The new Partnership for Africa's Development. Challenges and Prospects

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION
1.1. Background
1.2. Rationale of the Study
1.3. Statement of the Problem
1.4. Aim of the Study
1.5. Objectives of the Study
1.6. Literature Review
1.7. Conceptual and Theoretical Framework
1.8. Hypothesis
1.9. Significance of the Study
1.10. Methodology
1.11 Organisation of the Final Report

CHAPTER TWO HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF DEVELOPMENTAL INITIATIVES IN AFRICA
2.1. Earlier Initiatives
2.2. Lagos Plan of Action
2.3. Africa’s Priority Programme for Economic Recovery
2.4. United Nations Programme of Action for Africa’s Economic Recovery
2.5. Africa’s Alternative Programme to Structural Adjustment Programme
2.6. African Charter for Participation in Development and Transformation

CHAPTER THREE CHALLENGES FACING AFRICA IN IMPLEMENTING NEPAD
3.1. New Partnership for Africa’ Programme (NEPAD)
3.2. Goals for NEPAD
3.3. Challenges facing Africa in Searching for Sustainable Development Development Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.1. Challenges facing Africa in Implementing Peace and Security Initiative Of NEPAD
3.3.1.1. Role Played by People in Power to Exacerbate Conflict
3.3.1.2. Rejection of the Outcomes of a Negotiated Settlement
3.3.1.3. Lack of Capacity in African Union’s Peacekeeping
3.3.2. Challenges facing Africa in Implementing Democracy and Political Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.3. Challenges facing Africa in Implementing Economic and Corporate Governance Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.4. Challenges facing Africa in Adhering to Good and Corporate Governance Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.5. Challenges facing Africa’s Approach to sub - Regional and Regional Development of NEPAD
3.3.6. Challenges facing Africa to Implement Human Development Initiative Of NEPAD
3.3.6.1. Poverty Reduction
3.3.6.2. Bridging Education Gap and Reversing Brain Drain
3.3.6.3. Health
3.3.6.4 HIV/AIDS
3.3.7. Challenges facing Africa in Implementing the Environmental Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.8. Challenges facing NEPAD in Implementing Resource Mobilisation Initiative Of NEPAD
3.3.9. Challenges facing NEPAD in Implementing Market Access Initiative of NEPAD
3.3.9.1. Agriculture
3.3.9.2. Mining
3.3.9.3. Manufacturing
3.4. Challenges Presented by the Incorporation of NEPAD into AU Structures
3.5. NEPAD and its Critiques

CHAPTER FOUR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEPAD AND SOUTH AFRICAN FOREIGN POLICY
4.1. South African Foreign Policy: Apartheid Era
4.2. South Africa’s Democratic Foreign Policy
4.2.1. Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights: Mandela Regime
4.2.2. Promotion of an African Agenda: Mbeki Regime
4.2.2.1. African Renaissance
4.2.2.2. Millennium Partnership for African Recovery
4.3. South Africa’s Foreign Policy Objective of Resolving African Conflicts
4.3.1. South Africa’s Involvement in Conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo
4.3.2. South Africa’s Involvement in Conflict in Burundi
4.4. Perspectives about South Africa’s Foreign Policy

CHAPTER FIVE FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Findings
5.2. Conclusion
5.3. Recommendations

Bibliography

Appendix

ABSTRACT

Africa’s challenges in implementing the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) have to do with fundamentals of the very idea of NEPAD and its dependency underpinning. These challenges include structural, endogenous and exogenous factors which continue to constrain Africa’s endeavours. So the argument is that Africa failed to implement or was initially destined to fail.

Deploying the dependency theory, the thesis delves deeper into Africa’s development trajectory to reflect that NEPAD, just like preceding developmental plans such as the Lagos Plan of Action (LPA), was destined to fail as long as there was no clear paradigm shift from the long standing and perpetual asymmetric donor - recipient relationship although NEPAD is espoused as a partnership but it is still steeped within weakened neo - colonial relations that are incommensurate with Africa’s developmental path.

Through this study, Africa accelerates an African Agenda by embracing the philosophy of African Renaissance which is premised on the renewal and re - birth of Africa. This thesis therefore focuses on a continent aspiring to engage in dialogue and forge a partnership with the rich Global North to implement the millennium developmental plan like NEPAD. The primary lesson from this thesis is that the continent must ensure that it has the full support of 54 states and that continental plans cannot be implemented by a single country whose leadership is contested.

OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS

African Renaissance

The re - birth and renewal of Africa socially, politically and economically premised on: emancipation of African women from patriarchy; broadening and deepening of democracy and the initiation of sustainable economic development.

Africa’s Marginalisation

The decline of Africa’s importance to the world economy. This has subsequently resulted in Africa’s low GDP and GNP compared to the rest of the world.

