As an African, my dream for the next decade is to see the continent producing and selling chocolate to 300 million Chinese, instead of exporting raw commodities like cocoa. Several weeks ago, at the China-Africa Symposium in Xiamen, China, I tested this vision on the audience, and the 2,000-plus delegates responded with resounding applause. Business and government leaders are evidently ready to see Africa introduce structural change aimed at creating manufacturing-based national economies.
While many have touted Africa’s success in maintaining a 5 percent to 6 percent average GDP growth rate over the past decade, this masks the reality that by 2005, sub-Saharan Africa was little better off than it was a quarter-of-a-century earlier: It was still the world’s poorest region, with more than half of its population living on less than US$1.25 a day in purchasing parity terms. The region’s countries are on a poverty treadmill, running fast just to remain in the same position.
This needs to change. The orthodox agriculture-led growth strategy of the 1960s, the favored antidote to five decades of the “happy peasant” aid doctrine, must be replaced with an agribusiness development strategy whereby policymakers, donors and entrepreneurs target the entire value chain to support a shift from bulk products to value-added, agro-industrial manufactured products.
Several years ago, the late World Bank president James Wolfensohn describing a new international order, talked of a “four-speed world”: the affluent, the converging, the struggling and the poor. Converging countries are closing the gap with the affluent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries; struggling countries have failed to progress from middle-income status; and poor countries — most of them in Africa — are mired in extreme poverty.
FEWER POOR COUNTRIES
The good news is that since the 1990s, the number of poor countries in Africa has fallen from 35 to 21 and the number of converging economies has increased from two to 17. However, 13 of the latter are either dependent on oil exports (Angola, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria and Sudan), or mineral exports (Botswana, Ghana, Mozambique, Namibia, Sierra Leone, South Africa and Tanzania).
Moreover, the new realities of the unfolding global economic crisis that started in 2008 suggest that the North-South flow of capital, aid and finance of the past 50 years will not continue.
However, it is also clear that by 2030, today’s emerging markets will account for 60 percent of global GDP and 40 percent of the world’s consumer spending. World Bank chief economist Justin Lin (林毅夫) speaking recently in Mozambique, encouraged African countries to take advantage of the “emergence of large middle-income countries such as China, India and Brazil.” They should position themselves to capture from China “100 million labor-intensive manufacturing jobs, enough to more than quadruple manufacturing employment in low-income countries.”
Can Africa position itself in the global economy to produce and sell finished goods, especially processed foods and agricultural products? Can the continent break the North-South commodity-based pattern of trade and inaugurate a pattern of South-North-South triangular trade based on
higher-value products?
Working with leading experts like Tony Hawkins of the University of Zimbabwe Graduate School Of Business, the UN Industrial Development Organization has formulated a roadmap to accelerate Africa’s agribusiness revolution. It calls for the enhancing agricultural productivity; upgrading value chains; exploiting local, regional and international demand; strengthening technological effort and innovation capabilities; promoting effective and innovative financing; stimulating private participation; and improving infrastructure and energy access.
An agribusiness development strategy focused on higher-value output and stronger productivity growth throughout the value chain represents one of the best opportunities for rapid and broad-based economic growth and wealth creation in Africa. It could also be one of the few local pathways out of poverty for small farmers.
WASTEFUL
Africa still has limited agro--processing activity and capacity in rural areas. As a result, sub-Saharan countries experience up to 40 percent post-harvest losses, especially for perishable commodities such as fruit and vegetables.
In other words, almost half of what is produced on Africa’s farms rots there, while the vast majority of the population goes to bed hungry. I have seen this happen in Plateau and Benue states (supposedly the breadbasket of Nigeria) and in villages and towns in my home country, Sierra Leone.
The average amount of chemical fertilizer used in sub-Saharan Africa is 12.5kg per hectare of arable land, compared with the world average of 102kg per hectare. Similarly the agriculture sector is undercapitalized, with extremely low levels of mechanization: an average of 13 tractors per 100km2 compared with 129 per square kilometer in South Asia. Only 10 percent of Africa’s hydropower potential is exploited, compared with 70 percent to 80 percent in OECD countries.
By 2030, more than 50 percent of Africa’s 1.4 billion inhabitants are expected to live in cities. Urbanization brings with it opportunity, as consumer demand will most likely shift toward higher-value processed foods, including fruit, vegetables, vegetable oils, fish and dairy products. Thanks to skillful marketing, an Indonesian company convinced millions of Nigerians in just five years to consume an instant-noodle product, known as Indomie, instead of the popular cassava product called Garri.
There is no immovable reason why Africa countries — and companies — cannot do the same thing. However, that requires adopting a new mantra for eradicating poverty, eliminating hunger, and creating wealth: from cocoa to chocolate, from cotton to garments, and from bauxite to aluminum.
Kandeh Yumkella is director-general of the UN Industrial Development Organization and an editor of a new publication, Agribusiness for Africa’s -Prosperity.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with