You have to assume Cameroon has as many clever, ambitious sociopaths as any other country.  Why aren't they providing basic services?  The article explains why long-term investment doesn't take place, but it doesn't explain why simple for-profit services don't crop up in competition with the official ones.  For instance, if it costs too much to get a contract enforced legally, then there is a market for enforcing contracts illegally.  This is obviously bad news for the government officials profiting from the legal enforcement of contracts -- <i>unless</i> they are the ones running the illegal service, and they structure it as an inferior, low-end alternative to their legal service.  (Corrupt government officials have an advantage over the mafia:  corrupt government officials don't have to worry about getting shut down by the authorities.  They just have to share the loot with their superiors.)<p>The article also doesn't explain why government officials, even corrupt ones, fail to make cheap investments that pay off over a few years.  For instance, a kleptocrat should want a reliable supply of clean water to ensure that the farmers are healthy enough to plant and harvest crops, so he can steal the profits.  If an epidemic means the crops rot in the fields, that's money out of his pocket.  Money is readily converted to power, via bribes, weapons, or propaganda.  Losing money means losing power.  Why wouldn't a kleptocrat spend money on sanitation, especially if that means getting good marks from foreign governments and NGOs and qualifying for more aid?