Excitement around China and India were major themes of Davos. Who will be more successful most quickly? What will it mean for the US? For Europe? Does foreign investment have a direct correlation with economic success? These questions were raised in many sessions.
It is time to celebrate the enormous progress of both India and China. At the same time, while Africa is finally on the map of a greater collective conscience, it is still seen in a much more marginal way that smacks of despair rather than celebration.
Too many people are still talking in terms of teaching men to fish in Africa. I have never met a person who lives near water in Africa who doesn’t know how to fish. What is needed instead are better technologies and design innovations to make their fishing more effective; more information and eased trade restrictions so that more markets are available; connections, networks and management skills so that people can grow their businesses. They also need real jobs.
In these next years, the emphasis on Africa should start with recognizing the efforts of Africans to solve their own problems, examples of where innovation has been scaled, and studies of what things went wrong, and why. Africans are tremendously resourceful, but the continent - and the rest of the world - needs more examples of winners. Nothing begets success like success. China understands this - more than 700 businesses in Africa are registered as Chinese. The rest of the world needs to think more creatively about investment and also understand - and then provide - the management support needed to grow a stronger professional base of people. The dream is to celebrate Africa’s success and move away from more of a salvation mentality that has a fairly poor track record on that continent when it comes to unleashing individual human energies.
Congratulations on the launch of the acumen blog! The look of it is excellent and of course the content is terrific.
Reply to David KellerMedia framing of Chinese Development focuses on threats not progress. Was there consideration of both sides of the contradictory issue at Davos?
Was Africa merely (cruelly?) marginalized or completely forgotten at Davos?
Reply to David KellerFor those of you haven’t read “Race Against Time” by Stephen Lewis, the UN Secretary-General’s special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, I urge you to do so. His remarks toward the end of this book left me too with hope and despair….”But the truth is that truth inhabits both ends of the spectrum. At the level of the grand design–more money, more drugs, more prevention, more care–hope is instinctive. On the ground, where people live and die, where the gran design has yet to be felt, the pandemic (aids)is hell on earth.”
Reply to craig StewartDavid, those are good questions. There were most definitely discussions on progress regarding Chinese development. In fact, many people think there is a model there for how best to develop through the creation of a middle class. The interesting discussion was around whether democracy helped or hindered development in the long term; that will be a core frame through which many observe what happens both with India and with China
Africa was not forgotten — there were two panels devoted exclusively to Africa. One was around the business of African development and included Bono, Wolfowitz, Gordon Brown, Niall Ferguson and President Obasanjo of Nigeria. Bono discussed the need for more foreign aid and for more caring about Africa; Wolfowitz made the point that corruption takes two — and western companies that bribe African officials are equally to blame for much of what is wrong around corrupt business practices. Brown and Ferguson stressed that Africans must be part of the process of change. The second panel was about celebrity, aid and Africa but I didn’t attend it. So I would say that Africa was on people’s minds but more as a place that needed help rather than a place where we need to do more investing and where there is much good to be recognized. This is a perspective that the world must begin to hear more frequently - and it must be backed up by results, which is eminently possible. Indeed, I hope Acumen Fund can play a part in that discussion.
Reply to JacquelineI don’t know much about China’s influence on African corporation, but this is what struck me in the big question of raising Africa. The aticle stated: What is needed instead are better technologies and design innovations to make their fishing more effective; more information and eased trade restrictions so that more markets are available; connections, networks and management skills so that people can grow their businesses. They also need real jobs.
The question I pose is which one do you start with first. Work on trade markets or try to do damage control of AIDS orphans?
Reply to KendraDear Jacquiline,
You wirte up and the comments that follow touch on partinent issues relevant to socio-economic development.
The comments echo many declarations aimed at asissting development in Africa. The declarations empahsis involvement of African in the effort and emphasis on the need to reach the grassroot populations and some insist of debt relief and handouts.
The concern has been repetitive failures in achieving set goals as result recycling the approaches/channels (including those prone to corru[ption)and a persistent inability to notice the glaring lack of a vehicle and true partnership in taking programs to the grassroot level expeditiously.
True partnership can achieve alot in ashort time in Africa. A good example is the impact of A&Z - Acummen partnership that created many jobs in Tanzania in a very short period of time.
I have recently been involved in the evalaution of a deliberate effort by another fund in take services to the grssroots level in Kenya. I was amazed how a catalytic fund can achieve so much in ashort period of 2 years.
Africa is not poor in resources, there is plenty of incountry resources and there are many partners who have made funds available to the communities. Unfortunately most in need do not know what exists let alone the channels to access the resources. Again this due to lack of a vehicle to provide the techincal and mangement support.
I do hope an opportunity when I am in New york to visit your office and make a formal presention on our efforts and strategies on accelerating development at the grass root level.
