Why some countries fail while others prosper in the Middle East and Africa
The answer lies less in geography or resources than in the institutions that shape power, legitimacy and opportunity.
The fundamental inquiry of political economy is why some nations achieve enduring prosperity while others are trapped in cycles of poverty and collapse. The answer lies not in geography or culture, but in the systems and rules that govern societies.
When we evaluate the economic success or failure of a nation, we are ultimately evaluating its institutions. Economic outcomes are inextricably linked to the frameworks societies devise to shape incentives and opportunities. Nations fail when they are captured by “extractive institutions” — structures purposefully designed to siphon wealth and power from the majority to serve the narrow interests of a small elite.
This institutional paradigm offers a clarifying lens through which to understand the enduring developmental crisis in Africa. The continent’s historical economic stagnation — often debated in terms of colonial legacy or democratic transition — is rooted in a long, devastating history of extractive institutions. From the ravages of the slave trade and formal colonialism to the modern struggle for accountable governance, this legacy looms large. While it is historically inaccurate to claim Africa was always bound by extractive rule, its politically decentralised precolonial societies were rendered structurally vulnerable to predatory European mercantilism and colonial exploitation.
Perhaps the most profound tragedy of the current era is the poverty of political vision compared to the early postcolonial period. In the 1950s and 60s, leaders across the developing world championed robust ideological frameworks for nation-building. Figures like Julius Nyerere, Kwame Nkrumah, and Leopold Senghor articulated clear visions, such as “African socialism”, to forge national identities.