Disruptions and Rhetoric in African Development Policy

George Auma Kararach

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2022
• Print ISBN: 9780367721046
• eBook ISBN: 9781000582048
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

The book examines the failures and some of the successes of Africa in its efforts to transform into a society where human security or development in the broadest sense is achieved.

It is argued the African continent had, and will continue, to content with disruptions or change on its path to development. Development policy making in this regard, is an art of setting out strategies to build resilience and take advantage of disruptions or change in whatever format: political, economic, health, diplomatic, demographic or even environmental and climatic. The book discusses nine major disruptions in Africa's socio-economic life and the limits imposed by the rhetoric in development policy: exclusion and social inequality, environmental degradation and climate change, natural resources and poor beneficiation, trade and aid, food insecurity, demography and migration, pandemics and disease burden, conflict and criminality and technology and innovation.

The book is intended for intermediate students in African studies, Area Studies, Development Economics, Development Studies, Public Policy and Comparative Politics. In addition will be development practitioners working in developing countries, the UN system, multilateral development banks, donor agencies and regional economic communities in Africa.

1Development as disruptions – a reconstruction of the theory and practice

DOI: 10.4324/9781003153467-1

1.1 Introduction

Economies and society are always in a state of flux (Eriksson and Goldthorpe, 1992) due to constant disruptions to the system affecting how people work and live. Today, there is a general sense that the world economy is in a state of unprecedented transformation amid technological change, including rapid automation, the take-off of artificial intelligence (AI) and rapid advances in fields such as nanotechnology and genomics. Countries are also under pressure to undertake major shifts in their economic activities towards green growth. Major geopolitical shifts are underway as the centre of economic gravity is also shifting to the Global South (Kararach, 2020). This new geography of disruption will affect just about every aspect of society – from fiscal policy to industrial strategies and competitiveness to the labour market and to social policy. Our understanding of governance as well as how governments function will change in significant ways.

In developing African economies the challenge of transformation is even more intense. There has been a mistaken belief from modernisation theory, Marxism to structuralism that developed countries (DCs) have followed a narrow development path, leading from agriculture to low-value-added manufacturing to the manufacture of higher-value-added products (Marks, 2009). In making the transition from agriculture to manufacturing, DCs typically relied on low-cost labour to attract large manufacturers/investors to their shores. For manufacturers, these low costs more than offset the expenses incurred by shipping and complex supply chain logistics. Development was defined by disruptions in transport (canals, railroad, ships) and productivity-enhancing technologies like computing (Perez, 2002).

This chapter sets the basis for investigating the disruptions, on the one hand, and rhetoric in Africa’s development policy, on the other. The rhetoric analysis allows us to identify the argumentation structure that has underpinned development policy on the continent for the last 60 or so years of independence. The persistent gaps between disruptions and rhetoric in development policy/practice defined the state of underdevelopment or otherwise. This chapter provides the overarching theoretical framework of the book.

1.2 Understanding disruptions, rhetoric and structural transformation

We set out below the meaning and usage of the three concepts of disruptions, rhetoric and structural transformation. These primary concepts will be applied throughout the book and underpin the discussions of supportive secondary concepts and phenomena such as cumulative causation, conflict and social movements. The three concepts define our understanding of the mechanics of economic development at the micro, meso and macro levels.

Conceptual issues – disruptions, rhetoric and structural transformation

We will use disruption to mean a disturbance or problem that interrupts an event, activity or process. The day-to-day dictionary notion of disruption is synonymous with “interruption,” which has a largely negative connotation. The way this concept is used here need not be negative. A disturbance can also have a positive outcome – especially if it is removing ailments such as repressive regimes. Ikome (2007) gives a special meaning to disruptions when he suggests that empirically there exists no significant difference between military and civilian governments in Africa when evaluated against their achievements in office and effective governance. African governments display pyramidal power structures that peddle the interests of very few, leaving the wider citizenry in dire straits. Compounding this hierarchical nature of governance is the fact that African people are subsequently alienated from state institutions and processes, providing them with no means of effecting any substantial change in the elite-serving and parasitic leaderships. The governance realities justify what he called a “good coup” contrary to the general negative posture of the Africa Union (AU) in relation to coups. The leaders of the coup in Guinea Conakry of 2021 suggested the democratic motive and social inclusion. Col Mamady Doumbouya suggested the army had little choice but to seize power because of the rampant corruption, disregard for human rights and economic mismanagement under the 83-year-old then President Condé. A similar justification was posted in both coups in the Sudan in 2019 and 2021.

