Justify Your Argument Using Two Countries as Primary Examples.

Argue for the view that underdevelopment in sub-Saharan Africa today is due primarily to the legacy of colonialism.

Justify your argument using two countries as primary examples.

The impact of the colonial powers is often identified as the primary explanation for underdevelopment in today's Sub-Saharan Africa. Although the colonial period is often seen as short, the long term effects have had a deep impact upon the infrastructure of the continent with subsequent failure of numerous governments. Paul Bairoch, in his book Economics and World history mentions how this legacy of economic underdevelopment has "historical roots going back to European colonization." Additional matters that have also been seen to have an impact vary from economic, political and social. It is important to understand that the reason why underdevelopment has been so prevalent is due to the knock on effect of colonialism and its long lasting impact, which is still visible today in Sub-Sahara Africa.

Although Africa did not evolve and develop on its own, the presence of the colonial powers was important. With the presence of large empires much like the British Empire, which at its peak covered one quarter of the world, it is easy to map the spread of colonialism. With the conquest of Africa by the colonial powers, it was to be devolved into colonies. This in a sense was one of the first signs of globalization becoming integrated into Africa. Over a decade onward, this is not necessarily reflected as a good thing. The majority of Sub-Sahara African nations exist outside the global market and as former colonies of the western industrial nations, have remained subsistent economies. Although rich in resources, they possess little or no capital.

The colonial powers used colonialism to exploit the raw materials for export and gain. This is why today the majority of Sub-Sahara nations lack the most basic of physical and social infrastructure. Often little investment was made by colonial powers to benefit the natives. Take the example of the Portuguese, over a three hundred year span imperialism in Guinea-Bissau left only fourteen universities, an illiteracy rate of ninety seven per cent and only two hundred and sixty five miles of paved road . The economic history of Africa since widespread independence in 1960 has fallen short of expectation, dramatically. It is clear to see that, although in some states great effort had been made to 'jump start' the economy; in general the vast majority of African states were better off during the early stages of decolonisation than they were at the turn of the millennium. The data taken from figure 1.2, in the World Banks report on, "The Challenges of African Growth " commissioned in 2007 compares the growth of nations per capita in contrast to 1960. Each nation's progress is compared from 1960 to 2004.

Corruption is incredibly prevalent in the Sub-Sahara region; this can be tied to the colonial powers. The colonial powers did not just only exploit the natural resources of their colonies, by putting complex laws and taxes in place through the medium of local government the colonial powers were able to dominate the local work force to their advantage. In effect, the taxes made it almost impossible to be disfranchised from the colonial powers. The colonial controlled industry, which includes jobs like mining and farming, was not paid well and there were little benefits. This conduct installed by the colonial powers left one to think that the high level of exploitation is still present today. Only last week the UK announced it would be cutting its aid to Uganda admits a corruption scandal, in 2012 the British government is set to have spent around £99 million on aid in Uganda . It is reported that since Nigerian independence in 1960, more that '$380' billion dollars has either been stolen or wasted by the Nigerian government. The country is regularly ranked as one of the most corrupt by graft watchdog, 'Transparency international' . Transparency International currently rank Nigeria at 143 out of 183 nations with a score of 2.4 out of ten . The score out of ten fits on a scale of one to ten, the lower the score the higher the level of corruption. Nigeria is plagued by corruption so endemic and monumental it is hard to separate if from state policy . This has a knock on effect as the heads of state are more focused upon personal gain than the state of the nation.

Although there are exceptions; Botswana, a nation of two million boast an impressive GDP of $14.86 Billion. Although if you were to compare it to Nigeria's GDP, which was $235.9 in 2011, it appears much smaller but then again an additional 160 million people live in Nigeria. Botswana has managed to establish a developed economy with a healthy growth rate. In an interview with Sir Quett Masire, the Ex-President of Botswana he states that the reason for Botswana's healthy growth is, "it was a question of resources becoming available, but the management of those resources" . The minerals that were available to the nation were key but it was down to the management of this resource that Botswana has differed from nations like Nigeria. In May of this year crude oil production in Nigeria was set to hit 2.1 million barrels a day. As of the 16th of November of this year, according to Bloomberg the price of a barrel is at $89.27 . Yet when Nigeria was given independence, the British left a federal system in place with a selected leader. It was not long before he was overthrown and in 1999 was the first time that Nigeria was to conduct a democratic election. This system has allowed Nigeria to fail, the 2011 Index of Failed States places Nigeria at 14th out of 177 countries, alongside Somali and Zimbabwe. The simple lack of government due to poor foundations left by the British has allowed