Are Africans ready for their future?
By
A few weeks ago, on my way from Dire Dawa to the historical
city of Harar, in eastern Ethiopia, I came across a minivan that had an
intriguing message on the rear window. It read as follows: “If you don’t
see my mirrors, I can’t see you.” This funny message put me on a
thinking tailspin, as I realised what a wonderful metaphor it was
for
our continent’s current moment.
Day in, day out, we struggle to contain any bad news that might
perturb a new, robust narrative that will reaffirm the new Africa. It is
sometimes a thankless task when confronted with the sceptical eyes of
so many makers of mainstream public opinion. It is, nevertheless, a task
that no Ebola, Boko Haram, bad electoral process or commodity price
downfall should discourage us from accomplishing. It has taken too long
for African’s to regain a sense of urgency about constructing a common
future. This is not new. And it requires renewed agency, as articulated
well in the jubilee celebration of Africa’s mother institution, the
African Union.
Many still don’t see us because their mirrors are hidden. Africans on
the other hand can only move ahead, or overtake my metaphoric minivan,
if we make sure that others see and feel what we are up to, and are
aware of what we consider to be an imperative.
I believe the construction of Africa’s future will obviously benefit
from Africans’ own actions. That by itself does not necessarily mean it
would be driven by Africans. The nuanced difference between being “part
of” and “being the driver of” the transformation of one’s reality is
indeed what matters. After so much suffering and so many missed
opportunities, the time has come for Africa to claim its future.
I can see three imperatives that justify a call for action: a
historical imperative, a development imperative and a moral imperative.
The roots of contemporary pessimism or scepticism about Africa’s
prospects are old. Suffice to say that during the European Renaissance,
many authors and thinkers contributed to firming up various papal bulls
that gave the right for colonisation to the explorer Kings; all the way
to the diminishing portraying of blacks in the works of famous painters
such as Pigafetta, Rubens, Velázquez or Rigaud; the depiction of the
region in the still-used Mercator scale maps; or the philosophical
construct that Egypt
was detached from the rest of the continent. Hegel, the German
philosopher, captured the essence of the message by proclaiming that
Africans had no history before the arrival of the Europeans.
The spread of slavery, the other historical denial, fragmented
identities definition with ethnic classification and physical
anthropology dealing with diversity as if it was an entomological
challenge. These were some of the dire consequences of such contempt.
What followed is familiar. The response too is well celebrated.
Africans have shown over the past five decades an agency that has ridden
the continent from the shackles of brutal exploitation and
discrimination. If in 2013 there was a pause for reflection, it was
because too much celebration makes one dizzy. If we grow, have less
conflicts, expand democratic processes, increase women’s participation,
claim more control over our own resources, we are fine, aren’t we?
No, we are not, and one good demonstration of it is the fact that the
pessimistic and sceptical view prevails, outside and in many instances
inside Africa. That is the reason we have a historical imperative to change not just our reality but also the perceptions about our reality!
There is an accepted principle that ownership is central to the success of any enterprise undertaken by Homo sapiens. Ownership is essential to overcome the problems of agency in any strategy, programme or project that requires implementation.
If Africa does not take ownership of its own development trajectory,
then either others will do so or, worse still, the future of the
continent will be left to the vagaries of chance. Africa must avoid the
dangers and pitfalls inherent in adopting received paradigms wholesale.
It cannot continue to fall prey to different and sometimes ulterior
motives of some actors on the international scene.
For Africa to determine its own future, the thinking underpinning its
political, economic and social development must come from the continent
and its diaspora. Of course, this is a contentious point in the sense
that the generation or use of knowledge should not be constrained by
geographical or indeed psychological barriers. After all, ownership of
ideas is nonsensical. What matters in fact is ownership of a different
kind since all ideas, learning and knowledge are welcomed, no matter
where they come from.
The experience of structural adjustment programmes in Africa has
shown that there are merits in policy flowing from the indigenisation of
knowledge. Many induced frameworks displayed great ignorance about the
state of African economies and their institutional underpinnings.
What is perhaps of even greater concern is that while African
countries were struggling to ‘get prices right’, countries in East Asia
were doing the precise opposite and obtaining stellar results in
economic transformation. Thus, while the late 1980s and 1990s came to be
known as Africa’s lost decades, the East Asian economies were becoming manufacturing
powerhouses which created employment and improved social conditions for
their people. They also became incredible exporting machines that took
great advantage of unilateral trade liberalisation and concomitant
de-industrialisation in Africa. In other words, countries that have been
successful in terms of development determined their own future.
If Africans do not occupy the policy space vacated in the recent
past, thanks to the various crises that shook the pillars of the
financial system and facilitated the emergence of new South engines of
growth, they may not have another chance. This makes the case for a development imperative.
