IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Does Colonialism Exert a Long Term Economic Impact on Adult Literacy?

  • Arusha Cooray (University of Wollongong)

Examining the reason for differences in adult literacy rates across countries, this study finds that colonialism exerts a long term negative economic impact on literacy rates of the colonised. Investigating in particular, the effects of the French and British colonisation policies, the results of this study indicate that the colonial legacy remained long after independence, slowing down improvements in literacy rates in the former colonies. In conclusion it is noted that the implementation of policies that will ensure equal access to education for all is important.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford in its series QEH Working Papers with number qehwps176.

in new window

Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:qeh:qehwps:qehwps176
Contact details of provider: Postal: Queen Elizabeth House 3 Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (1865) 281800
Fax: +44 (1865) 281801
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Acemoglu, Daron & Johnson, Simon & Robinson, James A & Yared, Pierre, 2005. "Income and Democracy," CEPR Discussion Papers 5273, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Elizabeth Cascio & Damon Clark & Nora Gordon, 2008. "Education and the Age Profile of Literacy into Adulthood," NBER Working Papers 14073, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Brian Maddox, 2008. "What Good is Literacy? Insights and Implications of the Capabilities Approach," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 185-206.
  4. Sundaram, Aparna & Vanneman, Reeve, 2008. "Gender Differentials in Literacy in India: The Intriguing Relationship with Women's Labor Force Participation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 128-143, January.
  5. Luis Angeles, 2005. "Income Inequality and Colonialism," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 0543, Economics, The University of Manchester.
  6. Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2001. "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1369-1401, December.
  7. Graziella Bertocchi & Fabio Canova, 1996. "Did colonization matter for growth? An empirical exploration into the historical causes of Africa's underdevelopment," Economics Working Papers 202, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  8. Daniel Ortega & Francisco Rodríguez, 2008. "Freed from Illiteracy? A Closer Look at Venezuela's Misión Robinson Literacy Campaign," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 1-30, October.
  9. Hausman, Jerry A, 1978. "Specification Tests in Econometrics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1251-71, November.
  10. Jonathan R. W. Temple, 1998. "Robustness tests of the augmented Solow model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 361-375.
  11. Stanley L. Engerman & Kenneth L. Sokoloff, 2005. "Colonialism, Inequality, and Long-Run Paths of Development," NBER Working Papers 11057, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Barro, Robert J., 1999. "Determinants of Democracy," Scholarly Articles 3451297, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  13. Verner, Dorte, 2005. "What factors influence world literacy? is Africa different?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3496, The World Bank.
  14. Duol Kim & Ki-Joo Park, 2008. "Colonialism And Industrialisation: Factory Labour Productivity Of Colonial Korea, 1913-37," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 48(1), pages 26-46, 03.
  15. Chaudhary, Latika, 2007. "Essays on Education and Social Divisions in Colonial India," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(02), pages 500-503, June.
  16. Grier, Robin M, 1999. " Colonial Legacies and Economic Growth," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 98(3-4), pages 317-35, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:qeh:qehwps:qehwps176. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rachel Crawford)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.