, African

context. Thus, we first assess the dimensionality of citizenship ideas in Ghana by means of

factor analyses before scrutinizing which conception dominates vis-à-vis the other.

3.2. Analyses and results

Before assessing the dimensionality of citizenship, the mean scores on the eight citizenship

items are reported in Table 2. Respecting Ghana’s political institutions and laws, speaking a

local language and feeling Ghanaian obtain higher ratings while being married to a Ghanaian

receives a slightly lower score. It is, however, clear that respondents tend value all items rather

equally with a differential ratio between the most and least important item of only 1.85. It is

also noteworthy that all standard deviations are rather large meaning that the data spread far

from the mean and thus that there is a lot of variability in importance attached to the criteria

(Field, 2009). Because these descriptives do not reveal which items empirically belong

together nor which identity conception prevails, we still had to assess the latent structure of

citizenship using factor analyses.


9

Table 1: Descriptive statistics for the eight measures of citizenship attitudes (N=3,264).

Citizenship items n Mean SD Ranking

Q59_1. To have been born in Ghana 2995 5,99 3,135 4

Q59_2. To respect Ghana’s political institutions and laws 2992 6,41 2,988 1

Q59_3. To have lived in Ghana for most of one’s life 2987 5,02 3,003 6

Q59_4. To be able to speak English 2993 5,02 3,582 7

Q59_5. To feel Ghanaian 2986 6,35 3,231 3

Q59_6. To have Ghanaian ancestry 2986 5,93 3,181 5

Q59_7. To speak a local language 2988 6,39 3,212 2

Q59_8. To be married to a Ghanaian 2983 4,56 3,264 8

Note: Entries represent row percentages. Each item is preceded by the phrase: ‘Some people say that the following things are important for being truly Ghanaian. Others say they are not important. How important do you think each of the following things are?’.

To investigate the latent structure of citizenship perceptions among Ghanaian students and to

establish the empirical validity of the civic-ethnic dichotomy, we conducted an exploratory

factor analysis (ECA) –more specifically, a principle component analysis (PCA) with oblique

rotation (Promax)– on the eight items of the citizenship battery2. Against all expectations, only

one factor has an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 (4.75), explaining almost 60 percent of the

variance. In other words, the two-factor solution as commonly suggested in previous studies

is not presented in our data. All citizenship items load higher than .67 on this single factor

indicating a strong loading, as can be seen in the EFA-results displayed in Table 3.

2 The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) and Bartlett’s test of Sphericity both confirmed that conducting a factor analysis was an appropriate technique for this study. The KMO test statistics obtained a value of .910 which is generally considered as ‘superb’ (Hutcheson & Sofroniou 1999). Thus, we could be confident that the sample size is adequate for factor analysis. Bartlett’s test was also significant (χ2=12 670.04, df=28, p<.001), indicating that the correlations between the items were sufficiently large for an EFA (Field 2009).

The following step in the analysis was to determine the number of underlying dimensions that can be well measured by the items provided our survey. The scree plot clearly suggested a one-factor solution –instead of a two- (or three)-factor solution.


10

Table 2: Exploratory factor analysis of citizenship concepts.

Citizenship items Factor(s)

Q59_1. To have been born in Ghana .78

Q59_2. To respect Ghana’s political institutions and laws. .73

Q59_3. To have lived in Ghana for most of one’s life. .79

Q59_4. To be able to speak English .67

Q59_5. To feel Ghanaian .83

Q59_6. To have Ghanaian ancestry .81

Q59_7. To speak a local language .84

Q59_8. To be married to a Ghanaian .70

Note: Entries represent factor loadings obtained with an exploratory factor analysis for categorical data (in SPSS 22) with Promax as rotation method and PCA as estimator. The figures in bold represent membership of citizenship items to one latent factor, all factor loadings are significant at 5% level.

Interestingly, our EFA-results clearly contradict the widespread belief of a distinct civic, ethnic

(and/or cultural) citizenship conceptualization frequently found in the western-dominated

literature on citizenship (Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010; Reijerse et al., 2013; Wright et al., 2012).

