The imperialistic European powers came to Africa with various motives-social, political and economic but their stay was purely determined by the economic atmosphere at home that is, the contradictions of the industrial revolution such as the desire to acquire raw materials, avenues for the investments of surplus capital, acquisition of markets and settlement of their surplus population.  Therefore, the kind of colonial economies were largely determined by the foreign factors and the two catergories of settlements that were established that is settler economies and exploitative colonies were a fulfillment of the above objectives hence the following colonial economic policies were introduced in Africa as a way of satisfying the metropolitan countries.

Among the included land alienation whereby on arrival of the Europeans, large quantities of land were taken away from the Africans especially those that were economically viable in terms of fertility of soil and in terms of minerals, classical examples can be evident in the South African mineral regions where according to the 1913 land act, ⁹/₁₀ of the land was turned to European ownership mainly because of the mineral deposits while Africans were concentrated in reservoirs (Bantustans).  The same fate was in the high plateaus of Angola, Kenya, Rhodesia leaving Africans with the unproductive areas while the fertile areas were used to supply raw materials.

In as much as the Europeans had acquired the land, there was need to acquire labour that would be used to make land useful as one colonialist Grogan put it “we have stolen land, now we must steal limbs; compulsory labour is important of our occupation of the country”.  It’s therefore from this view that the forced labour policy was employed on Africans in farms, roads, railway construction for example in West Africa the French used forced labour to build the Dakar-Bamako railway and so it was in Nigeria by the British, in Uganda railway in East Africa, Germans in Tanzania forced the Africans to work on cotton plantations as later evident in the Maji-Maji rebellion (1905-07) and so it was in Togo.  In Angola and Mozambique contract labour was introduced whereby Africans were exported to the Islands of Sao-Thome and Principe where they died in large numbers.  This explains the outbreak of many rebellions in Africa.

It’s vital to note that forced labour was not enough to make Africans work hence alongside a monetary economy Europeans introduced a European tool of taxation, thus taxes were imposed to increase revenues for the colonies intended to run the day to day affairs of the government most important taxes were introduced as a way of compelling Africans either to grow cash crops or to work in European farms.  The most famous taxes were the hut and gun taxes which turned Africans into wage workers in order to be able to pay the taxes.  Classical examples can be seen in Congo under Leopard II, in Angola where failure of paying taxes amounted to the confiscation of property or in extreme cases death.  This was also in Kenya  among the Kikuyu and even the French colonies as one French man put it

“The idea that seems best for achieving employment of native labour would be to impose on the blacks relatively high taxes; in default of payment they would incur a sentence of forced labour”.

Meanwhile forced labour and taxes were not for their own sake but to avail raw materials for the metropolitan countries and their industries as Mahamood Mamdani rightly observes

“a country like Uganda was being looked at as a deep source of raw materials and a market for finished goods”.

Little wonder therefore that the introduction of cotton in 1905 was intended to cater for the cotton shortage in Manchester cotton industries following the American civil wars.  It’s from this basis that an export and import economy was introduced to be able to satisfy the two interests.  This witnessed the encouragement of the production of coffee, cotton, rubber and palm oil all as cash crops at the expense of the food crops which subsequently led to famine in African countries which had hitherto been self-sufficient.  In this sense therefore, Africans were developed as producers of raw materials in form of cash crops and minerals.

It’s worth noting that the availability of raw materials in the metropolitan countries required markets in African colonies and this was only made possible by the destruction of the infant industries or the discouraging of industrialisation in Africa for the only industries that were established were mainly processing industries purposely intended to reduce the bulk of the exported materials and make it easier for transportation.  In this regard, manufacturing industries were monopolised in Europe whereas the local craft industries that produced hoes, spears, knives, axes were destroyed to make Africans dependent on foreign goods i.e provide markets despite the fact that Africans could as well provide similar goods as Walter Rodney in his book, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa rightly observed “The African peasant went into colonialism with a hoe and came out with a hoe” and Mamdani added “The hoe he came out with was an imported one”.

A system that has continued up to date where Africans still dance to the tunes of their colonial masters as Mamdani cynically remarked in the case of Uganda “If they sneeze in Britain, we catch a cold in Uganda”.  In otherwords, the entire stratum of our society is nurtured to act as a conveyor belt for the satellite economy tied on to an imperialistic network.

The most controversial was the ideological exploitation through western education whereby an elementary education system was introduced in Africa whereby Africans were denied technical skills and their education only produced at best an intelligentsia of admirers and executors of colonial policies by making Africans classical dependants on imperialism in all aspects of life which are not of help to themselves but in the interest of colonial powers as Bret put it in his book, A history of Modern Tanzania.  “The kind of education provided was not geared towards development but to ensure that Africans are not educated above their stations in life”.

