The social under­stan­ding of wealth in Africa has evol­ved signi­fi­cantly – from Indi­ge­nous, pre-colo­nial, and post-colo­nial, to con­tem­po­rary Africa. During these peri­ods a key distinc­tion emer­ges bet­ween mate­rial and non-mate­rial wealth. Based on this distinc­tion seve­ral dif­fe­rent dimen­si­ons of wealth can be iden­ti­fied, par­ti­ally coming with con­flic­ting results when applied to con­tem­po­rary realities

People’s under­stan­ding and framing of wealth have shifted con­sider­a­bly to con­sider wealth to be a com­plex, mul­ti­fo­cal con­glo­me­ra­tion con­sis­ting of social, mate­rial, and emo­tio­nal semio­tics (Kirk 2007). In such a per­spec­tive wealth is a com­plex con­cept that elu­des a tim­e­l­ess defi­ni­tion as per­cep­ti­ons of the nature of wealth change over time. It is also for this reason that wealth is a con­cept that can be – and has been – con­tes­ted within and across com­mu­ni­ties. Peo­ple did not under­stand that wealth is redu­ced to a sin­gle form, nor did they view forms of wealth as immu­ta­ble. Rather peo­ple unders­tood wealth as some­thing multi-dimen­sio­nal that can be inter­pre­ted in social terms, mate­rial terms, and emo­tio­nal terms.

In pre-colo­nial Afri­can com­mu­ni­ties, for ins­tance, wealth was­n’t just about mate­rial goods but was bound to social reco­gni­tion as well as the duties which accom­pa­nied it. As wealth was asso­cia­ted with power and, cor­re­spon­din­gly, respon­si­bi­lity, those who had wealth were expec­ted to give away resour­ces. This was moti­va­ted by both, an empi­ri­cal sense of pro­pin­quity and ethi­cal con­vic­tions, which sup­ported com­mu­ni­ties to pre­serve joint ritu­als and cul­tu­ral tra­di­ti­ons, which in turn sup­ported social con­nec­tions and coll­ec­tive wel­fare. If this core func­tion of wealth is absent, social inte­gra­tion and their sta­tus will decline as a consequence.

Moreo­ver, being endo­wed with wealth also gave an indi­vi­dual the right to lea­der­ship, and for this reason, the respon­si­bi­lity to resolve dis­pu­tes, pro­vide pro­tec­tion and coor­di­nate com­mu­nity acti­vi­ties. Social reco­gni­tion in these roles was achie­ved by dedi­ca­ting one’s self to ser­vice and a desire to see that the com­mu­nity bene­fit­ted. Moreo­ver, there was a rich cor­re­la­tion bet­ween wealth and kin­ship and marital prac­ti­ces such as bride price exch­an­ges and part­ner­ships as well as eco­no­mies of scale to lar­ger family struc­tures to enhance social aut­ho­rity. Alt­hough mate­rial wealth, such as live­stock or land, coun­ted for much, it was mainly of sym­bo­li­cal signi­fi­cance in daily mat­ters, indi­ca­ting the ability of the indi­vi­dual to ful­fil the ‚com­mu­nal’ respon­si­bi­li­ties of the com­mu­nity and to main­tain rela­ti­onships. Thus, in pre-colo­nial Africa wealth was com­plex, and social reco­gni­tion and power were more than pos­ses­si­ons of mate­rial property.

During colo­nial and post-colo­nial times, this under­stan­ding of wealth trans­for­med into a strictly mate­rial per­spec­tive focu­sed lar­gely on the abun­dance of neces­si­ties. Wealth was unders­tood as the pos­ses­sion of cows, bulls, cal­ves, and money (a new thing too many socie­ties). Here is an exam­ple that shows how peo­ple unders­tood wealth in the 1970s:

„We are begging here for wealth; we are begging that the child­ren here may study and learn; we also would like a motor­car to drive. Whe­re­ver we plant mil­let, whe­re­ver we plant sesame, whe­re­ver we plant sorg­hum, may it come quickly and soon. Here, let us elope with women; we are begging here for the faci­lity in get­ting wives; here, we beg for repro­duc­tion; may we strike two by two so that we may have a twin cerem­ony every day. Let us be well; you give us life, and let us be free from the cold.” (Susan Rey­nolds Whyte quo­ted in Ste­phens 2022: 5).