Disruption as a concept gained currency in business management or industrial organisation since the publication of Clayton Christensen, 1997 book: The Innovator’s Dilemma. The idea is that nascent technologies or business models can profoundly affect the functioning of existing industries. This has also popularized the notion of business model innovations as a way to respond to disruptions. Recent examples are Airbnb and Uber which reportedly are disrupting conventional taxi and hotel markets, but there are many others in diverse areas such as finance, retail electricity and automobiles.

These disruptive innovations can deliver important benefits to competition and consumers in terms of new and better services and can stimulate innovation and price competition from established providers. However, they can also give rise to legitimate public policy concerns (e.g. safety, privacy) and create demands for regulation. Established providers will often lobby for existing regulations to be applied to new providers to lessen their competitive advantage, sometimes claiming rightly or wrongly that this advantage arises from an “unfair” exclusion from regulatory rules. Disruption in our usage is a union set that may contain shocks. Shocks are taken to be processes and dynamics that cause change to fundamental macroeconomic variables or relationships that have a substantial effect on (macro) economic outcomes and metrics of economic performance. Disruptions are, therefore, defined by both short- medium- and long-term changes acting in tandem in the structural and social configurations of the economy. Our definition, therefore, goes beyond the narrow usage of disruptions found in the industrial organisation literature. As we note, the notion of cumulative causation is a key element of disruption.

Development challenges are usually big and complex, obfuscating how they must be addressed (Kimmitt and Muñoz, 2018; York et al., 2017). An effective response would require evidence and clarity in analysis or argumentation from policymakers to set institutional priorities and motivating action (Harmon at al., 2015; Reinecke and Ansari, 2016). Moreover, development remains a highly contested issue in policy debates. Development theory is always underpinned by an ideology of the social actors that drive the debate, thus removing any notion of objectivity in subsequent policy discussions and programme prescriptions (Kararach, 1997). Insufficient knowledge usually exists about both the true underlying argumentations and values in policy rhetoric guiding the development programmes that get implemented.

Rhetoric analysis allows one to appreciate how policy institutions imbue meanings to development challenges. This approach to analysis emphasizes rhetoric as a way of “knowing” (Alvesson, 1993) and examines policy texts to expose their underlying interests and possible targeted audience (Green Jr and Li, 2011; Suddaby, 2010; Brown et al., 2012). We draw on the extant literature on the argumentation approach to analysis in which claims can be justified in response to challenges such as poverty reduction and broader structural transformation (Toulmin, 1958/2003; Harmon et al., 2015). Rhetoric here will be characterised by evidence, critical assessments of possible scenarios and programmatic response considering all requisite variables, including political economy and governance values being promoted such as equality, social inclusion and civic participation.

Historically, poverty reduction resulted from a profound structural transformation of the economy, a process characterised by a reallocation of economic activities from low- to high-productivity sectors. The rate of change has been a key factor that differentiates development levels across countries. Structural transformation encapsulates the longitudinal and historical change in the sectoral composition of output or gross domestic product (GDP), together with the sectoral pattern of labour employment. The sector shift in labour raises workers’ productivity, which contributes to accelerated economic growth. Development takes place in the form of capital accumulation in the high-productivity industrial sector supported by the migration of labour from low-productivity subsistence sectors (Rostow, 1960). Because of these structural changes, the share of agriculture in the national GDP will decline while the proportion of national income derived from manufacturing activities increases substantially.

Timmer (2007) significantly expands the definition of structural transformation as a process characterised by the following factors: a decline in the share of agriculture in GDP and employment; a rural- to -urban migration that stimulates the process of urbanization; a rise of a modern industrial and service economy; and a demographic transition from high to low rates of births and deaths. To bring these factors into a virtuous circle, proactive policies are required and state institutions must be actively engaged, coupled with the strategic capacity to ensure that policies and institutions are appropriate for the job at hand.

