|
Many developing countries have been able to achieve
self-sufficiency in foodstuff production as a result of rapid economic
growth during the last four decades. In addition, they have significantly
improved the quality of life for their citizens. Unfortunately, the kind
of strong macroeconomic performance that has allowed many of these countries
to successfully deliver major improvements in the national welfare has
not been universal. Although a few countries have performed relatively
well economically, the post-independence period in the majority of African
countries has been characterized primarily by extremely poor economic
performance. In addition to the fact that most African countries suffer
from food insecurity, the majority live in poverty. It appears that unless
appropriate institutional reforms are implemented and the structures that
enhance wealth creation are provided, the continent will continue to deteriorate
(1). In 1997, only thirteen African countries had per capita
incomes of more than US $1,000 (2).
In sub-Saharan Africa, there appears to have been little or no improvement
in the quality of life for the bulk of the people. In fact, today, most
people who live in this region are no longer able to meet their basic
needs and must depend on foreign aid--including food aid--for survival.
According to Cornwell, these economies "must grow at least 4-5 percent
annually to achieve food security, provide jobs and register a modest
improvement in living standards" (3).
Recent data on macroeconomic performance in the region, unfortunately,
do not indicate that the region will be able to achieve such growth, given
existing incentive structures. According to World Bank, only Botswana
(4.4%), Equatorial Guinea (6.0%), Mauritius (4.4%), Seychelles (3.7%),
Uganda (3.3%), and Egypt (2.5%) had reasonable rates of economic growth-as
measured by changes in the gross national product (GNP) per capita-during
the 1987-1997 period. Most countries in Africa had negative rates of economic
growth--Angola (-13.1%); Cameroon (-5.6%); Cape Verde (-9.7%); Democratic
Republic of Congo (-9.5%); Sierra Leone (-4.4%); and Republic of Congo
(-3.5%), just to name a few (4). Of the thirty poorest countries in the world today,
as measured by the UNDP's human development index (HDI), twenty-five of
them (83%) are found in Africa. According to a study by the Washington,
D.C. based Population Crisis Committee, over 90% of the countries with
the highest levels of human suffering in the world can be found in Africa
(5). In addition to the fact that Africa
is the poorest region of the world, it is also the only region whose prospects
for the new millennium look relatively bleak (6). Several studies have revealed that success in moving
beyond structural adjustment into long-term sustainable development will
be determined by how well African leaders are able to provide what the
World Bank calls an enabling environment for the productive use of resources
(7). Although there does not appear
to be agreement on what constitutes an enabling environment, in this paper
we will argue that some of its components include institutional arrangements
that guarantee economic freedoms; minimize corruption, rent seeking and
other forms of opportunism; and enhance indigenous entrepreneurship and,
subsequently, wealth creation. Many scholars have examined the causes of poverty
and underdevelopment in Africa and several variables have been identified
as major contributors. Among these are political opportunism, which includes
such behaviors as corruption and rent seeking; excessive population growth;
political violence, including destructive ethnic conflict; racial intolerance;
poorly developed and non-sustainable economic infrastructures; high debt
levels; military intervention in politics and governance; a global economy
that places African producers at a competitive disadvantage; an international
financial system that discriminates against African traders; and the economic
policies of the developed market economies (8).
Some researchers have argued that the critical determinant
of poor macroeconomic performance in Africa and, hence, continued poverty
and underdevelopment has been policy mistakes made by incompetent, ill-informed
and poorly educated but well-meaning policymakers. This latter argument
has informed the movement to recruit and bring to the public services
more competent, better educated, honest, and well disciplined individuals.
Recent studies by public choice scholars, however, have uncovered evidence
that points to political opportunism as the major determinant of underdevelopment
on the continent (9). Many of the so-called
policy mistakes are actually deliberate and purposeful programs promoted
by opportunistic, but not necessarily incompetent, civil servants and
politicians seeking ways to enrich themselves. The institutional arrangements
that African countries adopted at independence endowed the ruling elites
with significant regulatory and redistributive powers. These laws and
institutions enhanced the ability of the post-independence leaders to
engage in inefficient income and wealth redistributions in their favor.
