“Neopatrimonialism” and Agricultural Development in Africa: Contributions and Limitations of a Contested Concept
Abstract
The “neopatrimonial” character of African states has increasingly been invoked to explain the politics of agricultural stagnation across the continent. This article summarizes the literature on neopatrimonialism, reviewing how analysts have applied the concept in studies of food and agricultural policies in Africa. It then draws out some of the key contributions of such an approach, and describes limitations, both methodological and substantive. Finally, it asks how and why the concept has been deployed, and recommends greater circumspection, research, and refinement.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This class bias queries the over-generalisations about the neopatrimonial nature of African political regimes and agricultural policy processes.
“This class bias, however, also queries the over-generalisations about the neopatrimonial nature of African political regimes and agricultural policy processes (see also deGrassi 2008).”
From Three decades of agrarian reform in Zimbabwe (2011) · cites this paper as deGrassi 2008
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Three decades of agrarian reform in Zimbabwe
Moyo, S. (2011) · Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2011.583642 · Cited by 253 · see citing works
- Authors
- deGrassi, A.
- Corresponding author
- deGrassi, Aaron
- Venue
- African Studies Review
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 107-133
- ISSN
- 0002-0206 (ISSN-L)
- 1555-2462
- OpenAlex
- W2132022340
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 10.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- African Studies Review (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › African Studies and Ethnography
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Natural Resources and Economic Development
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
- Keywords
- neopatrimonialism, agricultural development, African countries, agricultural stagnation, food policy, agricultural policy, state governance, conceptual critique
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