This makes it impossible to assess the relative importance of the civic and ethnic

conceptualization and, thus, to assess the validity of the classic and second-generation

modernization ideas, respectively. Because of the rather large empirical evidence of a two-

factor solution in western countries, two confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were conducted

to formally assessed the stability of the one-factor configuration found in the EFA-results and

the two-factor configuration found in the literature. These analyses allowed us to validate our

one-factor solution as well as to scrutinize the theoretically suggested two-factor solution. In

order to determine the model fit, we used different fit indices. The first test statistic one should

consider is the chi-square test. However, because of the sensitivity to sample size of the chi-

square test statistic and because our sample size was considerable large (N = 3,264), this test

was not sufficiently sensitive as an indicator for the model fit in this casus. We, therefore,

focused on two other types of fit indices: the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)

as a measure of an absolute fit on the one hand; and on the other hand the Tucker-Lewis index

(TLI) and Comparative fit index (CFI) to assess a comparative fit of the model. It is suggested

to reject models with RMSEA values greater than 0.8 with an ideal RMSEA value less than

0.5. The CFI and TLI values greater than respectively 0.95 and .90 generally demonstrate

adequate model fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1992; Hu & Bentler, 1998).

First, we tested the one-factor solution found in the EFA by means of a CFA (see Figure 1 and

2). Accordingly, a theoretical model was specified that included only one factor measured by


11

the eight indicators addressing a complex, comprehensive citizenship conceptualization. The

initial results of the CFA using a one-factor solution were on the fringes of being stable: a

RMSEA of 0.121, a CFI of 0.929 and a TLI of 0.901. The CFI could be considered as

problematic. To improve the model fit, three modifications to the original model were

introduced. First, the item Q59_8 (‘Married to Ghanaian’) was removed as suggested by the

standardized Residual Covariances. Second, the error terms of Q59_1 (‘Born in Ghana’) and

Q59_3 (‘Lived in Ghana’), and the ones of Q59_4 (‘Speak English’) and Q59_7 (‘Speak local

language’) were covaried as suggested by the Modification Indices for Covariances and based

on theoretical grounds. Being born in Ghana is intrinsically connected to living there for most

of one’s life. Speaking English and speaking a local language are also two sides of the same

‘language’-coin. Third, as the covariances of Q59_1 and Q59_3 were also considerably high,

we allowed them to covary as well. The adjusted model confirmed the validity of a one factor-

solution (RMSEA of .054, a CFI of .991 and a TLI of .983).

χ2= 874.032; df = 20; p = 0.000 χ2= 103.528; df = 11; p = 0.000 CFI = .929;TLI = .901; RMSEA = .121 CFI = .991; TLI = .983; RMSEA = .054

Second, since prior research clearly revealed that items belong to either civic or ethnic scales

and since we needed this dichotomy to answer our questions about modernization, a

dichotomous factor solution was also tested (see Figure 3 and 4). Based on prior empirical

studies (Janmaat, 2006; Reeskens & Hooghe, 2010), we specified a theoretical model that

includes two factors (i.e. civic versus ethnic citizenship conceptions) measured by indicators

addressing a variety of citizenship attitudes. In line with Reeskens and Hooghe (2010), we

Figure 2: CFA results of the one-factor model – Stable

Figure 1: CFA results of the one-factor model – Unstable


12

ascribed speaking the national language (i.e. English), respecting political in the political

institutions/laws, and feeling Ghanaian to a civic factor while we ascribed being born in Ghana,

having lived in Ghana most of one’s life, having Ghanaian ancestry to the ethnic factor.

Moreover speaking a local language is also connected to the ethnic factor because learning a

local language is harder making it a more ascriptive, inherited aspect. Being married to a

Ghanaian is also linked to the ethnic factor as ethnic membership is not only conferred by birth

or adoption but also by marriage – according to Balaton-Chrimes (2015).

