ONLINE APPENDIX FOR “CRITICAL JUNCTURES:INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENTS AND DEMOCRACY IN AFRICA” Léonard Wantchékon Omar García-Ponce Princeton University New York University
[email protected] [email protected] July 30, 2014 AACCOUNTING FOR PRE-COLONIAL INSTITUTIONS The form of the anti-colonial insurgency may well be correlated with pre-colonial institutions and experiences that could shape post-colonial government. Similarly, the ruggedness of terrain may be correlated with pre-colonial institutions and experiences that affect the prospects for democracy. To further assess the validity of either rough terrain or rural insurgency, we show that our main findings hold even after controlling for pre-colonial institutions. In table A.1, we show that our main result, the effect of rural insurgency on democracy, is robust to the inclusion of a measure of “pre-colonial institutions,” which we define as the number of juris- dictional hierarchies at the local and beyond the local community during pre-colonial times, based on Murdock’s classification [1959]. We also show, in Table A.2, that rough terrain is a strong pre- dictor of rural insurgency, even after controlling for pre-colonial institutions, and that our measure of pre-colonial institutions does not seem to be significantly correlated with rural insurgency. Note that Murdock’s coding is only available for 40 countries, which substantially reduces the number of observations in the analysis. Compared to column (1) of Table 3, we lose almost one-fifth of our sample. More specifically, we lose the following countries: Cape Verde, Comoros, Congo, Eritrea, Gambia, Mauritius, Sao Tome & Principe, Seychelles, and Swaziland.