|
4. He went on to describe the mismatch between formal
and informal systems and the mistake of donors in creating
aid dependence. The success of state was measured by
citizens by how well it worked according to informal
rules - but external donors measured it according how
its formal institutions appeared. He said that ultimately
informal/formal demands are not compatible - particularly
under economic stress/crisis. There was a frantic search
for resources and aid filled the gap. Aid was biggest
source of revenue over time and increased dependence
on donors.
5. Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) in the 80s
signalled the end to the 'functioning neopatrimonial
state'. Lack of aid funds meant rulers could no longer
balance the demands of the informal and formal sectors.
Officially, rulers operated to norms of formal sector
but the informal sector came to dominate increasingly.
6. He said that there is an enormous difference between
countries in Africa ranging from those more efficient/able
to operate in formal sector (Botswana) and those that
don't operate at all (Zaire). However, there is a clear
trend of decline in state efficiency.
7. Moving to the issue of governance, Chabal said the
issue of rebuilding states in Africa was a practical
one. He contested the view held by some donors that
the market can drive state building, stating that there
is no C20th example of development or growth without
strong state direction.
8. On the role of the state, Chabal pointed out the
long-running debate between the roles of 'enabler' and
'manager' of development. He identified the following
features of a developmental state, which he said are
missing all over Africa:
- guarantees order and peace other than by repressive
measures and uphold RoL, which requires functioning
legal framework;
- maintains basic admin organisation at a minimum, which
is regulates and enables economic activity over time;
- ensures sufficiently operational infrastructure e.g.
communication, transport, electricity;
- provides basic health and education and if possible
expansion of higher technical training, which is crucial;
- ensures finance and banking infrastructure.
He said these features constitute an efficient government
and have little to do with whether the state is democratic
or authoritarian.
9. He also outlined lessons from the Asian Tiger economies:
- strong or efficient state is fundamental to economic
growth;
- state directed investment critical
- access to world market important in several aspects
e.g. comparative advantage
- economic growth depends on investment in human capital
- Culture is important but not always obvious in which
way -- e.g. Confucianism identified both as pro- and
anti-dev. by commentators.
10. The latest thinking is that the failure of state
is the primary reason for the absence of development.
There are 2 factors at play:
- State decline doesn't have gradual negative effects.
Below a certain 'threshold' the efficiency of state
falls off rapidly, and eventually collapses, and doesn't
have role other than clientelistic. One can identify
this point.
- Such decline is more than mere administrative corrosion.
It is the increased dominance of informal over formal
and there is a rapid destruction of the bureaucracy
that was established at independence.
There exists the assumption that re-institutionalisation
is merely a technical process. However, training is
not sufficient where a state has gone below a certain
threshold. Africans' view of the state is crucial. Once
they view it as no more than a predatory body, they
lose hope that it can be modernised and made to work
for them.
11. The focus now should be on establishing how to
measure the 'threshold of efficiency', concentrating
on leaders who are concerned with avoiding state decline,
distinguishing between countries that inherited a functioning
state from the colonial period and those that didn't
and on political will. Chabal gave a warning that even
well organised states have collapsed.
12. He concluded by saying that
- Aid can help sustain neopatrimonial networks, preventing
state decline below the threshold, propping up the state,
but not promote development, until political pressure
from below can move it forward
- Devolution of power, decentralisation, can only work
to improve conditions when state is committed to improving
conditions (efficiency, development)
- Efficiency and development will result in increased
state legitimacy.
|