A change of paradigm relevant for our time

A large part of academia considers ethnic diversity to have a negative effect on development*. This perception has also gained traction in the wider public as well. Across the world, political movements consider ethnic diversity* as a curse.

In ETHNICGOODS we conceive a different interpretation. We argue that researchers have systematically overlooked the macro-historical processes of nation-state formation and the ways in which these have shaped present-day diversity and developmental outcomes, be it economic transformation, social welfare, or democracy.

Our main goal is to explore whether considering the consequences of different nation-building strategies historical differences in state capacity proves the negative association between ethnic heterogeneity and development to be spurious. This would provide new evidence to question the usefulness of the diversity-deficit thesis and its simplistic causality.

We also believe that the prevailing scholarly focus on the potential drivers of either successful or failed nation-building will profit from a new and more nuanced focus on distinct varieties of nation-building, and their identitary and developmental consequences.

A change of paradigm relevant for our time

A large part of academia considers ethnic diversity to have a negative effect on development*. This perception has also gained traction in the wider public as well. Across the world, political movements consider ethnic diversity* as a curse.

In ETHNICGOODS we conceive a different interpretation. We argue that researchers have systematically overlooked the macro-historical processes of nation-state formation and the ways in which these have shaped present-day diversity and developmental outcomes, be it economic transformation, social welfare, or democracy.

Our main goal is to explore whether considering the consequences of different nation-building strategies proves the negative association between ethnic heterogeneity and development to be spurious. This would provide new evidence to question the usefulness of the diversity-deficit thesis and its simplistic causality.

We also believe that the prevailing scholarly focus on the potential drivers of either successful or failed nation-building will profit from a new and more nuanced focus on distinct varieties of nation-building, and their identitary and developmental consequences.

Upon their creation, modern nation-states adopted different approaches towards ethnic diversity. We expect historical differences in nation-building —whether states sought to assimilate, accommodate, segregate or eradicate ethnic minorities— to have distinct consequences for subsequent patterns of ethnic diversity and development.

We also expect historical variations in the capability of states to collect and analyze information about their populations to produce different outcomes in terms of ethnic identity and development.

Delving into nation foundation processes

In ETHNICGOODS we use states as our main subject of study. These political entities play a key role in giving access to public services such as healthcare or sanitation infrastructure, but also as shapers of identity through language policies or education. We investigate the creation and evolution of states in order to identify possible factors that account for the actual association between ethnic heterogeneity and the level of public performance.

In particular, we focus on the role of initial strategies for nation-building* and the historical variations of state capacity*

Delving into nation foundation processes

In ETHNICGOODS we use states as our main subject of study. These political entities play a key role in giving access to public services such as healthcare or sanitation infrastructure, but also as shapers of identity through language policies or education. We investigate the creation and evolution of states in order to identify possible factors that account for the actual association between ethnic heterogeneity and the level of public performance.

In particular, we focus on the role of initial strategies for nation-building* and the historical variations of state capacity*

Upon their creation, modern nation-states adopted different approaches towards ethnic diversity. Whether states sought to assimilate, accommodate, or exclude ethnic minorities had distinct consequences over the subsequent level of ethnic diversity and public goods provision, which would endure until today.

Historically strong states also produced different outcomes than weaker ones in terms of ethnical identity and public goods provision. These outcomes would again persist to this day.