Although the perverse economic policies implemented by these elites imposed
significant economic, human and social costs on the rest of society, they
generated enormous benefits for civil servants and politicians. Poorly designed, weak, and inappropriate institutional
arrangements are the critical determinant of poverty and underdevelopment
in the continent. These laws and institutions promote opportunism (e.g.,
corruption and rent seeking); restrict economic freedoms, and subsequently,
the ability of individuals to engage freely in exchange; impede entrepreneurial
activities and consequently, wealth creation; and generally endanger
sustainable development. The institutional arrangements that the African
countries adopted at independence enhanced the ability of those who
had captured the evacuated structures of colonial hegemony to misuse
the positions entrusted to them. In the process, they stunted the emergence
of an indigenous entrepreneurial class and, subsequently, the creation
of the wealth that the post-independence society needed to deal with
massive and pervasive poverty. The real obstacle to development in Africa, then,
is the absence of institutional arrangements that effectively constrain
the state and prevent its agents (civil servants and politicians) from
engaging in opportunism; enhance indigenous entrepreneurship and the creation
of wealth; and improve the ability of all individuals within each country
to participate fully and effectively in national development. In order
to prepare each African country for sustainable development in the new
century, citizens must engage in reconstruction of the state through proper
constitution making to provide governance and resource allocation systems
that minimize political opportunism; enhance indigenous entrepreneurship;
maximize wealth creation; promote peaceful coexistence of population groups;
and generally increase the national welfare. In the following sections,
we take a more detailed look at parts of this transition program (10). GOVERNMENT AND THE "ENABLING" ENVIRONMENT
FOR WEALTH CREATION IN AFRICA During the last forty years most governments in Africa
have either been unwilling or unable to perform their traditional duties-providing
public goods and maintaining a framework of security. In fact, in several
regions of the continent, governments have become irrelevant to the lives
of the people, hence the proliferation of non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), many of which have replaced the government in the provision of
services such as health care, education, and water (11).
The "good" or appropriate government enhances the wealth of
the nation; upholds the constitution and maintains law and order; protects
and enforces property rights, including the protection of the individual
from domestic and foreign aggression; promotes both entrepreneurial activities
and the creation of wealth; enforces freely negotiated contracts but does
not engage in activities that impede trade or free exchange; effectively
and fully enforces rules against theft, fraud, and other activities that
involve the illegal redistribution of wealth and income; minimizes opportunistic
behaviors such as bureaucratic corruption and rent seeking; and provides
public goods and services efficiently and equitably. Although each society should be allowed to determine
its own government through proper constitution making, the "good"
government has certain universal attributes. First, the state must be
limited constitutionally in order to make certain that civil servants
or the state's other agents do not engage in political opportunism. Proper
constitutional constraints will make certain that lawmakers, for example,
do not enact fiscally discriminatory legislation and that the state's
structures cannot be used by interest groups to plunder the economy for
their own benefit. Such limitations should minimize rent seeking and other
forms of opportunism, while at the same time advancing entrepreneurship
and healthy macroeconomic performance. Second, the political system must
not be allowed to degenerate into unlimited majoritarian rule, which could
result in the erosion of individual liberty. The latter, which is the
cornerstone of any effective democratic system, must not be allowed to
become a casualty of majoritarianism. During constitutional deliberations,
limitations should be inserted into the constitutional compact to make
certain that the majority does not oppress and marginalize the minority.
Third, the effective governance system is one that is consensual, secured
primarily by voluntary agreement between the relevant stakeholders, and
designed to enhance their well-being (12).
Members of society must see the "good" government as a social
arrangement put together by them to protect their "person" and
their "property" as defined and elaborated in the constitution.
In most African countries today, most governments pursue and advance primarily
the interests and objectives of a few individuals and groups--mostly those
of the ruling elites and their supporters. In recent years, public choice scholars have embarked
upon a research agenda whose primary objective is to provide the framework
for developing the appropriate model of government for each society. Such
a framework can be used to develop governance structures for each African
country (13). Since the end of the
Cold War and the collapse of the apartheid regime in South Africa, Africans,
energized by these monumental global events, have been engaged in efforts
to transform their critical domains and prepare for more effective governance,
and economic development in the new century and beyond. Unfortunately,
there has not been much success, as the majority of the polities in the
continent are still characterized by antiquated, anachronistic, and non-viable
governance structures, many of which were inherited from the colonialists.
These structures were not designed to enhance the ability of Africans
to govern themselves and generate the wealth to meet their needs, nor
were they expected to advance peaceful coexistence of groups. In fact,
during colonialism, peaceful coexistence was not achieved through cooperative
agreements but by force, deceit, co-optation of traditional rulers, bribery,
and other forms of coercion. Instead, the colonial institutional arrangements
were specifically developed to help the Europeans exploit the Africans
and their resources for the benefit of the metropolitan economies. At independence, the new African leaders were
expected by the African peoples, especially those who had been marginalized
by colonialism, to engage all sections of society in a national debate
on state reconstruction and provide more effective governance structures
and resource allocation systems that guaranteed individuals the right
to freely engage in exchange and contract--in other words, resource
allocation systems that guaranteed economic freedoms. Many of these
new leaders, however, undertook primarily opportunistic institutional
reforms that significantly increased their political power and enhanced
their ability to monopolize the supply of legislation and the allocation
of resources (14). Emerging from these reform efforts were highly oppressive,
exploitative and intrusive states, not unlike those that had existed
in the continent during the colonial period. Throughout most of the
post-independence period, bureaucratic corruption and rent seeking became
pervasive as civil servants and politicians promoted perverse economic
policies in an effort to plunder the economy for their own benefit.
Through this process, many Africans, especially vulnerable groups--women,
children, rural inhabitants, and the unemployed and underemployed youth
relegated to the urban periphery--were severely impoverished and marginalized.