It is also vital for Africa to determine its own future because of
the responsibility that the current generation must have to future
generations. If current trends remain the same, Africa is projected to
have the most youthful population in the world within 50 years. It would
certainly be wrong – given the current opportunities of above average
growth – to bequeath the legacy of a laggard continent to future
generations. This becomes even more unconscionable if we consider that
we are using up the mineral wealth and natural resources of the
continent and its oceans, at a very fast rate. As the rest of the world
gears up to adapt to mega trends arising from demographic, technological
and environmental shifts, it is imperative that our generation should
set Africa on a track of sustained and sustainable development.
Ownership and a sense of inter-temporal responsibility are, however,
not enough for Africa to determine its own future. Vision is also
required. This is quite easily demonstrated from the sphere of private
business, where second generations have inherited the family business
and run it aground because they lack the vision and entrepreneurship of
the founders.
I should make it very clear at this stage that Africa has not lacked
visionaries. This continent has also had its share of frameworks which
in many ways were attempts to encapsulate a vision for its future, such
as the Lagos Plan of Action, the Abuja Treaty and the New Partnership
for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). The challenge all along has been that
the visions were not accompanied by continental frameworks, but were
instead implemented at the national level.
Similarly, as its name implies, a document like the Lagos Plan of
Action was not intended as a vision document. Thus, while it contained
uplifting language about self-reliance, it was not underpinned by an
all-encompassing vision. More critical, however, is that it was not
given the opportunity to be implemented due to competing and perhaps
more powerful external forces that imposed a different pathway for
Africa’s development. That world view saw the African State – and its
primary tool of planning – as being at the very root of the economic
problems facing the continent. The response therefore was to roll back
the State, abandon planning and get prices right!
Is this time around any different?
Following the 2008/2009 financial debacle, it became clear that the
response to economic crisis, and indeed to development, had to be more
nuanced and diverse. Blueprints with universal ambition died. What the
Keynesians and their East Asian adherents had known all along about the
positive and mutually reinforcing role of states and markets suddenly
became clear to all and sundry. For its part, Africa weathered the storm
of the global crisis better than most other regions and the narrative
shifted from that of a ‘hopeless continent’ to that of ‘Africa rising’.
This was the background against which the African Union celebrated
its 50th anniversary, in 2013. Africa’s leaders felt that it was
important to build on current progress while fully cognisant of lessons
of the past, and accordingly adopted Agenda 2063 as the long-term vision
for continental development.
Given that Agenda 2063 arose from wide-ranging consultations with all
sectors of society and relevant stakeholders, it must be seen as an
improvement from the past. However, no matter how extensive,
consultations do not by themselves lead to high-quality plan documents
or even implementation. This is important because as of yet there are no
grounds for over-enthusiasm: indeed, average growth of 5% since the
beginning of the century has still not translated into decent jobs and
the elimination of large pockets of poverty and pervasive inequality.
The negative perceptions about Africa will catch up with the
wonderful intentions once again if we do not construct a reality that
matches the aspirations of the continent, particularly its too much
neglected youth and women. This is the moral imperative.
In my view, the most important component of Agenda 2063 is the clear
commitment to the structural transformation of the continent. Put
simply, Africa must industrialise for sustained growth and to generate
jobs and extract maximum value addition from its natural resources. This
in turn requires credible macroeconomic frameworks, infrastructural
development and adequate financing. We must remember while articulating
macroeconomic frameworks to underpin structural transformation that the
benefits of austerity are at the best short-term and sometimes even
damaging to the very foundations of structural transformation.
The important role of infrastructure
in supporting structural transformation is quite clear from the
physical evidence around us and the plethora of initiatives that have
been launched to attract and ensure financing for infrastructure
projects, especially power, rail, road and aviation projects. To be
viable and indeed useful for structural transformation, these projects
must be of a transnational, regional nature. There are two challenges to
be overcome in this regard. The first relates to ensuring a harmonised
policy and regulatory environment for such investments. The second
challenge pertains to paying for all these projects, while at the same
time raising resources for investment in farms and factories and for the
delivery of social services. Innovative sources of funding based
particularly on the potential for domestic resources are now on the
agenda.
The message on the rear window of the minivan was for all those who
drive by. In our case our leaders are driving. If they cannot see the
mirrors of the minivan the message is that they are not seen either.
They can have an accident. They can miss the overtaking. They can keep
driving slowly behind the front car. They can fall asleep. They can just
accept their bad luck and change their plans and arrive late. Or they
can make themselves seen, and more importantly, felt. If the latter
happens… it means they have understood Africa’s imperative to determine
its own future!
Carlos Lopes is executive secretary of the United Nations
Economic Commission for Africa. The article was first published on his blog.
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire