WI No Move To 'State Colonialism' In The Late 18th/19th centuries?

[mtg999]

One of the notable developments in the history of colonialism in the late 18th and particularly 19th centuries was the move towards what might be described as ‘state colonialism’, whereby nations in areas such as Africa, the Caribbean, Asia and the South Pacific increasingly fell under the direct control of European nations.

This contrasted with the previous model of ‘economic colonialism’ whereby European nations had (with the exception of Latin America) a ‘hands-off’ approach, preferring economic domination of Africa and Asia, often via corporations such as the Dutch East India Company and the British East India Company.

So, how would the world be different today, if there had never been a move towards ‘state colonialism’ and the previous model of economic domination (but no direct political control) of non-European nations had continued in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries?

What POD would be required for this to occur?

I am thinking here of a world where European powers are content to leave political control to native elites (for instance tribal leaders in many parts of Africa), in return for Europeans being allowed to trade and to settle freely.

I assume that Australia and Canada would still be administered under state colonialism; New Zealand probably also, although I can see the possibility that a more hands-off approach would persist longer there (for a variety of reasons in OTL, the British were more inclined to deal with the Maori as equals, than the indigenous Australians or Canadians).

What would be the effects on both the Europeans and non-Europeans? I am thinking here of both the positive and negative effects no state colonialism; notwithstanding the exploitative nature of colonialism, I do know that one of the prime motivations for moving to direct state control of colonies, was to stop the most extreme abuses of the native populations by profit-drive European corporations.

In particular, how would it impact the immigration of white settlers to these nations, in particular in Southern Africa?

Many of these nations (South Africa, Zimbabwe and to a lesser extent Kenya, etc) were obviously of great attraction to a significant number of white settlers for economic reasons. Would the economic prospects of the region still attract them; or would the prospect of not having direct political control be a deterrent? Whites in Southern Africa in this ATL would represent more of a traditional ‘Model Minority’ being economically powerful, but effectively politically dis-enfranchised.