Economists generally argue that the appropriate model
of government has two main functions: "to maintain law and order
and to provide public goods" (15).
As has been argued by James M. Buchanan, these functions are equivalent
to what he terms the protective and productive state (16).
A protective state engages in activities that enhance entrepreneurial
activities and the creation of the wealth that can be used to confront
poverty and deprivation, and advance the national welfare. According to
Gwartney and Wagner, such a state accomplishes this objective by providing
a "framework of security and order," which implies the effective
enforcement of laws against illegal activities, including the protection
of property rights (17). During deliberations
to design the nation's constitution, members of society may grant the
government the power to monopolize the use of legitimate coercion. The
government uses the latter to protect citizens from internal and external
aggression. In other words, the protective state shields its citizens
from harm and provides them with a framework of laws within which they
can freely engage in trade with each other. In addition to enforcing contracts,
the state also enhances free exchange through its activities, implying
that the state cannot pass or enact laws that restrain the individual's
ability to trade. More than a hundred years ago, the American constitutionalist
and politician, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated what he believed were three
attributes of the "good" government. According to him, "good"
government must (1) be able to prevent citizens from injuring each other;
(2) engage in as little trade regulation as possible, implying that citizens,
acting as private individuals or business owners, should determine their
own economic interests and freely engage in them; and (3) minimize takings--that
is, the government should not impose heavy taxes on productive activities.
Today, we see Jefferson's argument as a description of a governmental
system that effectively protects and guarantees economic freedoms, including
the maintenance of low marginal tax rates, and, as a consequence, enhances
wealth creation (18). During the last
forty years, no such government can be said to have existed anywhere in
Africa. While one may argue that governmental structures in Mauritius
and Bostwana were quite close, truly protective and productive governments
are yet to be established in the continent. The post-independence state in Africa not only failed
to perform its protective functions well, but its structures were actually
turned into instruments of plunder and exploitation in order to help the
incumbent maintain a monopoly on political power and continue to generate
extra-legal income for the ruling elite. For example, under the apartheid
system in South Africa, whites used the nation's framework of security
and order effectively to marginalize the majority black population, create
and sustain artificial privileges for themselves, and generally stunt
the economic, social, and political transformation of Africans (19).
Instead of performing its duties and protecting all citizens and their
property, the apartheid state became the primary source of most of the
violence that was directed at the African peoples. Additionally, the South
African state at this time failed to maintain an enabling environment
for the development and sustaining of indigenous capitalism and the effective
and full participation of Africans in national development. As the evidence
now shows, the apartheid state purposefully engaged in activities that
stunted the political and economic development of the African peoples
and as a consequence, failed to enhance the national wealth. Of course, the apartheid regime in South Africa was
not the only political system whose structures had been converted into
instruments of violence against its citizens. In practically all parts
of the continent, ruling coalitions--many of them dominated by specific
ethnic and/or racial groups--had captured governance structures at independence
and used them effectively for the private capital accumulation of the
ruling class. In many of these countries, the institutions that make up
the national security framework were either destroyed or made subservient
to the interests of the ruling elite. In many instances, civil servants
engaged in illegal activities to extract income for themselves; judicial
officers adjudicated cases based primarily on the wealth and political
status of the defendant; judges often used their positions to punish their
enemies and those of their relatives and supporters; and senior military
elites routinely converted resources destined for their troops into their
personal property. In a study of Zaire in 1989, Gould and Mukendi determined
that these activities were pervasive throughout the country during the
reign of Mobutu Sese Seko. In fact, such activities were common in many
other African countries as well (20). In the majority of African countries that were ruled
by the military (e.g., Nigeria and Zaire), the state ceased performing
its protective function. State structures were used regularly to suffocate
civil society, impose the will of the military on the people, and to help
military elites continue to monopolize the allocation of resources (21).
Military rulers used the regulatory powers of the state to redistribute
income and wealth in their favor, and in the process, severely impoverished
and marginalized the majority of citizens. Despite its enormous earnings
from petroleum, Nigeria is today, one of the poorest countries in the
continent. In 1982, Nigeria had a gross national product (GNP) per capita
of US $1,110, but by 1989 it had fallen to US $270. Thanks to continued
military interference in economic and political affairs, the economy continued
to deteriorate, as per capita income reached a new low of US $230 in 1994
before rising to US $260 in 1997 (22).
During the period, 1980-1997, per capita income in Nigeria was falling
at an average annual rate of 8.42%. Despite the OPEC oil price increases
of the mid-1970s and Nigeria's enormous windfalls from oil, Nigerians
are today among the poorest people in Africa. Their development potential
has been squandered by perverse economic programs promoted by the military
elites who have ruled the country during most of its existence as a sovereignty
(23). The conversion of the state's framework of law and
order into instruments to suffocate civil society and plunder the economy
for the benefit of politically dominant groups has been the rule not the
exception in many African countries. For example, in Cameroon, the country's
first president, Ahmadou Ahidjo, engaged in institutional reforms in the
immediate post-independence period that re-enforced the presidency and
concentrated most political power in the central government (24).