This lat­ter exam­ple shows how colo­niza­tion impac­ted con­ven­tio­nal defi­ni­ti­ons and per­cep­ti­ons coi­ning the shared social under­stan­ding of wealth and ther­eby pro­vi­ding a clear-cut exam­ple of Wes­ter­niza­tion. Wes­ter­niza­tion is a pro­cess in which ele­ments of Wes­tern cul­ture, eco­nomy, and poli­tics are inno­va­tively adapted into socie­ties, often dis­pla­cing, dimi­nis­hing if not com­ple­tely overs­ha­dowing indi­ge­nous sys­tems. Wes­ter­niza­tion has been often con­fu­sed with Moder­niza­tion. Howe­ver, in defi­ning wealth within the Afri­can con­text, Wes­tern stan­dards have not adapted very well. It may be this very dis­crepancy that helps shed light on why pro­grams meant to create wealth too often fail to gene­rate any or even pro­duce more poverty. For exam­ple, the recent for­ma­liza­tion of land in Africa has mar­ke­ted land and enab­led sales that effec­tively fur­ther pro­mo­ted land­less­ness among the gene­ral popu­la­tion to an ext­ent hitherto unknown in Africa. Rit­zer (1993) argues that the glo­bal dis­se­mi­na­tion of Wes­tern values and capi­ta­list prac­ti­ces has signi­fi­cantly impac­ted the struc­tu­ral and cul­tu­ral aspects of non-Wes­tern socie­ties. This pat­tern invi­tes us to reflect on a rede­fi­ni­tion of wealth and a reas­sess­ment of the wealth gene­ra­tion pro­cess in Africa.

Sum­mer School „Wealth Ine­qua­lity Stu­dies in Africa“

This article was writ­ten as part of the Sum­mer School „Wealth Ine­qua­lity Stu­dies in Africa“ at Makre­rere Uni­ver­sity in Kam­pala, Uganda in Sep­tem­ber 2024. It was made pos­si­ble by the joint orga­niza­tion of Resty Naiga (Make­rere Uni­ver­sity), Jakob Kapel­ler (Uni­ver­sity of Duis­burg-Essen) and Howard Stein (Uni­ver­sity of Michi­gan) as well as fun­ding from Volks­wa­gen Stif­tung.

Too often, we think of wealth as rest­ric­ted to ghostly mate­rial belon­gings or hol­low mone­tary achie­ve­ment. All the same, howe­ver, this par­ti­cu­lar defi­ni­tion of wealth does not serve the entire pic­ture as much as it applies to and coins the Afri­can con­text. Howe­ver, for most peo­ple in Africa, wealth means much more than just fiat cur­rency; it’s about the social net­work and cul­ture you’re part of, and the fee­lings you have that ensure the emo­tio­nal well-being of yours­elf and your com­mu­nity. App­re­cia­tion of how wealth is expe­ri­en­ced is important because these dimen­si­ons help explain dif­fe­rent ways of under­stan­ding wealth. In this paper, the idea of wealth is pre­sen­ted in new terms, defi­ned as the quest for the ‚good life’, which is so fun­da­men­tally roo­ted in Afri­can tra­di­ti­ons and values. Through this explo­ra­tion of seve­ral facets of wealth, we can offer a broa­der, more cul­tu­rally meaningful pic­ture of the ever­y­day under­stan­ding of ‘wealth’ in Africa than the sole mate­rial one would allow.

a) Social wealth – Social wealth is often unders­tood in terms of mate­rial resour­ces, but it is also deeply con­nec­ted to social rela­ti­ons and net­works. It invol­ves how com­mu­ni­ties share resour­ces, form rela­ti­onships, and main­tain inter­con­nec­tions that sup­port mutual growth. In many Afri­can com­mu­ni­ties, wealth flows are influen­ced by gen­der, which crea­tes signi­fi­cant bar­riers for women, par­ti­cu­larly when it comes to acces­sing land, finan­cial resour­ces, and edu­ca­tio­nal opportunities.

In some tra­di­tio­nal socie­ties, women are denied inhe­ri­tance rights, espe­ci­ally when it comes to land—one of the pri­mary sources of wealth. Patri­ar­chal laws and cul­tu­ral norms in places like rural Kenya fur­ther rest­rict women’s eco­no­mic auto­nomy by pre­ven­ting them from owning or con­trol­ling land. This situa­tion high­lights the chal­lenges women face within con­ven­tio­nal wealth sys­tems, where they are mar­gi­na­li­zed in terms of offi­cial eco­no­mic par­ti­ci­pa­tion. Despite these bar­riers, Afri­can women have found ways to con­tri­bute meaningfully to their com­mu­ni­ties, demons­t­ra­ting a form of social wealth that tran­s­cends mate­rial limitations.

