The cousin marriage tradition, colonial shocks, and the performance of informal firms in sub‐Saharan Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Research Summary The paper explores how the deep historical roots of informal institutions influence current informal businesses. It proposes that both pre‐colonial institutions—the tradition of cousin marriage—and the subsequent shocks of colonization still impact the performance of informal firms. We theorize on how the effects of historical family systems are moderated by the traumatic and spatially heterogeneous shocks of colonialism, in particular the cultural values of the colonizers (individualism) and their religious (missionary) activities. Our hypotheses are tested by regression analysis based on surveys of informal businesses in multiple regions of eight African countries. We find that the cousin marriage tradition is negatively associated with the performance of current informal businesses though this relationship is attenuated in places where colonizers were more individualistic. Managerial Summary This paper explores how the pre‐colonial family institutions—the tradition of cousin marriage—and the subsequent shocks of colonization jointly impact the performance of contemporary informal firms in sub‐Saharan Africa. We propose that the historical tradition of cousin marriage has persistent and negative effects on the revenue and labor productivity of contemporary informal businesses. This is because informal entrepreneurs in ethnic areas with the cousin marriage tradition may prioritize social obligations over economic incentives. However, these relationships are attenuated in ethnic areas colonized by European countries with more individualistic cultural values. Our findings highlight the importance for business owners and managers to understand the deep historical roots of the social norms of the communities and groups with which they interact.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".