The most outstanding was the modern transport sector where colonial powers through forced labour encouraged the construction of communication systems such as feeder roads and railway systems which were largely intended to facilitate the transportation of raw materials or siphon goods from the interior up to the coastal areas.  Little wonder therefore that most railway networks were directed to economically productive areas and in some regions like German, Togo, the railways were named after the products they were meant to steal for example the Iron line, palm oil line, cotton line and cocoa line.  Similarly, in East Africa the Uganda railway run from Port Bell on Lake Victoria to Namasagali via Kisumu to Mombasa and so did another line from Kasese to Jinja for cotton and copper respectively.  In Nigeria railways were intended to carry groundnuts, and in the case of Ghana, it was meant for cocoa.  It is worth noting that the Europeans did not make attempts to make railways linking villages or countries to another but specifically made to connect the interior to the coast as Michael Crowther sums up “The railways were directed to the coast with no link between them”.

In conclusion, a critical analysis of the colonial economic policies portrays that they were designed primarily for the benefit of the colonial masters.  If Africans had anything to benefit from these policies, it was by accident and not desired as Chango Macho concludes “If Africans achieved anything during the era of colonialism, it was no more than the crumbs of bread from a rich man’s table”.

COLONIAL ECONOMY:

After scrambling, partitioning, imposition and colonisation of African continent, there followed the establishment of colonial administration with an efficient colonial economy to support it by African indigenous economies to those of metropolitan countries.

As already observed that the most overriding motive for partition of Africa was economic, this colonial economy therefore, was designed in a such way that it solved the economic interests of the colonising powers, for example, it could provide them with raw materials, market for their manufactured goods and also land for their surplus investments. To achieve these properly the colonial governments had 10 build strong exploitative institutions backed by a good infrastructure to make colonies self sufficient and reduce the costs of administration.

CHARACTERISTICS OF COLONIAL ECONOMY IN AFRICA:

Taxation: This was one of overt features of colonial economy. It was the main method of generating revenue needed to run costs of colonial administration. The commonest were the hut and gun taxes. The method of collection was brutal and harsh at times thus making taxation a sound cause for African resistance wars. For example, hut tax war of 1898 in Sierra Leone.

Taxation was also important to compel or condition Africans either to grow cash crops or to work on European farms. This was because in order to get money for paying taxes these were the only possible alternatives. In some areas such as the Congo Free State and Angola taxes were paid in form of Natural products (in kind) and animals. Failure to pay taxes in these areas would tantamount to confiscation of property and sometimes mutilation.

Forced labour: Africans were unconditionally made to work on European farms, mines, construction of colonial offices and roads.Their labour was either paid cheaply or not paid at all. In Portuguese colonies of Angola and Mozambique there was a unique form of forced labour called contract labour. Africans could be rounded up and taken to islands of Principe and Sao Thome in the Indian Ocean to work in sugarcane plantations.But unfortunately they would die there quite often..

Development of Legitimate trade: This was developed to replace slave trade. This new trade is said to have brought peace and stability as it eliminated the raids and accompanying miseries of slave trade. Moreover some African traders profited a lot in this new trade. For example, in Nigeria the selling of palm oil made many African traders quite rich.

However, this trade was monopolised by Europeans who transferred or repatriated all the profits to their mother countries. On top of this they paid low prices to African products and charged highly their exports to Africa. Worse still, this trade involved the exchange of high valued African products like gold, copper, diamonds, cotton, coffee, rubber, palm oil among others. while their exports to Africa included beads, used clothes, necklaces, bangles, spices, glassware items among others. This is why so many scholars doubt whether legitimate trade was legitimate since it served to underdevelop and exploit African economies.

The creation of the Import-Export Economy: The colonialists emphasised vertical division of labour that installed vertical exchange of their products. Africans were made to consume what they do not produce and produce what they do not consume. Cash crops were introduced and Africans encouraged to produce and export them. In turn they would import European manufactured goods. It should be noted that exports were under-priced while the imports were overcharged. This kind of trade dependence stopped African economies from being integrated and self-sustaining.

Forced cultivation of cash crops: To meet the primary demand for colonisation of Africa, cash crop growing had to be boosted. Some crops were grown traditionally like rubber at start, some by whites such a pyrethrum while others by Africans, for example, coffee and cotton at supervision of whites. These cash crops were important to boost the industrial revolution that was a climax by 1880 in Europe.

It should be noted however that no attempts were made by Europeans to encourage the production of food crops and forced labour undermined the production of food crops and  this led to famine in African societies which traditionally had been self sufficient in term of food. The African economies were developed as producer of raw materials in form cash crops plus minerals and consumer of European manufactured goods.