Comment By Philip Mwalali, Advocate for grassroot support
Reply to Philip MwalaliAfrica, certainly has the human wealth and natural resources to pull it’s own socks up. Aid in the form of food is not a good idea, but a tractor is a great idea. Teaching water conservation and storage would also go a long way.
Our task at InternAfrica, is to build a better home, that complies with green principals and creates jobs from rural to urban, and maintain a vibrant economy between the two.
Reply to InternAfricaJacqueline,
Reply to Steve BrownIntroducing technologies and innovations that make livelihood activities more effective is definitely important and I argue for a stronger push in the IT direction in another post. An important point however needs to be made when it comes to any introduction of technological ‘progress’. Adoption and Disadoption rates. What are the constraints that fisherman, farmers and other primary product vendors face in adopting a seemingly more efficient technology (eg. seasonal liquidity for farmers, learning, social conformity effects)? I would never go as far as the above post has in saying a tractor is a good idea as we know some of the downfalls of maintaining capital like this where sustainability requires high costs. Earning a wage to meet seasonal subsistence requirements may also hinder labor intensive innovations in the short-run… There are plenty of possible constraints. Intereresting you say what African need is real jobs. More interesting.. where many young men are flocking to find jobs and how remittances can be most effectively used in rural development.
These are just a few thought-provoking aspects I find vital to the discussion centered around what Africans are actually doing for themselves. My favorite example of a livelihood or ‘not so real’ job was my friend Chirwa, a farmer in Malawi who siphons diesel from among other vehicles, the World Food/US Army truck that consistently passes the village I used to stay in. He would then sell the diesel to the local maize mills in town. Then the maize mills would operate at a lower cost than if they had to buy it at the nearest (in some cases 20-30k) BP or Mobil. Women who earned way less than $1 a day could now grind maize (possibly distributed via WFP) at .30 cents per tin instead of.. let’s say .40 cents. THANK YOU WORLD FOOD PROGRAM.
I hope the debate between the development trajectories of India and China does not get reduced to democracy versus lack thereof. Having worked in some of the poorest parts of India, my take on this is quite different. The reason why India is not running on all six cylinders is because there is total cognitive dissonance about how to establish processes on scale in order to produce outputs that address large challenges. Within this framework, it is not that we don’t know what to do, it is not that we are short of resources to do it (in fact, every year funds earmarked go unutilised)–the major issue is that we do not have the managerial ability which will translate these two blessings into something that is relevant and purposive. Till that is fixed, the pace is quite not set.
Reply to Gopi GopalakrishnanWHAT HAPPENED IN CHINA AND INDIA AS REGARDS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE HARD TO ACIHEVE IN AFRICA.THIS CONTINENT HAS THE MISFORTUNE OF BEING SO DIVIDED IN SO MANY WAYS THAT THE COHESION OF VISION AND DEDICATION TO PURPOSE THAT DID IT FOR CHINA AND INDIA WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE IN AFRICA. DAVOS CELEBERATED CHINA BUT HOW DID CHINA GET IT RIGHT? WAS IT AID,DEMOCRACY OR DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENT? THE TRAGEDY OF AFRICA IS THE EMERGENCE OF CHINA; A NEW SCRAMBLE IS ON, DEVELOPMENT IS DEFINED ACCORDING TO THE DICTATES OF THE INVESTOR,WITHOUT DUE CONSIDERATION FOR THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE LIVES AND TECHNOLOGIES OF THE PEOPLE. DEVELOPMENT AS IMPOSED AND NOT AS COMPOSED WILL NOT HELP AFRICA.
Reply to institute for china africa relations.Wow! The comments on this topic are very insightful, and highlight the degree to which Africa’s development issues must be examined with a variety of lenses. From establishing priorities, building capacity, and creating effective mechanisms for partnership to addressing resource management and the limitations of solutions to development problems, there is no “magic bullet.”
I don’t believe you can choose AIDS over trade or vice versa. Many of these issues must be addressed simultaneoulsy because they are so interconnected. That said, the unique combination of opportunities and problems in each country must be assessed, in order to establish priorities within a development agenda.
But I agree with the last poster that development cannot be “done” to Africa or directed by fiat. At the risk of sounding pat, it has to be owned and directed by the people involved, from the ground up, and from the ceiling down. For example, Chirwa siphons fuel because given the conditions in which he operates, this is a rational, beneficial decision. But can we create an environment in which Chirwa has more choices—one in which both he and the people from whom he’s taking diesel benefit? I think that’s one of the questions we strive to answer when we talk about development.
Reply to TayoI couldn’t agree more. Great comments on this post and great blog.
Joe.
Used Tractor Parts
Reply to Joe Simpson