The world we live in is not a static world. It is dynamic and has constantly undergone some changes. Simply put, we live in a changing society. Every nation has held elections so as to find a better government that can bring development to its citizens because where there is no change there can’t be development. Since development cannot just come on its own, the state has to play a role hence this discussion will state what development is and describe the role of the state in supporting development.
Development is an extension of the theoretical or practical aspects of a concept, design, discovery, or invention. The process of economic and social transformation that is based on complex cultural and environmental factors and their interactions. The process of adding improvements to a piece of land, such as grading, subdivisions, drainage, access, roads, utilities. It is also the process of economic and social transformation that is based on complex cultural and environmental factors and their interactions. www.businessdictionary.com/defintions.
Development is a complex issue, with many different and sometimes contentious definitions which may dwell on social, economic, or political development. Development is about improving the wellbeing of being of people, improving their education, health and opening to their new opportunities for richer and varied life. A basic perspective equates development with economic growth. The United Nations Development Programme uses a more detailed definition- according to them development is 'to lead long and healthy lives, to be knowledgeable, to have access to the resources needed for a decent standard of living and to be able to participate in the life of the community. Development does not mean building skyscrapers and payment of heft salaries for the civil service but it’s about the economical, social, environmental and political aspects of a nation or region. Furthermore the development should be sustainable even for the future generations to come and not just for the present to enjoy. Development refers to the act of improving the quality of life and making sure everyone has the preference in what life has to offer. These choices are widened through the combined effort of local people, international bodies, governments and a variety of civil society organisations such as non-governmental organizations and religious groups.
The role of the state in development has become one of the most hotly contested policy issues of the post-colonial era Africa in general and Southern Africa in particular. According to Matinussen (1997:257) ‘the debate concerning the role the state should play in development policy and what strategies bear most credence has been incessantly charged since the end of 1940s’. Although the controversy around which agency is more central in driving the development process between state and markets still a matter of debate, in a way some states favor communist ideologies while others favor capitalist ideologies. It is evident that since the 1980s through to the 1990s, dominant foreign actors, especially the Bretton Woods institutions have imposed their policies over the nationalist political elite, dictating Africa’s development path making it difficult for states to choose means of supporting development. This has had dire consequences for both political sovereignty and autonomous economic initiatives. No other country in the Southern African region provides such a vivid example of this contradiction between imperialist hegemony and national sovereignty as Zimbabwe does today, Matlosa (2002).
The problem with African countries is that they inherited economies that are backward, skewed and underdeveloped as a result of Western colonial rule. So since independence, African states have embarked on the transformation of inherited economic structures with varying degrees of success. The debate about the role of the state in development in Africa reached its peak in the 1970s. Therefore the state needs to create an entrepreneurship friendly environment and infant industry promotion amongst other means. The state is not to rely on more market forces for it to have development. Without government intervention states would be caught in a vicious circle of poverty, Baur (1984). However neoliberal policy recommendations aim at dealing with state failure through structural adjustment programs. The recommendations focus on fiscal, austerity, privatization, trends, liberalization and deregulation to increase the freedom of action for private entrepreneurs’, Rapley (2007). In this way the state supports development. The logic behind is rises from the fact that government spending fosters high inflation. More over the state owned enterprises are less efficient than the private sector. When government fails to allocate resources for its departments it borrows funds from the co-operating partners. But usually with strings attached. According to (IMF) international Monetary Fund a country that borrows agrees to adjust its economic policies to overcome the problems that led to it to seek financial aid from the international community, International Monetary Fund (2011).
The state needs to support development by protecting its local industries through various policies. For example Henry VIII aimed to support the domestic processing of wool which accounted for roughly half of the English industry in that time through taxing exports of raw wool, Chang (2002). As can be seen from the above example there was promotion of infant industry. Back here in Zambia the government of Zambia has been supporting small scale farmers through many programs such as the rural note book program on radio among others. The cash transfer schemes is one such programs where there is government support. The state needs to formulate or introduce policies that promote its manufacturing industry. For example reduced tariffs a developmental state has the capability for sustained economic growth (i.e. high gross domestic product (GDP)), and development (i.e. welfare services to the mass of the population), qualities that Mauritius and Botswana have.
The Southern Africa region is still confronted with enormous development challenges, which have not been resolved since the early 1980s. The Lagos Plan of Action, the UNECA proposals for an alternative development agenda and the structural adjustment in the late 1980s have not achieved the intended results, as the continent has nothing to show for all these efforts in terms of economic progress and regional integration. These have and are, arguably, development projects driven primarily by the nationalist political elite aimed at charting some autonomous development vision and destiny for the continent, Ake (1996).
However, part of the failure of the nationalist and state-driven development models was the resistance from the donor community and disapproval of such by the Bretton Woods institutions who jointly devised alternative development strategies such as the early 1980s Berg Report, through the late 1980s reports up to the current World Bank report on “Can Africa Claim the 21st Century”. In these competing development agendas, there is no doubt that the nationalist agenda has lost to Bretton Woods and the Washington consensus, Ake (1996), Kidane and Logan (1995).
Many African states relied heavily on expatriates, who subsequently produced development plans whose policies, programs and targets took for granted the inherited economic structure of their respective countries. In Southern Africa, most post-colonial states depended on expatriates for the formulation of national development plans that usually ran from five to fifteen years. At the same time, donors financially supported these development plans. In Zambia, the ratio of expatriates (mostly macro-economists) to national experts at the National Commission for Development planning in 1975 was 21 to 4, Ake (1996). The above explains why economic nationalism remained heavily at the center of development in the continent. Although they allowed foreign resources to complement their own mission and effort, nationalists remained focused and central to the development process in the continent.gai at the cost of community or widespread communities.
Last but not the least, the role of the state in development has been an issue of heated debate at theoretical and policy arenas in the Southern African region especially since the attainment of independence in the 1960s. Two main alternative or contrasting development agendas that have driven the debate were those of the nationalist political elite on one hand and those of foreign capital on the other. The former espoused what in ideological and policy terms could be described as economic nationalism. The latter espoused what could be described as economic markets. State intervention, as a key policy thrust of a development process is much stronger in respect of economic nationalism, which in itself is an expression of the political commitment of African states to chart an autonomous development path.
REFERENCES
Ake. C (1996) Democracy and Development in Africa. Washington D.C, The Brookings Institution.
Baur John (984) music through literature. Vol: 1.
Chang H. J (2002) kicking away the ladder. London, Anthem Press.
International Monetary Fund (2011) International MonetoryFund Conditionalities.
Accessed on 14/04/14 @ 10:39 from www.imf.org/external/np/ex/facts/conditionshtm.
Kidane Mengisteab and Logan B. Ikubolajeh (1995) Southern African Political EconomicSeries. Cape Town, NJ Publishers.
Matlosa Kabhele (2005) Rethinking African development: a paper presented at the conference. Maputo.
Rapley. J (2007) (3rdeds) understanding development: theory and practice in the third world. New York, Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Todaro M. P (1992) Economics for a developing World. London, Longman limited.
No comments:
Post a Comment