In many ways, the 2015 presidential election typifies Nigeria in recent times. The ballot was delayed by several weeks as the armed forces fought bitterly against Boko Haram to create a window of opportunity in which the vote could take place. Their efforts were not enough, however, to prevent the group's gunmen from killing dozens of people in several attacks. Yet neither these dangers nor the serious delays generated by the malfunction of the new technologies employed to help stamp out fraud were sufficient to deter millions of expectant Nigerians from participating. Their determination to do so was born in part of the perception that this would be one of the most open elections the country had held since the restoration of democracy in 1999. President Jonathan's main rival, especially in the north, was Muhammadu Buhari. Millions of Nigerians were looking to the future with this 72-year-old former military dictator.

Carl LeVan is the latest scholar to try to make sense of Nigeria and to develop and apply an analytical framework that has the subtlety to explain the country's development, idiosyncrasies and all. His motivating question is, ‘how does the distribution of political authority affect the Nigerian government's ability to formulate and deliver policies conducive to development?’ (p. 3). In posing it, LeVan confronts what is arguably one of African Studies' greatest and most persistent dilemmas – how can countries achieve economic development and raise living standards while building and safeguarding democratic institutions and practices? In Nigeria's case, this dilemma has an additional, vital dimension to the well-rehearsed arguments regarding efficiencies (as important as these remain). For few places in the world today are more synonymous with corruption. Checks, balances, political offices and layers of government, therefore, all need to be designed and empowered with this in mind.

LeVan's framework focuses on veto players and their effects on the political and economic performance of successive Nigerian governments. More specifically, he correlates the number and position of such players in the country's political system against a range of economic, development and democracy indicators. He situates these players in the Madisonian tradition, on the grounds that they can play crucial roles in improving a country's leadership. That is, they can reduce both its need for and dependence on Great Men and Women, and exposure to the criminal and inept. After tracing the number and influence of veto players in Nigeria, LeVan offers two comparisons in Ghana and Zimbabwe. Together, these countries represent alternative points on the perceptual, political and developmental compass. Using them is instructive.

So while Levan's original, sophisticated and dense study will mostly appeal to postgraduate students and established scholars researching Nigeria, it also has much to offer those working in the fields of democratisation and comparative politics. This is an important and commendable book.