Authoritarianism

A form of government in which power is located and centralized in one person, elite group, religious group or political party.

Aid

A form of official developmental assistance in the form of finance and technical expertise provided by the rich, developed countries to poor, underperforming and underdeveloped countries

Bretton Woods Institutions

Global institutions of finance and trade that were established after the World War II. They include: the World Bank, IMF and General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT) currently known as WTO.

Conditionalities

List of prescriptions accompanying aid to poor countries presented by the donor countries

Foreign Policy

Actions undertaken by states in reaction to conditions in their external environment which are normally outside their control.

Foreign Policy Objectives

A variety of collective national interests, goals and values that operate in foreign policy.

Globalised World

Interconnection and interdependence of countries in the modern world.

Globalisation

A process of the widening and deepening linkages of national economies into the world or global markets for goods and capital services.

Good Governance

The enhancement of free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberties, freedom of speech and religion as well as freedom from political oppression

G - 8

A group of seven or eight rich, developed and industrialized countries

G - 77

A group of poor, underdeveloped, developing countries that enhance South-South cooperation to change the existing imbalances in the global economic order

Hegemon

A global regional leader in terms of military, economic and cultural affairs.

Human Security

The ability to pursue any choices in a safe environment which possess seven dimensions of protection which are: economy, food, health, environment, personal, community and political

Neo Liberal Economy

This is a relatively open, market based free trade with a minimum of tariffs and other government initiated trade barriers. It also encapsulates currency devaluation, subsidy withdrawal from agriculture and social welfare as well as the privatization of state assets

North

A group of rich, powerful industrialized countries which emphasise the status quo by manipulating the world economy to advance their own interests.

Partnership

Principle of cooperation between the donor countries and Africa.

Peacekeeping

The deployment of armed forces into a conflict area to protect civilians and maintain peace between warring factions.

Regional Integration

A situation when geographically and proximate nations at equal stages of development come together to form a regional bloc to raise common tariffs against products of non-member states and promote internal trade among members.

South

Poor underdeveloped countries which jostle for the removal of the status quo in the world economy.

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACCRONYMS

illustration not visible in this excerpt

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION

1.1. Background

This chapter provides an introduction and orientation of the study encapsulating inter alia, the background, rationale of the study and statement of the problem, aim of the study, objective of the study, literature review and methodology.

Southall (2006) argues that Africa entered the 21st century as a heavily indebted poor continent because of its excessive dependence on external aid as well as endogenous factors, and that has subsequently entrenched and tethered the continent into the quagmire of socio - economic and political malaise. In order to address Africa’s socio - economic and political quagmire, the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) which include inter alia the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) solely and without consulting Africans developed and imposed reform policies such as Stabilisation Policies and Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) in the continent. This unilateral decision exacerbated the plight of the continent. The IFI’s understanding of Africa’s plight was premised on a narrow assumption that development is curtailed to economic growth by referring to qualitative change and restructuring within the continent’s economy in relation to technological and social progress. The major indicator of such a skewed developmental agenda is accelerated Gross National Product (GNP) per capita or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita which are envisaged to increase socio - economic productivity and an average material well-being of the country’s population.

As a means to find an Afrocentric development programme, African leaders engendered the New Partnership for Africa ’ s Development (NEPAD). NEPAD as an African product is a continued search by African leadership and its peoples to create pan African structures able to lead to socio- economic transformation of the continent in a rapidly globalising world. Conversely, NEPAD is an instrument of contestation between Africans seeking self-determination in their development endeavours and those forces in quest to perpetuate their exploitation of the continent’s resources upon which the accumulation of their wealth depend. The relationship of this contestation is historical but also solid because it manifests itself in the continuing structures of imperialist domination of the African populace through the postcolonial state to continue a neo-colonial instrument of domination. In this regard, NEPAD illustrates this ongoing historical contestation continuing to take place between these two forces. The postcolonial state finds itself at the centre of the contestation because of its ambivalence in facing the two forces. On one hand, it endeavours to respond to the demands of the people but the leaders lack determination to pursue those demands on the basis of people’s own decisions in a democratic state. On the other hand, because of lack of determination to trust the Africans it seeks the support of the enemy to help in envisioning and implementing what they believe are people’s aspirations (Nabudere, 2002).

One of the cornerstones of NEPAD is good governance that is the pedestal for democracy and the provision of human and national security. In this regard, the actions of some African leaders such as President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Hassan Omar Bashir of Sudan do not conform to good governance. President Mugabe continues to violate Zimbabwe’s election protocol by rigging elections and arbitrary detentions whereas Bashir’s government continues to marginalise people in the South by disallowing them financial benefits accrued from the extraction of oil in their region. The African Union (AU) exacerbates matters through its policy embracing respect for self-determination, territorial integrity and independence which advocate for non- interference in the affairs of member states. This poses a serious challenge for NEPAD to achieve its envisaged goals because the people who are supposed to take leadership are the perpetrators. A golden question is that who guards the guards? Moreover, how can NEPAD operate under such inappropriate conditions? These aspects explain why Africa’s implementation of NEPAD is confronted with problems emanating from lack of cooperation from some African leaders such as Mugabe and Al Bashir.

