RUGGEDNESS: THE BLESSING OF BAD GEOGRAPHY IN AFRICA

Nathan NunnDiego Puga

Presented By: Ian Hughes

AUTHORS

Nathan Nunn Department of Economics – Harvard

University

Diego Puga Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Dep.

Economia

ISSUE: WHY ARE RUGGED COUNTRIES BETTER OFF IN AFRICA?

Rugged terrain tends to hinder economic development

Nations with rugged terrain don’t tend to perform well compared to flatter countries

HYPOTHESIS: RUGGED TERRAIN HINDERED SLAVE TRADERS, HELPING FUTURE GROWTH

Slave trade decimated entire regions of Africa from the 1400s to the 1800s Societies were disrupted, fragmented Led to slower economic progress

Areas with rugged terrain provided more protection from raiders

MEASURING RUGGEDNESS

1996 US Geological Survey Measured elevation differences between

hundreds of points in each country to determine overall ruggedness

TESTING OTHER POSSIBILITIES

The resource curse Tropical diseases Soil quality Overweighting outliers Colonial rule

FURTHER EVIDENCE

Not all regions of Africa were equally affected by the slave trade Ruggedness did not benefit Northern Africa Was most beneficial in Western Africa

ECONOMIC IMPACT - INCOME

Average per capita income in areas affected by slave trade: $ 1,784

In areas untouched by the slave trade: $ 4,419

Difference: $ 2,635

A single standard deviation in ruggedness increases per capita income by approximately $747

ECONOMIC IMPACT – RULE OF LAW

Current governments in Africa are influenced by past damage from the slave trade

Magnitude of effects is difficult to quantify

QUESTIONS?