Evidence suggests that during the early stages of structural transformation there is a substantial gap between the share of the labour force employed in agriculture and the share of GDP generated by that workforce. This gap narrows with higher incomes (Timmer and Akkus, 2008). However, in many countries, this structural gap widens during periods of rapid growth, a tendency seen even in the earliest developers. While all countries can make the transition from agriculture to industry, the catching-up process can vary from country to country, depending on their endowment structure, historical conjunctures, timing and geography (Acemoglu et al., 2002; Lopes et al., 2017). Structural transformation might occur through aggregate labour productivity growth due to the reallocation of labour across sectors as well as within sectors, resulting in increased production and export of high value-added products¹. In essence, structural transformation will not occur on its own accord without deliberate public policy actions to close the gap between disruptions and policy rhetoric. Figure 1.1 presents the schematic link between growth and disruptions. The graphs represent four scenarios: (a) growth-accelerating disruptions; (b) growth-neutral disruptions; (c) growth-decelerating disruptions and (d) growth-stagnating disruptions.

Figure 1.1 Disruptions-growth regimes.

Natural sources of disruptions

There are several natural sources of disruptions, including weather events, major earthquakes and pandemics. These disruptions can induce both supply and demand shocks. Zenklusen (2007) noted that the literature on natural disruptions and growth is diverse identifying both positive and negative consequences of natural disasters on economic growth through scientific empirical investigation.

Cavallo et al. (2013) argue that growth empirics do not provide definite evidence on the relationship between natural disasters and economic growth. In neoclassical growth models, the destruction of capital stock by natural disasters may not affect the rate of technological progress. However, it may boost short-run economic growth, possibly by disrupting countries from following their steady-state growth objectives. In contrast, endogenous growth models suggest natural disasters may lead to higher economic growth, as the shocks of natural disasters can act as catalysts for reinvestment and improve the productivity of capital stock (see, for example, Caballero and Hammour 1994; Schumpeter, 1942).

Natural disasters may provide opportunities to upgrade capital stock that may lead to higher rates of total factor productivity (TFP) and GDP per capita growth. Such explanations are good examples of Schumpeterian creative destruction. In addition, Cuaresma et al. (2008) explored the correlation between the frequency of natural disasters and long-run economic growth and found that the degree of catastrophic risk has a positive effect on the volume of knowledge spill-overs that take place between industrialized or developed countries and primary commodity-based or developing countries. These growth paths are presented by curve a (Figure 1.1).

However, Barro and Lee (1993) note that most of the macroeconomic factors are positively associated with growth and negatively associated with disaster risk: disasters reduce the investment rate and raise government consumption expenditure. They also increase the market risk premium on foreign exchange as well as the frequency of revolutions. Growth would eventually decelerate as presented by curve c (Figure 1.1).

Man-made sources of disruptions

Man-made disruptive events like wars or major terrorism incidents and changes in policy regimes may cause significant disruptions to the economy. Wars, terrorism and such conflicts have the potential to destroy physical and human capital. Equally, policy shocks have a profound economic effect on the development trajectory. The economic impact of a policy shock might even be the goal of a government action. It could also be an expected side effect or an entirely unintended consequence as well. Fiscal policy is, in effect, a deliberate aggregate demand disruption – positive or negative – intended to smooth out aggregate demand over time to generate any of the possible growth paths (a)-(d) in Figure 1.1. The imposition of tariffs and other trade barriers can create a positive shock for domestic industries but a negative shock to domestic consumers.

Moreover, the effects of natural disruptions may be similar to those discussed under the section on man-made disruptions. The reciprocal association between natural and man-made disasters and growth of economie...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Endorsement Page
• Half-Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Acronyms
• About the Author
• Overview
• 1 Development as disruptions – a reconstruction of the 
theory and practice
• 2 Social discontent as search for development: 
From colonialism to independence
• 3 Natural resources, climate change and poor beneficiation: 
The potential for a curse
• 4 Trade versus aid: Economics, politics and dilemmas in 
development cooperation
• 5 Food insecurity and agricultural stagnation
• 6 Demography and migration – seeking out the dividends
• 7 Pandemics and diseases as forces of dislocation – a 
post-COVID-19 view
• 8 Conflict, drugs and criminal upheavals in African development
• 9 Innovation, AI and technology as handmaiden of development
• 10 Democracy and social inclusion: Bridging public 
action and development policy rhetoric
• References
• Index