The world's economic powers finally appear to be closing ranks behind efforts to address global poverty and economic underdevelopment. At this year's World Economic Forum, within the G8, and elsewhere, the consensus that something needs to be done has been as clear and as it is welcome. But, for some of the world's poorest regions, particularly Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), a commitment to help may not be enough.
Basic indicators of economic and social development show SSA lagging far behind other developing areas. The average income per capita of SSA countries in 2000 was less than half that for all developing countries, about 40 percent of the level of East Asian and Pacific developing countries, and less than 25 percent that of Latin America and the Caribbean countries.
Similarly, life expectancy at birth in SSA countries lagged 16 years behind the developing-country average, 14 years behind countries in South Asia, and 21 years behind countries in East Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. In combined gross enrollment in primary, secondary and higher education, SSA countries stood 19 percent below the average for developing countries, 11 percent below South Asian countries, 29 percent below East Asia and the Pacific and 32 percent below Latin America and the Caribbean.
What accounts for this broad-based underdevelopment? Until the late 1800s, most of Africa was unexplored and occupied by hunter-gatherers and practitioners of subsistence agriculture. Land was relatively abundant and allocated by tribal chiefs without regard to Western-style property rights. The only territorial units resembling those that exist today were Ethiopia, Liberia and South Africa.
During the burst of imperial expansion in Africa that followed national integration and trade liberalization in Europe, colonial powers showed little interest in delineating colonial national boundaries based on cultural or ethnic considerations; they cared only about raw materials and markets. The Berlin Conference of 1885 fixed the borders of Europe's African colonies so that they included within them a large variety of languages, religions, and ethnic groups.
Most SSA countries attained national independence some time after the end of the World War II, as the British, French, Belgian, and Portuguese empires unraveled (Germany had already lost its colonies after 1918). Thus, SSA countries have only enjoyed independence for a short period in comparison with, say, South America, where countries had their wars of independence around 1810 to 1820 and achieved some type of constitutional government by 1850 to 1880.
The legacy of arbitrarily drawn borders and limited political centralization meant that in many SSA countries remnants of the colonial experience continue to play a big role in defining the institutional landscape, such as the civil service and public administration, educational system and economic infrastructure. To be sure, many countries adopted English, French, or Portuguese as their official languages, and European missionaries, who often followed in the colonizers' footsteps, had success in transmitting their religious practices to local populations.
Nevertheless, linguistic variety and ethnic divisions remain more important than in most of the developing world, and tribal affiliation has continued to hinder the emergence of unifying national identities. Moreover, self-rule has not brought many democratically elected regimes. Instead, anti-colonial liberation leaders often developed personality cults and hogged power for decades.
Monopolization of political power led, in turn, to rampant cronyism and corruption, which stifled economic and social development. Recent data on perceived corruption in public transactions show the SSA countries with the lowest average score for all developing regions. Only Botswana and Namibia achieved respectable scores, while the worst offenders were Cameroon, Uganda, Kenya, Angola, Madagascar and Nigeria.
Weak national unity has underpinned an even more damaging pattern. Since the 1990s, many of the world's armed conflicts have taken place in SSA countries. Congo and Lesotho each experienced two conflicts during the decade, while civil strife ravaged Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Congo and Sudan. This deterred not only foreign and domestic investment, but, more fundamentally, the formation of the very institutions needed for successful economic development.
Sustained economic growth requires, everywhere, the accumulation of physical and human capital, as well as the acquisition of technological capabilities. This process does not occur in a historical vacuum, devoid of the influence of powerful social and political factors. Structure, institutions and policies are critical determinants, as is the availability of qualified technical and administrative personnel.
Indeed, the availability of a highly qualified bureaucracy in both South Korea and Taiwan -- and before that in their model country, Japan -- was a necessary precondition for achieving rapid economic growth. By contrast, the shortage in SSA of scientific, technical, and administrative skills, such as those of engineers, natural scientists, managers, and technicians, is a key reason why the East Asian "miracle" could not be reproduced there.
None of the preconditions of economic development will be met in SSA until the legacy of colonialism and weak states that has defined the region is overcome. Developed countries can provide limited help by means of well-focused, untied aid and technical assistance projects.
But success depends mainly on the emergence of dedicated, talented, and honest national and regional political leaders. Only such leaders can build up the legitimacy needed to unite their countries, and only then will they be able to confront head on the many challenges that the region faces in shaking loose from the shackles of backwardness.
Simon Teitel is an economic development consultant and visiting research fellow at the International Center for Economic Research (ICER) in Turin.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
RSS