The results of the CFA using a two-factor solution were also on the fringes of being stable: a

RMSEA of .119, a CFI of .935 and a TLI of .904. To improve the model fit, two modifications

to the original model were introduced. First, the items Q59_4 (‘Speak English’) and Q59_8

(‘Married to Ghanaian’) were removed as suggested by the standardized Residual

Covariances. Second, the error terms of Q59_1 (‘Born in Ghana’) and Q59_3 (‘Lived in

Ghana’) were covaried as suggested by the Modification Indices for Covariances. Being born

in Ghana is also intrinsically connected to living there for most of one’s life. The adjusted model

confirmed the validity of a two factor-solution (RMSEA of .058, a CFI of .993 and a TLI of .984).

Although this two-factor model was acceptable, it was also clear that the two factors were

extremely correlated to each other (.94). This implies that 94 percent of the respondents who

are considering civic citizenship requirements as important also tend to adhere to an ethnic

logic. So, it is preferential to speak about one comprehensive citizenship conceptualization

instead of two separate concepts. Moreover, if we do construct the two separate variables, we

see that they both obtain a similar mean score (i.e. 5.91 for civic citizenship and 5.57 for ethnic

citizenship) –again reinforcing the complementary nature of the two constructs.

In conclusion, we wanted to assess the absolute importance attached to the civic and ethnic

citizenship conception in order to assess competing modernization ideas, but –against all

odds– the markers of national identity did not cluster into those two variables. Instead, they

clearly clustered into only one factor. When assessing the validity of two distinction

dimensions, it was clear that these dimensions were highly correlated which indicates

complementary rather than mutually excluding notions of nationhood. In other words, students

who attach more importance to civic items will also value ethnic items more. Consequently, it

seems necessary to reassess the ethnic-civic dichotomy –at least within an African, highly

educated subsample. Future research in more African countries should be conducted to re-

examine the meaning of ‘citizenship’ in the African context. More important in light of our

research objective, these results made it impossible to confirm or support one vision on

modernization. Our students do not adhere more to the national group (classic modernization)

nor to their ethnic group (second-generation modernization). The students seem to attach

equal importance to both civic and ethnic identity markers simultaneously in order to perceive


13

someone as ‘truly’ Ghanaian –rather than some students applying civic requirements while

others using ethnic criteria. Based on those results, we conclude that the Ghanaian students

do not reveal a typically modern identification as stated in previous theories on modernization,

but that they adhere to a new, post-modern, hybrid identity expanded in the next section.

χ2= 802.916; df = 19; p = 0.000 χ2= 74.192; df = 7; p = 0.000 CFI = .935;TLI = .904; RMSEA = .119 CFI = .993;TLI = .984; RMSEA = .058 Note: Confirmatory factor analysis for continuous data (N = 2901) with maximum likelihood. CFI – comparative fit index; TLI – Tucker-Lewis index; RMSEA – root mean square error of approximation.

As a robustness test of this rather unexpected result, we analyzed the standard question (i.e.

the ‘Moreno’ question3) used in studies on modernization as well. As can be seen in Figure 5,

almost 60 per cent of our respondents feels equally Ghanaian and a member of his/her ethnic

group regardless of this ethnic group. In other words, nor the national group nor the ethnic

group identification prevails –a result supporting our one-factor solution found in the factor

analyses.

3 Most studies on modernization simply ask the respondents to choose between being a [e.g. Ghanaian] and being a member of their ethnic group whereby possible responses include ‘only ethnic’, ‘more ethnic than national’, ‘equally national and ethnic’, ‘more national than ethnic’, ‘only national’. This measure of self-identification was first proposed by Moreno in his 1986-paper.