Domination of trade: In almost all the African colonies, Africans were discriminated against both in commercial production, home trade and export trade. For example, with the construction of Uganda railway, the whites dominated trade. In Senegal and Algeria the French controlled the trade. The British got involved directly in the Niger Delta States thus removing Africa middlemen.

In some countries like Algeria and South Africa, Africans were discriminated against on the grounds that they were inferior. African monopolies formerly enjoyed by Delta State and the coastal leaders of East Africa came to an end with the coming of European trading companies such as the Royal Niger Company, the Germany East African Company an IBEACo. This brought to an end of African economic independence.

Discouraged industrialization: To control monopoly for source of raw material and market for their manufactured goods in Africa, Europeans extremely discouraged the setting up of manufacturing industries in Africa. For example, in Egypt, Lord Crommer just established processing plants for cotton raw material while cotton cloth textile industries remained a monopoly of metropolitan British.

He set up tariffs on locally manufactured foods and on imported coal. He also put up heavy fines on smokers to kill the tobacco industry. Consequently Egypt which was one of the producers of best quality cotton of the time, continued to import cotton cloth from Britain Important to note also was Lord Crommer's construction of Aswan High Dam which he never used to produce power for industrahsation except for cotton processing industries.

In Senegal, for example, the French never set up any industries to the extent that even groundnuts were exported in their shells. The only industries set up were primary processing industries which were aimed at reducing the bulky raw materials. The prices at which these raw materials were sold were very low while the manufactured goods imported were at very high prices to Africans. This was a clear indication of colonial exploitation.

Land alienation: This was the worst form of African exploitation of natural resources in colonial Africa. Africans in settler colonies were hit hardest by this exercise, for example, in Kenya highlands, South Africa, Rhodesia, Algeria, Angola and Mozambique. Africans could be settled in reserve camps leaving fertile and mineralised plots of land to whites. At the signing of treaties in Africa, white men aimed at taking over African land especially the plots which were mineralised and fertile, for example, the 1887 Globler, Moffat treaties and the Charles Rudd concession of 1888, Cecil Rhodes aimed at clearing off the rumour about presence of minerals in Ndebele kingdom by conqeuring Matebeleland.

Technology  interference:     Another important aspect on the nature of colonial economy was the manner in which African technology was interfered with. For example, before colonialism, Africans used to produce most of their domestic needs such as bark cloth, hoes, spears, knives, axes among others. The coming of colonialism saw the introduction of better tools and commodities. The acquisition of these items forced African to abandon their own skills. On this note, Mohamood Mamdani had this to say;

"the African entered colonialism with a hoe he had manufactured himself and came out with an imported one".

This shows that, if Africans had not been colonised, Africans would have developed the technologies further.

Development of road and railway transport: For colonial development of legitmate trade, road and railway transport network, establishment became paramount. This network connected the interior of colonies to the coast. More to this, these roads and railways were mainly established in resourceful areas where colonialists had direct gains. For example, in West Africa Togo land, Germany constructed railway lines and named them after the produce they were meant to carry such as Cocoa nut line, Cotton line, Palm oil line and Iron line.

Education system: Education institutions were manned by mainly Christian missionaries. In these institutions Africans were given skills to serve as lower cadres of colonial rule. The main products of this educational institutions best suited the posts ofhouseboys, house girls and clerks. They could not make Engineers, Doctors and other professional careers.

Their curriculum was dominated by the teaching of the Bible and did not involve practical skills. The weakness with this education is that it created people who were intimate to European ways of life, a factor that made them exploiters of fellow Africans on behalf of the colonialists. In Uganda the priority was offered to the sons and daughters of chiefs. In French, Portuguese and Italian colonies education served purposely assimilation aims.

Nationalistic subjects such as pyschology, political  science, literature and history were neglected in order to keep Africans away from forming revolutionary movements against exploitative, oppressive and suppressive policies of colonialists.To colonialists the best subjects fit for Africans was Bible study ,Reading and Writing of languages.

Exploitation of minerals: It has been claimed that the exploitation of mineral wealth had some advantages, for example Africans were employed in the mines, it led to urbanization, for example, in Congo and South Africa plus the general improvement of their standards of life.

However, Africans in the mine? were underpaid, as for instance, in South Africa, Congo and Togo mines Europeans monopolised all the benefits from the mining activity. All mineralised lands were taken free or by force from the Africans. The conditions of workers in mines were quite miserable as a result of poor wages. African skilled and semi skilled geologists especially those in Gold Coast (Ghana), Nigeria, Togo-land, South Africa and Zimbabwe were ignored in terms of sufficient wages. Hence the exploitation of minerals in colonial Africa held. a strong element of underdevelopment.

All in all, it is clear that colonial economic policies were designed primarily to benefit the colonial masters. Many Africans however accidentally benefited as a result of these policies which were purely designed to benefit the colonialist. Colonial economy was therefore more exploitative than developmental.