The small island nation of Mauritius is one of the world’s top destinations for a luxury vacation. Its natural beauty makes it a hot spot for the wealthy communities of Europe and Asia alike; an appeal that draws in around 1.4 million people every year, or about 110% of the country’s population (World Bank). Visitors of Mauritius, lacking any political research, will likely be unaware that the country represents a positive rarity in African politics: a relatively well-functioning democracy. Freedom House, a think-tank that measures democracy around the world, gives Mauritius and 86 out of 100 on their scoring of the country (100 being a full democracy, and 0 being fully undemocratic) (Freedom House). It has perfect civil liberties score and has all but 4 points to have perfect political rights. Its impressive score makes it the most democratic country in Africa, and even ahead of well-recognized democracies such as South Korea and the United States. The country also has the third highest GDP per capita in Africa, at roughly $23,000 (World Bank). Its political system is characterized by a competitive system with regular elections and a respect for, or at least a tolerance of the rich ethnic diversity that the island possess. The country’s credentials are impressive but are both underappreciated and under reported. This paper will not only attempt to highlight their successes, but also argue that they are the causes of a strong political system that has consistently promoted and adopted policy that has burgeoned economic growth, and used its revenue to expand the political system, all while preserving and expanding political rights for ethnic minorities. I will also argue that relics of the Mauritian colonial structure, while most certainly impeding the country’s political, social, and economic development by subjecting the population to tyrannic rule that fostered a system of slavery and oppression, did nonetheless serve as a foundational starting point, from which the country’s government and economy flourished.
Mauritian history is much like that of the rest of colonial Africa. Initially established as a Dutch trading port in 1598 (Lange), it was quickly deserted and found itself under the rule of French colonialists. Much of French rule was characterized by a rapid economic development of the island. Sugar production, a staple of colonial trade, was expanded massively. Plantations were created, which led to the importation of slaves from continental Africa. France established Mauritius as key colony in the production of sugar, which led to its transfer of ownership from the French to the British, in the Treaty of Paris in 1814 that ended the Napoleonic Wars. When the British abolished slavery on the island, as it took similar steps in many of its other colonies, the country’s economy still required laborers to work on the ever-growing sugar plantations that gave Mauritius its economic importance. To solve this problem, the British imported indentured workers from its colonies in India and China, who were effectively slaves as they lacked basic political and civil liberties and were sent to Mauritius against their will. Nevertheless, their arrival on the island in the hundreds of thousands forever changed the demographic makeup of the country (Lange).
As Britain and much of Europe decolonialized in the aftermath of World War II, Mauritius too gained its independence from the British on March 12th, 1968. The country almost immediately adopted a Westminster-like parliamentary form of government, with the position of Prime Minister serving as the head of government, and the more ceremonial role of President serving as the head of state. The legislative body had 70 elected seats. The country’s constitution granted all people equal political representation regardless of their ethnic background, a key facet in establishing the country as a democracy given the diversity in the country. The country’s political system was reflective of this constitutional detail, as well as the country’s diversity, as it established several political parties that represented its various groups. None has been influential in the politics of the country then the Mauritian Labor Party, which was initially formed to represent agricultural workers in wage negotiations with the British. The government has historically maintained a strong social safety net that has prevented poverty and has limited inequality. This system has several functions that make it effective. For the elderly, the government provides a comprehensive pension program that roughly equates to 70 dollars a month. The program is incredibly popular amongst Mauritians, and politicians have been punished electorally for threatening to gut the program (Osei-Hwedie). The Mauritian government also provides free healthcare for all its citizens and pays for both primary and secondary schooling for its children. This keeps kids in school until they are at least 16 years old. The country has two institutions of higher education to serve those with higher academic pursuits. Mauritian students also frequent top schools in Europe and the United States. The plethora of social programs offered by the Mauritian government is made possible by an ever-growing economy that provides much of the funding for the national government (Mehta).
The country’s economic development ran parallel its political development. Given the country’s natural beauty, tourism emerged as a large segment of the country’s economy. What started with just 1,000 visitors annually at the end of decolonialization, swelled to around 600,000 in the late 1980’s and currently stands at over a million every year. While tourism flourished, the Mauritian government continued its former colonial exportation of sugar, this time leveraging its strong relationships with France and Britain to negotiate fixed purchasing prices that were higher than the market rate. In addition to an inflated purchase price, Mauritius also levied a roughly 20% tariff on the export, furthering their revenues from the crop . This helped maintain low-skilled labor jobs. Mauritius also expanded into textile production, specifically producing sportswear. This furthered their integration with European markets and served to diversity the economy (Sandbrook). The government established an Export Processing Zone (EPZ) which provides companies with a cheaper means of importing machinery for their goods. The economy has since diversified into banking and businesses and has begun investing in continental African firms (Industrial Free Zones Boost Mauritius' export-led manufacturing).