Figure 3: CFA results of the two-factor model – Unstable

Figure 4: CFA results of the two-factor model – Stable


14

4. Discussion and conclusion

In this paper we have investigated the structure of citizenship conceptualizations among

Ghanaian university students, arguably a very ‘modern’ group. In Western contexts, it is usually

argued that citizenship falls out into two broad –yet distinct– categories: civic and ethnic

citizenship. In line with the classic modernization perspective, one might expect the civic

citizenship conceptualization to prevail whereas another could equally argue that our university

students will endorse the ethnic citizenship conceptualization more based on the second-

generation modernization literature. Thus, by investigating the structure of citizenship among

Ghanaian university students and which conceptualization dominates, this paper connects the

theoretical tools developed by scholars of African politics concerning the impact of

modernization with the generally accepted citizenship conceptualizations elaborated with a

specific reference to developments in the western World.

Although the civic/ethnic dichotomy could be a useful tool for politicians and journalists to

construct a popular discourse, and for academics to assess the absolute importance attached

to civic citizenship vis-à-vis ethnic citizenship, it appears that it does not apply for Ghanaian

popular notions of citizenship. Rather than some students adhering the civic and others to the

ethnic notion, Ghanaian adolescents adhere to a one-factor, comprehensive citizenship

conception converging both civic and ethnic criteria. The one-factor results of the EFA and

CFA were confirmed by the fact that more than half of the students ‘feel equally Ghanaian and

a member for their ethnic group’. We therefore argue to reassess the civic-versus-ethnic

Figure 5: National versus ethnic identification


15

dichotomy, and opt for a more multi-dimensional concept mixing civic, ethnic and cultural

practices –at least in the Ghanaian context. This comprehensive citizenship conceptualization

led to our overall conclusion that Ghanaian university students adhere to a post-modern

identification whereby both the nation and the ethnic group or both civic and ethnic items are

simultaneously considered important (or unimportant). In other words, nor the national group

identification nor the ethnic group identification clearly dominates refuting both classic and

second-generation modernization theories. Nevertheless, future research is needed to confirm

that this post-modern identity present among our Ghanaian students also exists among other

groups and sections of society in Ghana as well as in other non-Western societies.

Some possible explanations can be put forward. Ghanaian students’ ideas about ‘true

Ghanaians’ and their self-identification are not fixed, but continuously in process, as the

boundaries between themselves and others, and between the different parts of themselves

are constantly negotiated. As a result, they think and behave differently in different contexts,

cultures and sets of ideas creating a multiple identity. Instead of having a national or an ethnic

identity, civic items can be more important in some contexts while it is equally possible that

ethnic criteria will be applied in other circumstances. This is in keeping with the ideas of Langer

(2010), Wimmer (2008) and Kuzio (2002). Langer (2010) examined the importance of different

identity markers –especially ethnic and religious markers– in different contexts and concluded

that ‘the relative importance attached to a specific dimension can differ between different

groups and/or fluctuate between different contexts’ (Langer, 2010, p. 27). Wimmer (2008)

evaluated different forms of ethnicity and argued that boundary-making is a ‘process of

constituting and re-configuring groups by defining the boundaries between them’. In other

words, one should not regard identity as fixed but rather as continually evolving (Wimmer,

2008, p. 1027 - original emphasis). Likewise, Kuzio (2002, p. 21) outlined that nationality is a

‘process of change that incorporates tensions between civic universalism and ethnic pluralism’.

Hence, he concluded that ‘pure civic or ethnic states only exist in theory’ because each nation

contains elements of both types of nationalism (Kuzio, 2002, p. 20).

It is equally possible that the specific Ghanaian context contributes to post-modern identity

ideas comprising a complex, multidimensional citizenship notion. After their independence,

Ghanaian politicians have underscored a multicultural nationality guaranteeing universal rights

to all citizens, including people of foreign origin, based on birth (Kobo, 2010). Furthermore, the

political elite has –in both formal and informal ways– taken various measures to ensure the

‘neutrality’ of the state (Langer, 2007, p. 14). By reducing ethnic electoral politics and ensuring

that political parties are national in character, by maintaining ethno-regional balances in the

political sphere and by continuously trying to reduce the developmental gap between ethnic

groups, national integration was stimulated and ethnic identities reduced (Langer, 2007). It is


16

therefore possible that a national and civic logic has gradually subsumed the ethnic one as a

result of decades of policy efforts. In this respect, it would be interesting to investigate other

African countries with other nation-building policies in order to see whether the post-modern

identification is more widespread or a Ghanaian phenomenon. It is also important to

incorporate a more representative, diverse sample especially in terms of age. Following the

argument that national and civic notions have gradually gained more importance, it could be

that older people still hold more ethnic identities compared to our young student sample.

