From patrimonialism to neopatrimonialism
Weber (1978) called traditional domination in which the ruler treats the state as personal property and officials are bound by personal loyalty 'patrimonialism'. It contrasts with legal-bureaucratic domination, which separates public and private spheres and operates by rules. Eisenstadt (1973) noted that postcolonial states had the outward form of modern bureaucracy but ran internally on patrimonial logic, and called this hybrid 'neopatrimonialism'. Erdmann and Engel (2007) defined it as the coexistence and mutual penetration of legal-bureaucratic and patrimonial domination.
Features and democratization
Bratton and van de Walle (1994, 1997) identified presidentialism concentrating power in the president, systematic clientelism using state resources, and the private use of public resources as features of African neopatrimonial regimes. They argued that crises came when leaders lacked resources to sustain patronage networks, and that transitions tended to arise from protest from below rather than elite pacts. Rent-seeking is pervasive in such regimes, and multiparty elections often lead to competitive authoritarianism.
Critiques and reassessments
Pitcher, Moran and Johnston (2009) criticized the concept as overused, a catch-all term that stereotypes Africa, and noted that Weber's original concept was a form of legitimacy, so equating it with corruption is a misreading. Kelsall (2011) argued that 'developmental neopatrimonialism', where rents are managed centrally and for the long term, can coexist with economic growth. The debate connects to research on political legitimacy and state capacity.
FAQ
- What is neopatrimonialism in simple terms?
- A system that has laws and bureaucracy on paper but in practice runs on the leader handing out state resources to allies in exchange for loyalty.
- Does neopatrimonialism always block development?
- It is usually seen negatively, but some studies find it can coexist with growth when rents are managed centrally and long term.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). University of California Press. Weber's patrimonialism.
- Eisenstadt, S. N. (1973). Traditional patrimonialism and modern neopatrimonialism. Sage. Coins the concept.
- Bratton, M., & van de Walle, N. (1994). Neopatrimonial regimes and political transitions in Africa. World Politics, 46(4), 453–489. Regimes and transitions.
- Bratton, M., & van de Walle, N. (1997). Democratic experiments in Africa: Regime transitions in comparative perspective. Cambridge University Press. Comparative regime transitions.
- Erdmann, G., & Engel, U. (2007). Neopatrimonialism reconsidered: Critical review and elaboration of an elusive concept. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 45(1), 95–119. Clarifies the concept.
- Pitcher, A., Moran, M. H., & Johnston, M. (2009). Rethinking patrimonialism and neopatrimonialism in Africa. African Studies Review, 52(1), 125–156. Critique of overuse.
- Kelsall, T. (2011). Rethinking the relationship between neo-patrimonialism and economic development in Africa. IDS Bulletin, 42(2), 76–87. Neopatrimonialism and development.