From 1960 to 1982, he ruled the country by decree and employed the country's
large security apparatus to exploit, oppress, and marginalize the people
for his own benefit and that of his supporters. Instead of protecting
the liberties and property of Cameroonians, the nation's security institutions
were used effectively by the president and other members of his ruling
coalition to torture the people, suffocate civil society, destroy the
independent media, oppress and marginalize popular forces, stunt indigenous
entrepreneurship, subvert justice, and, in the process, totally marginalize
the Cameroon people, in an effort to help Ahidjo continue to monopolize
political power and the allocation of resources (25).
In 1982, Ahidjo handed the government to his prime minister, Paul Biya.
Unfortunately for Cameroonians, Biya retained the nation's existing laws
and institutions, forcing the country to remain a de facto one-party political
dictatorship (26). In order for the state in Africa to perform its
protective functions, it must guarantee the security of its citizens.
At minimum, the protective state must maintain law and order, provide
the wherewithal for popular participation, enhance entrepreneurial activity,
and maximize the national welfare. Included among these institutions
are (1) a properly constrained police force; (2) an independent press;
(3) a professional civil service; (4) a professional and politically
neutral military, subordinate to the civilian government; (5) an efficient
and representative legislature; (6) an independent judiciary; and (7)
an independent central bank. The second function of the state is to enhance the
national welfare by organizing those productive activities that cannot
be carried out efficiently by the private sector. In its productive role,
the state is expected to produce the goods and services that citizens
acting in their individual and separate capacities cannot undertake efficiently.
A theory of public goods has been developed by economists to explain why
the state may be required or called upon to produce certain goods and
services. For example, in the presence of externalities, the state has
the opportunity to significantly enhance the national welfare by organizing
the affected activities. One must caution, however, that states should
not become engaged in the production of goods and services that can be
organized efficiently and effectively by the private sector. This warning
is directed especially at governments in the African countries, which
during the last forty years, have dominated virtually all sectors of their
economies, engaging in activities that were supposed to be the exclusive
purview of the private sector. In the process, these governments established
and artificially sustained a plethora of unprofitable and poorly managed
public companies, maintained large, bloated and parasitic bureaucracies,
and significantly impoverished their citizens. In order to provide the
subsidies that these unprofitable public enterprises needed so as to continue
to operate, and to meet the financial needs of the large civil services,
these governments accumulated relatively high external debts. In fact,
by the mid-1980s, the majority of African governments were no longer able
to meet their financial obligations (27). Although it is true that a state has the potential
to improve national wealth through the production and distribution of
goods and services that cannot be organized efficiently by the private
sector, such a function can only be carried out efficiently if the country's
institutional arrangements adequately and effectively constrain the exercise
of government agency, and subsequently the ability of civil servants and
politicians to engage in political opportunism. As the evidence from post-independence
Africa has indicated, governments are able to stray, often quite significantly,
from the path prescribed by the conceptual models. What the government
is expected to do in order to maximize the national welfare, protect the
liberty and property of individuals, enhance wealth creation, and promote
peaceful coexistence of groups, is not necessarily what governments actually
do. The state may lack the human capital to perform its assigned functions
efficiently (28). In some cases, the government may be unwilling to
undertake the activities as required. The ruling elites may desire different
public policy outcomes from the ones desired or demanded by greater society.
There is ample evidence to indicate that the failure of the post-independence
state in Africa to perform its protective and productive functions efficiently
has been due primarily to opportunism on the part of public servants.
In other words, the absence of skilled individuals in the public services
of the African countries has not been the major determinant of poor macroeconomic
performance. Political opportunism (e.g., rent seeking and corruption)
on the part of civil servants and politicians has been the primary determinant
of continued economic deterioration (29). The theory of public choice states that the incentive
structures within a market determine the behavior of traders and, as a
consequence, explain market outcomes. Thus, one way to understand post-independence
policy outcomes in African countries is to examine incentive structures
in these societies. Market incentive structures are determined by the
country's institutional arrangements. Existing institutional arrangements
in the majority of African countries make political opportunism (especially
rent seeking and bureaucratic corruption) the inevitable outcome to public
policy. According to Gwartney and Wagner, "[t]he central point of
departure taken by these scholars [i.e.,public choice scholars] is that
the incentives contained within a particular system of government will
determine whether or not government's power to tax, spend, and regulate
is used as envisioned by the normative justifications" (30).
In other words, the incentive system within each society will determine
the extent to which the state will perform its productive and protective
functions. Therefore, even if the government has the capacity and capability
to perform these functions effectively, it may still not do so if the
institutional arrangements do not provide the appropriate incentive structures.
Thus, the incentive structures must be considered an important and critical
part of state capacity and capability. As mentioned above, the incentive structures are determined
by the country's institutional arrangements. A country's constitution
determines the power of the different political jurisdictions within the
country, provides structures for the peaceful resolution of conflict,
and defines the type of resource allocation system that society will have.