A third explanation for our controversial finding could relate to the survey. It could be possible

that the items constructed in western research to measure civic and ethnic citizenship are too

culture-specific. It is perfectly possible that Ghanaian students perceive ‘nationalism’ in a

different way than people do in the West. This is in keeping with what Davidov et al. (2014)

would call ‘emic concepts’. It is possible that ‘identity’ concepts have a strongly nation-or

culture-specific meaning. In this respect, it is this arguable that the African context deviates

substantially from the usually investigated western contexts, and that we should be cautious

with trying to place past, present and future developments in Africa under de cover of western

concepts like ‘nationalism’ or ‘citizenship’.


17

5. References

Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of

nationalism (Rev.). London: Verso.

Balaton-Chrimes, S. (2015). Ethnicity, Democracy and Citizenship in Africa: Political

Marginalisation of Kenya’s Nubians. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

Bandyopadhyay, S., & Green, E. (2013). Nation-Building and Conflict in Modern Africa.

World Development, 45, 108–118.

Bates, R. H. (1983). Modernization, Ethnic Competition, and the Rationality of Politics in

Contemporary Africa. In D. S. Rothchild & V. A. Olorunsola (Eds.), State versus Ethnic

Claims: African Policy Dilemmas (pp. 152–171). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Bates, R. H. (1999). Ethnicity, Capital Formation, and Conflict. In Festschrift Conference.

Bereketeab, R. (2011). The Ethnic and Civic Foundations of Citizenship and Identity in the

Horn of Africa, 11(1), 63–81.

Bornman, E. (2006). National symbols and nation-building in the post-apartheid South Africa.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(3), 383–399.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sociological

Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258.

Brubaker, W. R. (1990). Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Columbia

University.

Brubaker, W. R. (1992). Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Chandra, K. (2012). Constructivist Theories of Ethnic Politics. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Coleman, J. S. (1954). Nationalism in Tropical Africa. The American Political Science

Review, 48(2), 404–426.

Davidov, E., Meuleman, B., Cieciuch, J., Schmidt, P., & Billiet, J. (2014). Measurement

Equivalence in Cross-National Research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40(1), 55–75.

Deutsch, K. W. (1953). Nationalism and social communication: an inquiry into the

foundations of nationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Deutsch, K. W. (1961). Social Mobilization and Political Development. The American Political

Science Review, 55(3), 493–514.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering Statistics using SPSS (3th ed.). London: Sage Publications.


18

Gellner, E. (1993). Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Oxford Blackwell.

Herbst, J. (1989). The creation and matintenance of national boundaries in Africa.

International Organization, 43(4), 673–692.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to

underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.

Janmaat, J. G. (2006). Popular conceptions of nationhood in old and new European member

states: Partial support for the ethnic-civic framework. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(1),

50–78.

Kobo, O. (2010). ‘We are citizens too’: the politics of citizenship in independent Ghana. The

Journal of Modern African Studies, 48(01), 67–94.

Kohn, H. (1945). The Idea Of Nationalism: A Study In Its Origins And Background. New York,

NY: Macmillan.

Kpessa, M., Béland, D., & Lecours, A. (2011). Nationalism, development, and social policy:

The politics of nation-building in sub-Saharan Africa. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(12),

2115–2133.

Kuzio, T. (2002). The myth of the civic state: a critical survey of Hans Kohn’s framework for

understanding nationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(1), 20–39.

Langer, A. (2007). The Peaceful Management of Horizontal Inequalities in Ghana. CRISE.

Oxford.

Langer, A. (2010). The Situational Importance of Ethnicity and Religion in Ghana.

Ethnopolitics, 9(1), 9–29.