Mauritius owes its success to many different factors. The first of which is the strong relationship between its government and its economy. The country has had a fluid relationship between its political and economic institutions, that has been relatively free of corruption. The Mauritian government has exercised its authority on economic matters well, implementing tariffs and negotiating fixed prices for goods, both of which benefited the country’s economy. Additionally, the country’s system of government was designed to be inclusive. The electoral system encourages the nomination of minority candidates to ensure that the island diverse ethnic groups are represented in politics. The system goes as far as to appoint eight loosing candidates to the legislative branch to ensure representation is maintained. The government also required that parties in the legislative branch form coalition governments. Since each party traditionally represented specific ethnic groups in the country, the coalition requirement functioned to erase the ethnic differences between each party.
Additionally, the Mauritian governmental structure under colonial rule was much different than the rest of British-controlled Africa. Unlike other colonies in Africa, Mauritius had a much more developed system of governance that included a strong bureaucratic structure. As such the government had 4 times as much state revenue, 3 times as many police officers, and 10 times as many judges as the average British-governed African colony. They had a generally system of state infrastructure, that mimicked Singapore’s government, which too was a post-colonial success. The British also allowed Mauritians to participate in this government, with around 60% of workers in the Mauritian government being Mauritian. Once independence was achieved, Mauritians inherited a much stronger political system then their continental African counterparts. Though colonialization most certainly harmed Mauritian economic and political development, the form of government Britain established made it easier for the country to begin its process of independent political advancement.
Another reason Mauritius found political and economic success was the division of land that took place in and around its independence. As sugar plantations were dissolved as colonial bosses left the country, the land was reclaimed by the local inhabitants, forming strong village communities. This empowered local leaders, who now possessed land from which they could harvest sugar and lead more productive lives. It also served as the foundation for the development of local political parties, which served to diversity and expand the reach of the Mauritian political system (Lange).
In conclusion, the development of the modern-Mauritian state is rooted in a strong political system that catered to the needs of the economy, creating a strong flow of revenue that was used to fund social programs.
Works Cited
“BTI 2022 Mauritius Country Report.” BTI 2022, https://bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report/MUS#pos2.
“GDP per Capita (Current US$).” Data, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD.
“Industrial Free Zones Boost Mauritius' Export-Led Manufacturing.” UNIDO, https://www.unido.org/stories/industrial-free-zones-boost-mauritius-export-led-manufacturing.
“International Tourism, Number of Arrivals - Mauritius.” Data, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.ARVL?locations=MU.
Lange, Matthew. “Embedding the Colonial State: A Comparative-Historical Analysis of State Building and Broad-Based Development in Mauritius.” Social Science History, vol. 27, no. 3, 2003, pp. 397–423. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40267814. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
“Mauritius: Freedom in the World 2022 Country Report.” Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/country/mauritius/freedom-world/2022.
Mehta, Rani. “Ethnicity, Ethnic Relations and Development of Mauritian Society.” Indian Anthropologist, vol. 45, no. 1, 2015, pp. 47–60. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43899415. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
Osei-Hwedie, Bertha Z. “Successful Development and Democracy in Africa: the Case of Botswana and Mauritius.” Il Politico, vol. 65, no. 1 (192), 2000, pp. 73–90. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24005439. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
Sandbrook, Richard. “Origins of the Democratic Developmental State: Interrogating Mauritius.” Canadian Journal of African Studies / Revue Canadienne Des Études Africaines, vol. 39, no. 3, 2005, pp. 549–581. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25067498. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
“Why Africa's Island-States Are Generally Freer.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2021/06/26/why-africas-island-states-are-generally-freer.
“BTI 2022 Mauritius Country Report.” BTI 2022, https://bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report/MUS#pos2.
“GDP per Capita (Current US$).” Data, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD.
“Industrial Free Zones Boost Mauritius' Export-Led Manufacturing.” UNIDO, https://www.unido.org/stories/industrial-free-zones-boost-mauritius-export-led-manufacturing.
“International Tourism, Number of Arrivals - Mauritius.” Data, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.ARVL?locations=MU.
Lange, Matthew. “Embedding the Colonial State: A Comparative-Historical Analysis of State Building and Broad-Based Development in Mauritius.” Social Science History, vol. 27, no. 3, 2003, pp. 397–423. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40267814. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
“Mauritius: Freedom in the World 2022 Country Report.” Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/country/mauritius/freedom-world/2022.
Mehta, Rani. “Ethnicity, Ethnic Relations and Development of Mauritian Society.” Indian Anthropologist, vol. 45, no. 1, 2015, pp. 47–60. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43899415. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
Osei-Hwedie, Bertha Z. “Successful Development and Democracy in Africa: the Case of Botswana and Mauritius.” Il Politico, vol. 65, no. 1 (192), 2000, pp. 73–90. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24005439. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
Sandbrook, Richard. “Origins of the Democratic Developmental State: Interrogating Mauritius.” Canadian Journal of African Studies / Revue Canadienne Des Études Africaines, vol. 39, no. 3, 2005, pp. 549–581. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25067498. Accessed 24 Feb. 2023.
“Why Africa's Island-States Are Generally Freer.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2021/06/26/why-africas-island-states-are-generally-freer.