In other words, the nation's constitution determines the kinds of incentive
structures to be faced by participants in both economic and political
markets, and provides the foundation for the establishment and sustaining
of the country's institutions. To make certain that the state performs
its functions effectively, citizens of each African country must engage
in proper constitution making to reconstruct the state and provide their
societies with what public choice scholars call the constitutionally limited
government, and a resource allocation system that guarantees economic
freedoms (31). POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM AND POVERTY IN AFRICA: NKRUMAH'S
GHANA Like many of the new African countries, Ghana believed
that it could achieve rapid economic growth and development by adopting
an import substitution industrialization (ISI) program. The government
of Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana's first head of state, expected to anchor the
ISI program on its regulation of the international trade sector. To
meet the goals set under the ISI program, the government introduced
a number of policy instruments. These included (1) protection of domestic
producers through tariffs, exchange controls, and import quotas; (2)
subsidies to foreign firms to encourage them to establish and maintain
import production facilities within the country; and (3) the creation
of development and investment banks that were expected to provide subsidized
loans to individuals and groups willing to invest in the government's
so-called "priority development sectors." The government usually determined the priority areas.
In addition, the state created a significant number of public enterprises,
which were expected to produce a variety of goods and services. Specific
sectors of the economy were targeted for control by the government.
These included public utilities (which the government considered too
critical for national development to be left under the control of the
private sector, especially if non-Ghanaians dominated the latter); exploitation
of the country's natural resources; and the ownership and operation
of airlines, radio, and other forms of communication. Nationalist fervor
demanded that the government create firms to exploit the country's environmental
resources and ensure that certain important areas of the economy were
placed under the firm control of the indigenous people. As a consequence,
industries such as mining, air and rail transportation, electricity
and telecommunications, as well as the financial sector, were expected
to be controlled and dominated by the government. Unfortunately, two important constraints made public
policy failure inevitable in Ghana. First, the institutional arrangements
adopted shortly after independence did not adequately constrain the
state, allowing civil servants, whose job it was to implement the ISI
program, to deliberately mismanage it for their own benefit. Second,
Ghana did not have non-governmental agencies that were capable of counterbalancing
elite interests and forcing civil servants and politicians to become
accountable to the people. The absence of an effective civil society
to serve as a check on the exercise of government agency and the inability
of existing institutional arrangements to adequately constrain the state
resulted in widespread policy failure. The large number of state enterprises
that the government had created to implement the ISI program were, instead,
turned into instruments of patronage and corruption, and regularly employed
by civil servants to extract extra-legal income for themselves, and
by politicians to purchase regime security for the regime. According to results of research on Nkrumah's ISI
program (32), the perverse incentive
structures made possible by the country's institutional arrangements encouraged
political and bureaucratic corruption; destroyed any chances that the
ISI may have had for success; and enhanced the ability of civil servants
and politicians to use the government's regulatory powers to enrich themselves
at the expense of greater Ghanaian society. Referring to Ghana's former
trade minister, A. Y. K. Djin, Leith remarks that the system (i.e., regulation
of the foreign trade sector) which the government had designed to "meet
the apparent national needs and to minimize capricious discrimination
among importers was frequently set aside in favor of Mr. Djin and his
associates" (33). Djin and other
Ghanaian civil servants used the foreign exchange rationing and import
licensing systems--which were designed to enhance the implementation of
ISI--to extort bribes from prospective importers, discriminating against
any entrepreneurs who were either unwilling or unable to pay the required
bribes. Thus, the regulatory system set up by the Nkrumah government at
independence in Ghana was easily transformed into an instrument for the
enrichment of the ruling coalition. The ease with which civil servants
and politicians in Ghana were able to turn governmental structures into
instruments of plunder was due primarily to the existence of institutional
arrangements that failed to adequately constrain the state and subsequently
the behavior of its agents and the absence of a strong civil society to
force accountability in government (34). The extent of venality and public malfeasance in
Ghana during the government of Kwame Nkrumah is well documented. Many
Ghanaians believe that even though the overthrow of Nkrumah by the military
could be considered opportunistic, the public still welcomed the action
because of the exceptionally high level of corruption that pervaded
the government. As Werlin has stated, "Many Ghanaians attribute the downfall of
Kwame Nkrumah and his Convention People's Party to their corruption.
'It was lucrative to belong to the Party; nepotism was the rule',
notes T. Peter Omari. During the Nkrumah régime, corruption was
not merely practiced by the politicians alone. Attu Kwaminia adds,
'but by those who held various degrees of power in the civil service,
in commercial concerns, in corporations, in political parties, in
traditional authorities, and so on'" (35). After Nkrumah's regime was overthrown in 1966, several
commissions of enquiry were engaged by the new military government to
investigate and determine the extent of corruption in the public sector.
