The (nuanced) legacy of colonial rule

How did British India fare against Spanish South America

The subject of the legacy of colonial rule is a controversial one. While many view colonialism as exploitative, others argue that it laid the groundwork for much needed progress in developing areas. The emerging strand of research on the long-term effects of colonial rule, however, paints a much more nuanced picture.

In India

Take, for example, a study on the long-term effects of direct vs. indirect colonial rule in India. This investigation reveals that areas that were directly ruled have lower levels of access to schools, healthcare, and roads, ranging from 1 to 3 percentage points, in the present day. The authors find that these disparities may have been driven by differences in land systems and accountability mechanisms.

This is reinforced by another study on the impact of the colonial land revenue institutions established by the British in India, which compares the differences in areas where proprietary rights were given to landlords versus those given to cultivators. Not only did researchers find that non-landlord districts had 23 percent higher wheat yields, but they also experienced 40 percent lower infant mortality rates. The authors attribute this to two mechanisms: (1) the relatively lowered development expenditure in landlord states, and (2) difference in state policy priorities.

Conversely, another study on colonial India finds that proximity to Protestant missions has had a positive impact on long-term literacy rates. Specifically, for every mission per 1,000 sq. km, literacy increases by almost 32 percentage points. This proximity was also accompanied by a 17 percentage point reduction in gender parity. Though these outcomes appear positive, they were ultimately driven by the missions’ religious agenda rather than a humanitarian one, i.e., enabling individuals to read the Bible and converting women to Protestantism. It is important to balance such critiques of cultural imperialism alongside the quantitatively objective upsides when considering the legacy of colonial policies.

In South America

We observe similar impacts of Spanish colonial rule in South America. For example, in Mexico, we see the effects of a colonial segregation policy on land prices today. In particular, the Indigenous settlements defined by the policy have experienced a 5 percent land value penalty. This is driven by over two hundred years of low public good provision, poor economic expectations, and low quality housing stock.

Meanwhile, a study on the long-term impacts of the Inca Road boasts a multitude of persistent positives. Researchers find that living within 20 km of the Inca Road is associated with an 11 percent increase in hourly wages, 22 percent boost in years of schooling, alongside a 8 percent reduction in child malnutrition. The authors also find that these effects are 20 percent greater for women, all of which are driven by the provision of primary schools and roads.

This mirrors the results of a study on the Indian railroads built during the colonial era, which finds that cities that increased in market access also grew in population. Unlike the railroads, however, the Inca Road wasn’t build by colonial powers. Nonetheless, it quickly gained a commercial purpose following the arrival of the Spanish, becoming a vessel to extract gold from the Empire and export it to Europe. The areas surrounding the Road rapidly commercialized by default, explaining their continued affluence today. Once again, drawing a fine line between economic growth and exploitation.

We see the latter in the Congo, where researchers find that former rubber concessions have worse education and health outcomes. This is evidenced by individuals living within the concessions receiving 1.3 fewer years of education relative to those just outside the concessions. Unlike the Incas, the Congolese have only ever been worse off as a result of colonial conquest.