nstitutions, which secure private property and encourage entrepreneurship. The long-term result is higher incomes and improved human welfare. What Acemoglu and Robinson call "extractive" political institutions, in contrast, place power in the hands of a few and beget extractive economic institutions, w

rs Government, Geography, and Growth Jeffrey D. Sachs September/October 2012 -- According to the economist Daron EFTA_R1_02211669 EFTA02724663 Acemoglu and the political scientist James Robinson, economic development hinges on a single factor: a country's political institutions. More specifically,

ave provided more than half of all its export earnings and a substantial proportion of its budget EFTA_R1_02211678 EFTA02724672 receipts. Yet in Acemoglu and Robinson's telling, diamonds are just a sideshow. Perhaps the authors would retort that Botswana has outperformed other diamond producers, suc

nstitutions, which secure private property and encourage entrepreneurship. The long-term result is higher incomes and improved human welfare. What Acemoglu and Robinson call "extractive" political institutions, in contrast, place power in the hands of a few and beget extractive economic institutions, w

do not suffer from economies that stagnate or decline. Although "most social scientists shun monocausal, simple, and broadly applicable theories," Acemoglu and Robinson write, they themselves have chosen just such a EFTA00712911 "simple theory and used it to explain the main contours of economic and

bestseller that has sold close to half a million copies in English, and hundreds of thousands in translations around the world. "Balance of Power," Acemoglu and Robinson write, "develops an entirely original thesis about the diversity of the ways in which states function, resolve conflicts, provide public