|
Introduction and Background
The economic situation of most African countries south of the Sahara, Malawi inclusive, is characterized by low levels of development - manifested by poor and weak economies consequently resulting in wide-spread and severe poverty due to poor infrastructure (bad roads, weak railway links, poor housing, inadequate water and sanitation system), poor access to basic necessities of life health, education and agriculture, among others; in short, miserably low standards of living with half the population (over 340 million throughout Africa, living on less than US$1 per day or on nothing and in much of the Southern Africa, especially Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi, thousands are living in dire poverty with most of them starving.
During the 1980s, there were competing explanations for slow growth in Africa. One view argued that the primary cause was inappropriate policies adopted in the post-independence phase, in particular, prices which discriminated against exporters and rural producers, and excessive involvement by the state in economic activity. The alternative view suggested that exogenous factors were the key, most particularly the decline in the terms of trade for most African countries from the late 1970s. Though the two analyses of growth difficulties were widely divergent, as were the policy prescriptions which flowed from each, they shared a narrow focus on economic reform as not only necessary, but also sufficient. In other words, both approaches implicitly saw political reform as unnecessary, and the state in Africa as an effective instrument, which could be used by whomever had control over it - the key was for the government in power to adopt the right ideas and policies.
Following inadequate rates of development (as measured by the annual rate of growth of GDP, i.e. around 2.5% per annum attained by most countries in the region for the greater part of their post-independence era, notably in 1960s and 1970s), and the need by these countries for external resources to finance development projects and even government operations through external loans, international financial institutions began to take a keen interest in the management of their economies. They began to recommend structural adjustment policies that sought to minimize government's direct involvement in the economy. It was only in the 1990s that these institutions began to recognize that there were serious development costs involved in 'shrinking the state' - reducing its role in productive activity and rolling back its spending, including on health, education, agriculture and other public services. This recognition contributed to the growing emphasis on governance and on the state's regulatory capacity in relation to private sector activity and private sector-led growth.
|
In its 2000 Human Development Report for the Southern Africa, the UNDP described Human Development as a process of enlarging people's choices so that they can live better and longer, be educated, enjoy political, economic, social and cultural freedoms and rights, as well as have full self respect and esteem. To measure development, economists now use the Human development Index (HDI) - {the function of GDP per capita + educational attainment + life expectancy} while to measure its inverse or lack of it they use the Human Poverty Index (HPI) - measuring the deprivation of three areas cited in HDI i.e. low GDP per capita, low educational attainment and low life expectancy. Thus HPI is HDI.
|
Strategies that governments in Sub-Saharan Africa have pursued over the last three to four decades have all sought to raise not only the HDI but bring about comprehensive development as well. These strategies started with national development plans and inward looking import substitutions and protectionist policies. Government's influence was not only noticeable in the political arena but was very strong in business and the rest of the economy as well.
Nature of the Review
This review provides an overview of the process, outcomes and content, within the region's socio-political context, examining the pathways that were available to different stakeholders for engagement in the process, and how this participation and strategies are reflected in the policy outcomes. It is deliberately open-ended and does not intend to offer
Final recommendations on the policies and strategies to follow but rather wishes to instead, restate our belief in the benefits of a rigorous, open and frank debate in terms of reaching greater convergence among conflicting paradigms, as well as in terms of more humane and efficient policies and strategies to benefit us all.
The paper further endeavors to catalyze our thinking in analyzing how the relationship between the conception and practice of the 'popular' PRSP to previous initiatives such as the Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs), the advent of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), let alone the new opportunities offers for poverty reduction in Africa. This has not always happened in the past, nor will it necessarily occur in the future; but gains are indeed possible and reachable.
It is everyone's sincere hope, I believe, that this paper will contribute, albeit modestly, to the formulation and implementation of more appropriate policies and strategies which will give a more concrete foundation to the hopes and aspirations of African people. In particular, this hope will be to the poorest and most deprived of them, an improvement in whose survival and living conditions is, in the end, the sole criterion for judging the success of future theories, paradigms, policies and strategies.
|
|
- 121Kb ~ 1 min (8 pages)