Although the military may have attempted to use these commissions of enquiry
to discredit the Nkrumah government, many scholars have attested to the
judiciousness and fairness of the commissions (36). The more than 40 commissions
revealed that during Kwame Nkrumah's reign, [a] kickback of from 5 to
10 percent was expected in return for government contracts. The CPP garnered
about 90 percent of its income in this way, amounting to over $5 million
between 1958 and 1966, which Nkrumah freely used for his own purposes.
For example, the properties of A. G. Leventis were purchased in 1962 at
an inflated price with the understanding that $2.4 million would be turned
over to Nkrumah for his own use (37). While in power, Nkrumah did respond to his critics
and made an effort to deal with corruption. For example, in 1965, Nkrumah
sacked his trade minister for mismanaging the import-licensing scheme
and replaced him with Mr. Kwesi Armah. In addition, the government published
for the first time the foreign-exchange budget. Unfortunately, these
reforms were only superficial and failed to affect the existing incentive
structures, including the country's institutional arrangements. As a
consequence, there was no incentive for the new minister to engage in
behavior that was significantly different from that of his predecessor.
On the contrary, shortly after he took office, Mr. Armah became engaged
in the same types of opportunistic behaviors that had characterized
Mr. Djin's tenure in office. In fact, instead of limiting his activities
to "profiting" from only a fraction of the licenses issued
by his office, Mr. Armah developed and implemented a system that enhanced
his ability to profit from all licenses issued. According to one of the commissions, "He [Mr. Armah] introduced the system whereby
all applications for import licenses had to be addressed to him personally
under registered cover and he alone was responsible for processing
the said applications
[T]here was open corruption and malpractices
in the matter of grant of import licenses during this period. Import
licenses were issued on the basis of a commission corruptly demanded
and payable by importers on the face value of the import licenses
issued. The commission was fixed at 15%, but was in special cases
reduced to 7.5 or 5%" (38). While he was the Minister of Foreign Trade, Mr.
Armah and his subordinates routinely denied applications for permits
to import essential inputs for local industries. On the other hand,
licenses were being granted for the purchase of non-essential commodities
(primarily luxury American and European goods). Since the latter generated
significantly more monopoly profits, prospective importers were willing
and quite eager to invest in the bribes that were demanded by the civil
servants at the trade ministries. Corruption in the foreign trade ministry
eventually thwarted the government's development goals as presented
to the Ghanaian people at independence. Subsequent Ghanaian governments have attempted to
deal with pervasive corruption, rent seeking and other forms of opportunism.
Military dictator Jerry Rawlings, who has since "civilianized"
himself and is now the elected Ghanaian head of state, has on several
occasions dealt ruthlessly with those convicted of corruption and other
forms of public malfeasance. He executed three former national rulers
for their complicity in corruption and financial mismanagement and two
bank executives who were "judged and found guilty" of corrupt
enrichment and other fraudulent activities in connection with the Ghana
Commercial Bank (39). Rawlings' ruthless,
brutal and non-constitutional approach to corruption cleanup in Ghana
was condemned, as well as praised. His harsh measures, however, had only
a short-term impact on corruption. Corruption control programs that are
most likely to be sustainable and have long-term positive effects on civil
service efficiency require fundamental changes in existing institutional
arrangements and subsequently, the incentive structures faced by market
participants. Unless such changes are undertaken and Ghanaian society
provided with more participatory, transparent and accountable governance
structures, corruption will remain a serious constraint to development. ENHANCING INDIGENOUS ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITIES The most critical need in Africa is wealth that
can be used to alleviate poverty. Throughout the continent, few economies
are able to generate the resources needed to confront pervasive poverty
and deprivation. The inability to generate enough wealth to meet even
basic needs has been due primarily to government-imposed restrictions
on economic freedoms. Such restrictions have stunted indigenous entrepreneurship
and made wealth creation virtually impossible, especially in the formal
sector. While such restrictions have generally created many benefits
for the ruling elite, they have imposed significant costs on the people,
especially the historically deprived and marginalized. During the last
several decades, the African economies have been so mismanaged that
today many Africans have become almost totally dependent on the industrial
North for survival. Due to changes in the global economy during the
1989-1991 period, Africans now have another opportunity to engage in
state reconstruction through proper constitution-making. As a result of the development model adopted by many
African countries after independence, most economies on the continent
are heavily regulated, suffer from high rates of corruption and rent seeking,
and have bureaucracies that are very hostile to entrepreneurs and the
private sector. Most of the regulations that exist function as major impediments
to private exchange and trade. Research has determined that while competitive
exchange minimizes the incidence of rent seeking and other forms of opportunism,
the latter tends to flourish in monopolized markets (40).
Monopolistic (and monopsonistic) markets in the African economies are
usually maintained with the help of government regulations. Such monopolized
markets, whether developed and maintained by domestic or foreign firms,
will have a significantly negative impact on indigenous entrepreneurship
and subsequently, efficient wealth creation in the country. To insure
competitive exchange (i.e., to minimize monopolization) and provide the
appropriate environment for capitalist development, the constitution of
each country must guarantee economic freedoms and create structures that
protect private markets. According to Mueller, the ability of political coalitions
or interest groups to engage in opportunism and to restrict the ability
of other individuals and groups to participate in economic markets, can
be constrained through constitutional design (41).