For exam­ple, in com­mu­ni­ties like the Yoruba in Nige­ria, women are reco­gni­zed for their essen­tial roles in the house­hold, such as mana­ging finan­ces, plan­ting crops, and caring for child­ren. These respon­si­bi­li­ties are cen­tral to the well-being of their fami­lies and, by exten­sion, their com­mu­ni­ties. Yet, despite their con­tri­bu­ti­ons, women remain mar­gi­na­li­zed within for­mal wealth struc­tures. In count­ries like Ghana and Rwanda, women actively par­ti­ci­pate in mar­ket tra­ding and other eco­no­mic acti­vi­ties, demons­t­ra­ting their vital role in sus­tai­ning local eco­no­mies. This enga­ge­ment reflects the Afri­can under­stan­ding of wealth as a more holi­stic concept—one that includes not just mate­rial assets, but also social, rela­tio­nal, and com­mu­nity-based contributions.

Thus, while gen­der ine­qua­lity con­ti­nues to affect women’s access to mate­rial wealth in many Afri­can com­mu­ni­ties, the broa­der con­cept of social wealth—encompassing both mate­rial and rela­tio­nal contributions—can offer a more nuan­ced approach to under­stan­ding wealth. By reco­gni­zing and ele­vat­ing the roles women play in these social net­works, there is poten­tial for impro­ve­ment, fos­te­ring a more inclu­sive approach to wealth that ack­now­led­ges the importance of both mate­rial and social con­tri­bu­ti­ons. This mul­ti­di­men­sio­nal per­spec­tive can help shift the dis­course on wealth from a nar­row focus on resour­ces to a broa­der under­stan­ding of how inter­con­nec­ted­ness and recipro­city con­tri­bute to the over­all pro­spe­rity of a society.

b) Finan­cial -Various macroe­co­no­mic fac­tors, poli­cies, and struc­tu­ral chal­lenges shape wealth dis­tri­bu­tion in Africa from a finan­cial and eco­no­mic per­spec­tive. Despite Africa’s vast natu­ral resour­ces and gro­wing eco­no­mies, wealth remains unevenly dis­tri­bu­ted, with stark dis­pa­ri­ties bet­ween count­ries, regi­ons, and social groups. The finan­cial and eco­no­mic aspects of wealth dis­tri­bu­tion in Africa reveal a con­ti­nent with immense poten­tial but also signi­fi­cant challenges.

While Africa has expe­ri­en­ced eco­no­mic growth and deve­lo­p­ment in cer­tain sec­tors, wealth remains unevenly dis­tri­bu­ted due to fac­tors like resource depen­dence, limi­ted finan­cial inclu­sion, cor­rup­tion, and ent­ren­ched sys­tems of ine­qua­lity. This uneven dis­tri­bu­tion of wealth, par­ti­cu­larly in finan­cial terms, reflects the broa­der mate­rial dis­pa­ri­ties across the con­ti­nent. As a result, many Afri­can count­ries face signi­fi­cant chal­lenges in ensu­ring that the eco­no­mic bene­fits of growth are shared equitably.

For exam­ple, accor­ding to the World Ine­qua­lity Data­base (WID), Africa exhi­bits some of the hig­hest levels of wealth ine­qua­lity glo­bally, with the wealt­hiest 10% of the popu­la­tion owning a dis­pro­por­tio­nate share of the continent’s wealth. This con­cen­tra­tion of wealth con­tri­bu­tes to eco­no­mic dis­pa­ri­ties, lea­ving large seg­ments of the popu­la­tion with limi­ted access to finan­cial resour­ces and opportunities.

Thus, the finan­cial dimen­si­ons of wealth dis­tri­bu­tion in Africa are clo­sely intert­wi­ned with the mate­rial aspects of wealth, high­light­ing the need for a more inclu­sive approach to eco­no­mic poli­cies and struc­tu­ral reforms. By addres­sing both the finan­cial and mate­rial ine­qua­li­ties, Africa can bet­ter harness its poten­tial for equi­ta­ble growth and development.

c) Time Use can also be included as an essen­tial part of under­stan­ding wealth. It reflects how peo­ple balance their resour­ces of both time and money to achieve well-being. For ins­tance, a per­son with large free time and heavy finan­cial resour­ces expe­ri­en­ces a heigh­tened form of wealth, as they can enjoy mul­ti­ple dimen­si­ons of wealth. Con­ver­sely, time can some­ti­mes also be a sub­sti­tute for money, as indi­vi­du­als with more time but fewer finan­cial resour­ces may still achieve satis­fy­ing out­co­mes by inves­t­ing time in unpaid work, having con­trol over one’s time enhan­ces per­so­nal free­dom and oppor­tu­ni­ties, con­tri­bu­ting to an over­all sense of wealth. Peo­ple who lack con­trol over both time and resour­ces are often more sever­ely impac­ted by poverty. In par­ti­cu­lar, the unfair dis­tri­bu­tion of unpaid care work, such as house­hold and dome­stic respon­si­bi­li­ties, affects the empower­ment of women and girls across the Afri­can con­ti­nent. The patri­ar­chal sys­tem, which per­pe­tua­tes these gen­de­red divi­si­ons of labour, plays a signi­fi­cant role in this ine­qua­lity (Okunade et al., 2023).