Langer, A., Meuleman, B., Oshodi, T., & Schroyens, M. (2014). Can student populations in

developing countries be reached by online surveys ? The case of the National Service

Scheme Survey. Leuven.

Meinecke, F. (1907). Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat; Studien zur Genesis des deutschen

Nationalstaates. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Melson, R., & Wolpe, H. (1970). Modernization and the Politicas of Cummunalism: A

Theoretical Perspective. The American Political Science Review, 64(4), 1112–1130.

Miles, W. F. S., & Rochefort, D. A. (1991). Nationalism Versus Ethnic Identity in Sub-

Saharan Africa. The American Political Science Review, 85(2), 393–403.

Moreno, L. (2006). Scotland, Catalonia, Europeanization and the ‘Moreno Question’. Scottish

Affairs, (54), 1–21.


19

Moreno, L., & Arriba, A. (1996). Dual idenitity in autonomous Catalonia. Scottish Affairs, (17),

22–41.

Moreno, L., Arriba, A., & Serrano, A. (1998). Multiple identities in decentralized Spain: The

case of Catalonia. Regional & Federal Studies, 8, 65–88.

Reeskens, T., & Hooghe, M. (2010). Beyond the civic-ethnic dichotomy: Investigating the

structure of citizenship concepts across thirty-three countries. Nations and Nationalism,

16(4), 579–597.

Reijerse, A., Acker, K. Van, Vanbeselaere, N., Phalet, K., & Duriez, B. (2013). Beyond the

Ethnic‐Civic Dichotomy: Cultural Citizenship as a New Way of Excluding Immigrants.

Political Psychology, 34(4), 611–630.

Robinson, A. L. (2009). National versus ethnic identity in Africa: state, group, and individual

level correlates of national identification (Afrobarometer Working Paper No. 112).

Afrobarometer Working Paper No. 112.

Robinson, A. L. (2014). National Versus Ethnic Identification in Africa: Modernization,

Colonial Legacy, and the Origins of territorial Nationalism. World Politics, 66(4), 709–

746.

Rostow, W. W. (1990). The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shulman, S. (2002). Challenging the Civic/Ethnic and West/East Dichotomies in the Study of

Nationalism. Comparative Political Studies, 35(5), 554–585.

Shulman, S. (2004a). The contours of civic and ethnic national identification in Ukraine.

Europe-Asia Studies, 56(1), 35–56.

Shulman, S. (2004b). The contours of civic and ethnic national identification in Ukraine.

Europe-Asia Studies, 56(1), 35–56.

Smith, A. D. (2010). Nationalism: Theory, Ideology, History (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA:

Cambridge Polity.

Svallfors, S. (1996). National Differences in national identities? An introduction to the

International Social Survey Program. New Community, 22, 127–134.

Weber, E. (1976). Peasants Into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1870-

1914. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Wimmer, A. (2008). Elementary strategies of ethnic boundary making. Ethnic and Racial

Studies, 31(6), 1025–1055.


20

Wright, M., Citrin, J., & Wand, J. (2012). Alternative Measures of American National Identity:

Implications for the Civic-Ethnic Distinction. Political Psychology, 33(4), 469–482.

Appendix: descriptive statistics of socio-demographic variable s (N=3,264)

Categorical variables Percentage Frequency

Gender

Male 67.6 2205

Female 32.4 1059

Total valid 100.00 3264

Religion

Christian 84.2 2748

Muslim 5.8 190


Ethnicity

Akan 57.2 1866

Ga-Dangbe 10.0 326

Ewe 17.7 577

Guan 2.8 92

Gurma 7.0 229

Mole-Dagbani 1.3 41

Grusi 0.7 23


University

UG – Accra 21,8 712

KNUST – Kumasi 43,0 1403

UDS – Tamale 35,2 1149


Continuous variables N Min-Max M(SD)

Age 3183 18-46 23.21(2.591)

Ghanaian vs. ethnic identity 3169 1-5 3.37(0.714)

towards post-modern identities in africa? · strengthen ethnic identifications, because of the...

Documents