Appropriate constitutional provisions can minimize rent seeking and other
forms of opportunism, which have contributed significantly to the inefficient
allocation of resources in many African countries. Thus, to improve macroeconomic
performance in the African countries so as to generate the wealth that
the people need to solve their problems, it is necessary that each country
be provided with the institutional arrangements that guarantee economic
freedoms, promote entrepreneurship and enhance the creation of wealth
(42). In a study published in 1996, Gwartney, Lawson and
Block identified four components of economic freedom, which they argue,
can be elaborated in the constitution in order to provide the society
with the enabling environment to create wealth. First, the government
should provide traders with a currency that is stable and has a relatively
predictable value. In carrying out this function, the government should
make an effort to maintain relatively low rates of inflation. In addition,
citizens should be granted the right to have free access to foreign currency
and also maintain bank accounts in foreign financial institutions. Without
stable money, individuals cannot undertake the complex exchanges that
are an important part of a modern economy, or participate effectively
in global markets. Gwartney, Lawson and Block argue that "the general
ingredients of economic freedom in the monetary area include (1) slow
monetary expansion that maintains and protects the value of money, (2)
price level (or inflation rate) stability, and (3) the absence of restrictions
limiting the use of alternative currencies" (43). Second, the private sector and not the government
should determine the goods and services to be produced in the economy.
During most of the post-independence period, the government has determined
most of what should be produced in the economy, and in many cases, how
these goods and services should be distributed. In the post-Cold War era,
central development planning should be de-emphasized in favor of greater
reliance on the market. It is important that trade be based on mutually
beneficial voluntary exchange and state influence restricted to broad
areas consistent with the concept of economic freedom as guaranteed in
the constitution. The state would provide public goods and protect the
liberty and property of individuals. Government-imposed production constraints,
such as price control regimes and interest rate ceilings, interfere with
economic freedoms and should be eliminated from each economy (44). Third, the government should not pass legislation
that creates benefits for some individuals and groups at the expense
of others. Economists have identified three public policies that can
generate benefits for some individuals while imposing significant costs
on greater society. These include income transfers and state subsidy
programs, high marginal tax rates, and conscription to secure soldiers
for the military. Such public programs directly infringe on the economic
freedoms of many citizens, stunting entrepreneurship and wealth creation. Finally, restrictions on international trade are
an important infringement on the right of citizens to free exchange.
During the post-independence period in Africa, most of the laws imposed
on international trade have come at the request of interest groups seeking
enrichment. Although such restrictions have created many benefits for
special interest groups, they have imposed enormous costs on greater
society. In addition to impeding trade, these regulations have produced
reductions in both consumer and producer surpluses. Excessive economic
regulation is widely considered the most important source of bureaucratic
corruption in African economies. For example, civil servants at the
central banks regularly extort bribes from entrepreneurs seeking scarce
foreign exchange permits. The outcomes of most international trade regulation
in Africa have been increased corruption and opportunism, as well as
continued deterioration of general economic conditions. Shortly after independence, many new African leaders
told citizens that government regulation was an important policy tool
that could be used to protect domestic industries, improve macroeconomic
performance, and industrialize the economy. Despite their now obvious
negative effects on exchange and wealth creation, many countries have
continued to promote such policies. Of course, regulations generate
the resources necessary to provide regime security and allow the monopolization
of political space and allocation of resources. Controls on agriculture
have generated significant resources that have been used to subsidize
the politically volatile urban sector. Such regulatory programs have
only further marginalized and impoverished many rural communities. To enhance wealth creation in Africa and improve
the continent's ability to engage in sustainable development, each country
must create resource allocation systems that guarantee economic freedoms
through proper constitution-making and state reconstruction. In addition,
each country must constrain the power of the government so as to prevent
civil servants and politicians from engaging in opportunism. If these
reforms are not enacted, Africans will continue to suffer from high
rates of poverty and deprivation. Destructive ethnic conflict will remain
pervasive. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION At independence, many Africans--especially the historically
marginalized and deprived groups and communities--believed that the control
of governance structures and economic systems by indigenous elites would
provide them with the wherewithal to improve their living conditions.