d) Edu­ca­tion can be unders­tood as a key com­po­nent of over­all wealth, as it pro­vi­des indi­vi­du­als with know­ledge, skills, and oppor­tu­ni­ties that enhance their life pro­s­pects. A per­son with a strong edu­ca­tio­nal back­ground has access to bet­ter job oppor­tu­ni­ties, hig­her ear­ning poten­tial, and more infor­med decis­ion-making in various areas of life (Fer­reira 2003). Edu­ca­tion can also act as a mul­ti­plier of wealth, as it enables indi­vi­du­als to make bet­ter use of their finan­cial and time resour­ces. Fur­ther­more, edu­ca­tion fos­ters per­so­nal deve­lo­p­ment, cri­ti­cal thin­king, and a deeper under­stan­ding of the world, which con­tri­bu­tes to a richer, more ful­fil­ling life expe­ri­ence. In some cases, edu­ca­tio­nal wealth can even sub­sti­tute for finan­cial wealth, as know­ledge and skills can help peo­ple navi­gate chal­lenges or create value with fewer mone­tary resources.

e) Mate­rial wealth is a wealth dimen­sion loo­ked at dif­fer­ently in indi­ge­nous Africa from in the Wes­ter­niza­tion dimen­sion. The obvious one is land. In addi­tion, other mate­rial items like heads of cattle, goats, and sheep, gran­ary stocks, and mine­rals, were among the con­side­red mate­rial wealth.

f) Human Health and Phy­sio­lo­gi­cal Wealth – Phy­si­cal, men­tal, social, and spi­ri­tual well-being were all con­side­red to be com­pon­ents of health in Afri­can Tra­di­tio­nal Society (Tosam, 2021). As a result, ill­ness was seen as the break­down of harm­ony, whe­reas health is seen as a har­mo­nious balance, a posi­tive rela­ti­onship, bet­ween the dif­fe­rent ele­ments of the uni­verse. The sci­en­ti­fic study of the human body’s pro­ces­ses and ope­ra­ti­ons is known as human phy­sio­logy (Pocock et al., 2018). It focu­ses on how the organs, tis­sues, cells, mole­cu­les, and sys­tems of the body coope­rate to sup­port life and pre­serve home­osta­sis. Let us use the notion of the slave trade. One of the fac­tors that deter­mi­ned the value of a slave was health and phy­si­cal (able-bodied) con­di­ti­ons. This would trans­late into how much energy and fit­ness a slave would have and later the amount of labor as an out­put. Since these slaves con­tri­bu­ted to the deve­lo­p­ment of wealth in count­ries like Ame­rica and crea­ted poverty and suf­fe­ring in the Afri­can areas depri­ved of able-bodied men, this then means the phy­si­cal health of the Afri­cans was and is wealth. Of course, the orga­nic foods and life­styles, most of which would streng­then their immu­nity, made most of them healthy which – in addi­tion to the phy­sic – would add on the value of wealth in this dimension.

All the time we talk about wealth, there is a ten­dency to take the dimen­sion of mate­rial wealth which seems not all-encom­pas­sing. More mul­ti­di­men­sio­nal and indi­ge­nous defi­ni­ti­ons should be taught which include mate­rial, phy­sio­logy, time, and gene­ral well-being. While such a change in under­stan­ding would serve well to bridge and inte­grate widely shared public under­stan­dings of wealth across Africa, it also pro­vi­des some buil­ding blocks for con­s­truc­ting an alter­na­tive theory of social wel­fare based on an indi­ge­nous under­stan­ding of wealth.

The under­stan­ding of wealth in Africa has evol­ved from pre-colo­nial times, where it was tied to social sta­tus, respon­si­bi­lity, and well-being, to a more mate­ria­li­stic view influen­ced by colo­niza­tion. Tra­di­tio­nally, wealth included com­mu­nal obli­ga­ti­ons, lea­der­ship, and sym­bo­lic assets like live­stock. Wes­ter­niza­tion shifted this focus to finan­cial wealth, often incre­asing ine­qua­lity. A broa­der view con­siders mul­ti­ple dimen­si­ons: social net­works, finan­cial sta­bi­lity, time use, edu­ca­tion, mate­rial assets, and health. Reco­gni­zing these aspects can lead to a more inclu­sive and cul­tu­rally rele­vant under­stan­ding of wealth in Africa.