|
African states in danger of decaying beyond 'threshold'
By PATRICK CHABAL There is growing awareness that lack of development in post-colonial Africa has more to do with the political than the economic situation on the continent. After a decade of transitions, the most notable being the move to multiparty democracy, there is little evidence that governments in Africa can achieve the aims outlined in the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) and the Millennium Development Goals. The present debate on the role of decentralisation draws on the assumption that devolved governance is better than the central government. In so far as decentralisation entails an increase in the legitimacy of local government and enhanced accountability to the local population, it is potentially an improvement in governance but the question whether devolution of power contributes to faster and sustainable development, remains, because little research on how it is working has been done. Outside Africa, the success of decentralisation rests on the quality of state governance. The state in Africa has gradually become too weak, with the World Bank now recognising that without a functioning state, there is very little prospect of development. There has long been the debate about whether the role of the state is that of enabler or manager. Whatever the case, there is little doubt that there are minimal features of a state that are necessary for the upkeep of a society in which economic activities contribute to development. Of these, the most important include order and peace, operational infrastructure, basic health, social and education; and a financial and banking infrastructure. Order and peace mean that, without repressive measures, the state guarantees and upholds the rule of law, which requires a functioning legal framework and a working independent judiciary. On the banking front, the state needs to ensure existence of an infrastructure able to make and implement business decisions other than for political reasons. These are the very features that have been seriously eroded in Africa today, yet are the fundamentals of good governance. In the first decade after inde-pendence, the state in Africa worked with some degree of efficiency and because world market prices for primary products were relatively high, a number of governments managed to discharge many of the above functions. But in the 1980s, state decline set in and has not been reversed since. Unfortunately, there was little sustainable economic growth. Why? The structure of African economies made them vulnerable to the vagaries of the market and impeded the long-term growth required for development. With time, they became less efficient and degenerated into "no longer working," therefore not providing substantive administrative regulatory services, and worse, became the preserve of individuals and groups. When the above happens, politicians and functionaries increasingly neglect their duties in order to exploit the state for their own parochial ends, rapidly accelerating state decay resulting in the inability of governments to discharge their duties. In extreme cases, bureaucrats begin to privatise the business of dispensing public services and charge fees for performing their duties. The ensuing rivalry between competing political elites, particularly within the ambit of multiparty electoral system, can easily precipitate state decline. Politicians start battling with their domestic competitors and with foreign donors who insist on attaching conditions to disbursement of aid. Here, those who control the state have an immense advantage over all others since they control the symbols of sovereignty more so because businesses and donors have to conduct their affairs with official state representatives. At this stage, the state requires total rebuilding, virtually from scratch. To begin with, the bulk of Africans see the state as a predatory body from which they expect nothing but trouble – except for those who continue to benefit from the patrimonial largesse of the politicians in place. Once a large proportion of the population loses hope that the state can deliver, they also abandon faith in its development potential. This is why, so many ordinary Africans, though desperate for an improvement in their lives, take a cynical view of the possible benefits of democratic reforms for decentralisation. Unfortunately, when things get this bad, the prospects of restoration of a good government are remote, explaining why efforts to resume relatively efficient governance have proved more difficult than usually credited. It is therefore imperative to avoid state decay beyond redeemable thresholds through foreign expertise and local knowledge, given that there are no precise indicators that the state is failing and the population losing faith until it is too late. A foreigner from a donor country can easily gauge administrative effectiveness, while ordinary Africans can tell those who want to listen how efficient the state is. It is also not difficult to identify leaders who are genuinely concerned to avoid state decline, because they will be prepared to maintain or improve state effectiveness. Examples are Houphouet-Boigny, whom long employed French civil servants for that very purpose. Others are Jerry Rawlings and Yoweri Museveni both of who were intent on strengthening state capacity and with large-scale foreign aid made good progress. The situation in Cote d'Ivoire today is perhaps the most striking example of the collapse of a functioning state and there is some doubt about whether it can ever recover from its current predicament. It also shows that political strife, blinkered clientelism, corruption and incompetence are the root causes of state failure in Africa. On the other hand, the case of Mali, a country that was poorly endowed at independence, demonstrates that where there is political will, better government or at least a more efficient state can emerge. In the end, leadership does matter. Preventing state decline is worthwhile because the consequences of failure are dire for the bulk of the population. Experience from countries where decentralisation has had a positive impact suggests that devolution of power and the control of resources at the local level can only work to improve conditions when the state itself is committed to development. This commitment is not measured in official statements, it is demonstrated in practice by the continuous efforts to improve state efficiency. Patrick Chabal is Professor of Lusophone African Studies at Kings College, University of London |
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