It was generally believed that shortly after the departure of the Europeans,
the institutions which they had left behind would be dismantled and reconstructed
to produce structures that were more suitable to the maximization of African
values. This was never done and, consequently, Africans have been unable
to generate the wealth that they need to confront pervasive poverty and
deprivation. Today, Africa is one of the poorest regions of the world,
and its prospects for the new century look relatively bleak. The causes
of economic deterioration in Africa have been examined by many researchers
(45). In this paper, I have argued
that the most important determinant of poverty is the absence of institutional
arrangements to guarantee economic freedom and adequately constrain the
opportunistic activities of civil servants and politicians. Institutional arrangements are a critical determinant
of macroeconomic performance. They determine the incentive structures
faced by market participants and, as a consequence, determine market
outcomes. To properly prepare Africa for the new century, it is necessary
to reconstruct the state through proper constitution making, providing
an environment for wealth creation and peaceful coexistence. It is important
to caution that the process of designing constitutional rules must involve
enfranchising people (especially the historically marginalized groups)
and providing them with the facilities to participate fully in constitutional
deliberations. If, as was the case during decolonization, the transformation
process is controlled and dominated by urban-based indigenous elites
and their foreign benefactors, the outcome will be institutional arrangements
unable to efficiently direct development on the continent. In this paper,
I have examined some of the most important issues facing Africa as it
prepares for the new century. These include determining of the appropriate
model of government and enhancing indigenous entrepreneurship and wealth
creation. Constitutions can significantly constrain the ability
of legislators to enact counterproductive public policies (46).
During constitutional deliberations, members of society can establish
a development-oriented constitutional structure. A constitution that minimizes
the erosion of economic freedoms by guaranteeing the right to freely engage
in trade and constraining the activities of the state is critical for
sustainable development. Certain constitutional provisions, including
the following, can enhance economic freedom but constrain the state and
its agents: Monetary provisions: These should provide for
an independent central bank, allow citizens to own bank accounts
in non-domestic currencies, and create price-level stability. Government borrowing: These provisions should
make certain that the government borrows only for specific projects,
as a way of enhancing fiscal responsibility. Income and consumption taxation: Here, the
emphasis is on minimizing the possibility of a double tax on saving.
The latter is critical for capital formation. Procedural limitations on the power of the
government to tax: In order to make certain that the government
functions as an engine of economic growth and development, its power
to tax must be limited constitutionally. Provisions for the approval of the public budget:
A process that is transparent and accountable to the governed must
be put in place so that public budgets can be approved. Ideally,
this should involve approval of the budget by the executive and
legislative branches of government. However, it is important to
note that the exact process adopted would be determined by the existing
structure of government. Whatever the process, it must be one that
is transparent and accountable to the relevant stakeholder groups.
Thus, a supramajority requirement should be considered since that
implies that there will be more of a consensus on matters relating
to the budget. International trade and the imposition of tariffs:
International trade is a very important way to enhance the wealth
of a nation. Thus, interference with the flow of trade is counterproductive
and limits the ability of the economy to create wealth. As discussed
in this paper, restrictions on trade--domestic or international--usually
produce benefits only for special interest groups. Labor markets: The right to enter into labor
contracts that are mutually beneficial to the employer and employee
is critical to wealth creation. Interference with this right can
lead to significant inefficiencies in the allocation of a nation's
labor resources. Price controls: Control of prices usually benefits
special interest groups (e.g., urban dwellers) and impedes wealth
creation. Economic regulation: Government regulation
of private exchange can and does enhance the wealth of a nation
if it is not undertaken arbitrarily, capriciously and opportunistically,
as has been the experience of the African countries during the last
forty years. According to Gwartney and Holcombe (47),
regulatory "laws should be structured so that they are objective
and non-arbitrary, and so that they apply uniformly to all members of
a society. In addition, regulations should be instituted only to further
the general public interest, not to further narrow special interests."
The primary reasons for elaborating these provisions in the constitution
is to guarantee economic freedoms and to make certain that they cannot
be abrogated through ordinary legislation. (1) UNDP, Human Development Report, 1998.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1998; World Bank, World Development
Report, 1997. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997; World Bank,
World Development Indicators, 1997. Washington, D.C.: The World
Bank, 1997; Mbaku, J. M. "Patterns and Levels of Life in Sahel
West Africa Since the 1960s." Africa Insight, Vol. 19, No.
1 (1989), pp. 38-47. (37) Werlin (1972), op. cit., p. 252. Abstract:
Available evidence shows that human conditions in most African countries
have deteriorated significantly in recent years. In fact, since many
African countries began to gain independence in the 1960s, the standard
of living for most Africans has either not improved or has done so only
marginally. The general consensus among many observers--including researchers,
aid donors, and even African policymakers--is that unless appropriate
(and drastic) measures are undertaken, economic, social and human conditions
in the continent will continue to worsen. Today, most African countries
are unable to generate the wealth they need to deal fully and effectively
with mass poverty and deprivation, and as result, must depend on the
industrial North for food and development aid. This paper examines impediments
to wealth creation in Africa and argues that continued poverty and deprivation
in the continent are made possible by the institutional arrangements
that Africans adopted at independence. In order to prepare for sustainable
development in the new century, Africans must engage in state reconstruction
to provide themselves with governance structures that minimize political
opportunism (e.g., bureaucratic corruption and rent seeking), and resource
allocation systems that enhance indigenous entrepreneurship and promote
wealth creation. Reference
Style: The following is the suggested
format for referencing this article: |