This article investigates commonly accepted theories that purport to explain political centralization and investigate their relevance to sub-Saharan Africa. The leading ideas for the formation of political centralization using a worldwide sample include population density, inter-state warfare, and trade. However, the authors reported these factors are not predictive of the sub-Saharan Africa sample. The authors suggest that the lack of agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa may have stunted population density therefore inhibiting political centralization and that Africa’s poor economic performance is, in part, due to lack of political centralization.

This article investigates commonly accepted theories that purport to explain political centralization and investigate their relevance to sub-Saharan Africa. The leading ideas for the formation of political centralization using a worldwide sample include population density, inter-state warfare, and trade. However, the authors reported these factors are not predictive of the sub-Saharan Africa sample. The authors suggest that the lack of agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa may have stunted population density therefore inhibiting political centralization and that Africa’s poor economic performance is, in part, due to lack of political centralization.

This article investigates commonly accepted theories that purport to explain political centralization and investigate their relevance to sub-Saharan Africa. The leading ideas for the formation of political centralization using a worldwide sample include population density, inter-state warfare, and trade. However, the authors reported these factors are not predictive of the sub-Saharan Africa sample. The authors suggest that the lack of agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa may have stunted population density therefore inhibiting political centralization and that Africa’s poor economic performance is, in part, due to lack of political centralization.

In this article, the authors seek to reevaluate Nolan's (2003) study on the primary determinants of war. They reanalyze his hypotheses with what they claim are more robust measures and methodology. They conclude that there is only a little evidence supporting Nolan's theories, that more productive echnology and higher population density predict war, and that overall ecological-evolutionary and sociopolitical explanations of war are equally supported by empirical data.

In this article, the authors seek to reevaluate Nolan's (2003) study on the primary determinants of war. They reanalyze his hypotheses with what they claim are more robust measures and methodology. They conclude that there is only a little evidence supporting Nolan's theories, that more productive echnology and higher population density predict war, and that overall ecological-evolutionary and sociopolitical explanations of war are equally supported by empirical data.

The author analyzes 440 Sub-Saharan African societies to test whether trade across ecologically diverse zones is predictive of degree of state centralization (state capacity or strength of state) in pre-colonial Africa. The author finds that diverse ecology is predictive of state capacity and that trade supports class stratification. The author also emphasizes the importance of historical contingency and ethnographic data consultation in understanding mechanisms in individual cases.

This article investigates the degree of political centralization in pre-industrial and the political competitive outcomes in 15 modern-day Sub-Sahara African countries. The authors first report that pre-colonial centralization decreases political competitiveness in modern day countries, advocating that traditional power structures play a role in modern day politics. The authors then use light-density as a proxy for regional development and test developmental outcomes based on political centralization and competitiveness. They report pre-colonial centralization positively affected regional development and suggest this could be due to more centralized institutions increasing the capacity of chiefs to mobilize voters, in turn lowering political competition and increasing the accountability of elected officials. Many controls are introduced.

This article investigates the degree of political centralization in pre-industrial and the political competitive outcomes in 15 modern-day Sub-Sahara African countries. The authors first report that pre-colonial centralization decreases political competitiveness in modern day countries, advocating that traditional power structures play a role in modern day politics. The authors then use light-density as a proxy for regional development and test developmental outcomes based on political centralization and competitiveness. They report pre-colonial centralization positively affected regional development and suggest this could be due to more centralized institutions increasing the capacity of chiefs to mobilize voters, in turn lowering political competition and increasing the accountability of elected officials. Many controls are introduced.

This article investigates the degree of political centralization in pre-industrial and the political competitive outcomes in 15 modern-day Sub-Sahara African countries. The authors first report that pre-colonial centralization decreases political competitiveness in modern day countries, advocating that traditional power structures play a role in modern day politics. The authors then use light-density as a proxy for regional development and test developmental outcomes based on political centralization and competitiveness. They report pre-colonial centralization positively affected regional development and suggest this could be due to more centralized institutions increasing the capacity of chiefs to mobilize voters, in turn lowering political competition and increasing the accountability of elected officials. Many controls are introduced.

In this article, the authors seek to reevaluate Nolan's (2003) study on the primary determinants of war. They reanalyze his hypotheses with what they claim are more robust measures and methodology. They conclude that there is only a little evidence supporting Nolan's theories, that more productive echnology and higher population density predict war, and that overall ecological-evolutionary and sociopolitical explanations of war are equally supported by empirical data.