The problem behind Africa's 2014 index of well governed countries: Few are.

Author helped create the index in 2007 but laments that Africa's two best governed countries are islands far out at sea. Most Africans today have still never known the rule of law, security, good education and free speech. 

A version of this post appeared on Africa and Asia. The views expressed are the author's own. 

Africa’s development chances and social possibilities remain heavily hindered by its overall mediocre governance.

Despite the talk of Africa rising -- and growth rates that now exceed other parts of the globe -- too many of the continent’s peoples are subject to the kinds of governments that favor ruling elites rather than ordinary villagers and townspeople. Growth rarely trickles down.

The latest Index of African Governance, released last week by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, confirms such sorry conclusions.

For the eighth year in a row Mauritius, an island nation that belongs to the African Union -- but is located far out in the Indian Ocean -- has been deemed the African country with the best governance, scoring 81.7 on a scale of 100.

Next best on the Index -- as for nearly the past eight years -- are Cape Verde, another island group, this one in the Atlantic Ocean.

The best government performer on the actual continent of Africa, as per usual since nearly 1966, is Botswana. No surprises there.

Following these top three on the Index, are South Africa (which has moved up slightly in the rankings despite massive corruption and serious labor problems), the Seychelles (which has dropped slightly), Namibia, Ghana (the best West African performer), Tunisia (despite its Arab Spring tumult), Senegal, tiny Lesotho (which had a coup since the rankings were prepared), and Rwanda (which only this year has entered the top dozen after climbing in the ratings year by year thanks to tough leadership). Sao Tome, Zambia and Morocco rank next.

Morocco’s score is 58, and the average across all of Africa’s 52 countries (Sudan and South Sudan are not included) is 51.5. This shows the distance between upper middle ranking countries such as Tanzania, Malawi, Benin, Kenya, Uganda, and Mozambique (all of whom rank below Morocco) are from the top performers. Sierra Leone (before Ebola), Egypt, and Gabon are all at 51, the average score.

Gabon is number 27 on the list, from top to bottom. At the nadir is Somalia, a country without a real government, with an Index score of 9.

Just above Somalia are the war-torn Central African Republic, dictatorial Eritrea, despotic Chad, drug-infused Guinea-Bissau, the so-called Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), harshly-ruled Zimbabwe, and oil-rich but autocratic Equatorial Guinea.

The peoples of each of those countries have since at least 2000 hardly ever known such components of good governance as the rule of law, security, educational opportunity, freedom of speech and assembly, or the absence of wild corruption.

Nor have the inhabitants of such major producers of oil such as Angola (which ranks 44th) or the Ivory Coast, at 36th, which grows much of the world’s cocoa.

Nigeria, with its Boko Haram insurgency, perennial corruption, and weak governance under President Goodluck Jonathan, scores 46 (below the middle) and is 37th in the ratings list. It is Africa’s largest country and soon to become the third largest in the world.

The fact that Nigeria, with bustling, entrepreneurial people, and a reasonable educational system, performs so poorly on the index testifies to the steady weakness of African governance and thus to the failure over many decades of African leaders and their governments to deliver responsible and effective governmental services  to their constituents.

Africa’s contemporary economic rise will only be sustained if the lessons of the best and the better governed African countries are embraced by all, or at least most, of the nations of Africa.

Mauritius, Cape Verde, and Botswana have long limited corruption, fortified their rule of law regimes, run free and fair elections, embraced the four freedoms and fully respected the human rights of virtually all of their citizens, and provided exemplary educational and medical facilities.

As a result, their peoples have prospered and enjoyed the best social services in Africa while those persons who have had the misfortune to be born in some nearby countries, such as the DRC, have remained poor and often brutalized by conflict.

Governance, to be clear, is the delivery of essential services such as security, rule of law, political participation, economic opportunity, and human development to all citizens. Lack of security and safety (civil conflict and crime) detracts from scores, as does the paucity of clean water, or the inability to keep girls in school. (A historical note: I created the index in 2007 before it was taken over by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation).

Most of Africa, as the numbers show, does not measure up. When its largest country ranks 37th, it is obvious that improvements across the continent are essential if the continent’s peoples are to achieve the results that they want and deserve -- but that only some some of their leaders insist upon.

Canada and other Western powers should focus their foreign assistance on strengthening governance for all, not cosseting autocratic rulers or bolstering resource-rich elites. China does that. But Canada, the United States, and Europe need not.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to The problem behind Africa's 2014 index of well governed countries: Few are.
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today