Obi (2001) argues that NEPAD is a new strategy of an African ruling elite with ambitions to energise Africa’s development by accepting numerous imposed models premised on trade liberalisation and good governance as well as forging new but unequal partnership with the advanced capitalist countries or the G-8 group of industrial powers. Akokpari (2004) adds that NEPAD is a partnership programme established between Africa and the G-8 countries to emphasise three dimensions of governance; namely economic and corporate governance, political governance and peace and security. In this context, NEPAD represents a moral contract between African countries and the G-8 countries under which African counties endeavour to improve governance and promote democracy by undertaking political reforms and marked friendly economic policies. Conversely, the G-8 countries commit to assist African countries which are upholding to good governance, the promotion of human rights, poverty eradication and economic growth. Such assistance is allocated through a programme of “enhanced partnership ” established by the G-8 at the Kananaski Summit in June 2002.The moral of this partnership is worrisome because the G-8 countries are dictating the framework through which African development should progress. The catalogue of Africa’s good governance and human rights leaves too much to be desired because some African states such as the ones mentioned above are grossly violating the rights of the people without any punitive action instituted against them. On economic terms

NEPAD embraces the liberal principles of the economic order that were vehemently refused by earlier African initiatives, by prescribing an important engagement with the global economy. There is no punitive instrument when the G-8 is unable to fulfil its golden promise whereas this creates a skewed development in Africa because those who comply with G-8 might be rewarded and those who are intransigent would be ignored. Such a situation creates divisions of characterised by “ us and them ” which is a recipe for disunity at the African Union (AU). Moreover, developed countries might be flooded with numerous refugees seeking greener pastures and habitat

Gelb (2002) on the other hand perceives NEPAD as the formation of a “ club ” of African heads of state who are collectively undertaking to improve governance amongst themselves by engaging in both joint and individual actions. Regardless of the G-8s contribution towards the construction of NEPAD, the formulation rests on the leadership of a small group of African heads of state. Its success relies on the small de facto leadership from a smaller group within 15 member Heads of State Committee. This assertion reflects that the origin of NEPAD arose from few African leaders claiming to represent the aspirations of the entire continent.

Ikome (2007) argues that as enshrined in NEPAD’s external compact, developed countries and other international actors would have to reduce subsidies to their farmers and also remove various disguised tariff and non-tariff barriers to African products entering their markets. These measures would make African products more competitive in international markets and potentially reduce Africa’s marginalisation in the global economy. Concomitantly, this would engender higher foreign exchange earnings for African economies and address their balance of payment deficits. This is expected to bring about economic growth and enhance the development prospects of the continent generally. However, the G-8 countries did not commit on the removal of agricultural subsidies and tariff barriers. Their intransigence has been evident in the Doha round of trade negotiations where they are defending their unscrupulous actions of status quo on agricultural subsidies. Subsequently they end up apportioning artificial prices to their agricultural products which makes it difficult for African products to penetrate their markets because they are unable to compete with heavily subsidised products. This nefarious interaction kills African agriculture that is the backbone of Africa’s economy.

Ikome (2007) further argues that, by formulating their expectations of the G-8 countries, the progenitors of NEPAD have ignored the fact that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), Overseas Development Assistance (ODA), debt cancellation and market access are within the realm of politics and that the G-8 leaders and the multilateral institutions pledged to support NEPAD within political environments that impose limitations on their ability to do so. In this context NEPAD assumes that once African countries commit themselves to the norms of good governance then their superior partners will deliver on their part of the deal in terms of ODA, FDI, debt cancellation and market access because of NEPAD’s moral, historical and security arguments.

It is doubtful that the G-8 countries would engage in a new “chapter ” with Africa resulting from African leaders making declarations on the new beginning. It is argued that the prospects of the government of G-8 honouring their commitments to NEPAD depend on the dynamics of the interests of Northern countries and related operational limitations that underpin the modus operandi of the G-8 countries. For example, other poor countries including Russia and its former satellite states compete with Africa for ODA and FDI. However, these countries are more important to the G-8 in economic and strategic terms than Africa. The former communist states of Eastern Europe are prospective members of the expanding European Union (EU) and it makes more political and economic sense to dedicate resources to facilitate their eventual integration into a united Europe that helping Africa. In the context of Russia, the G-8 has a particular strategic interest in helping it economically in order to prevent the misuse of its colossal nuclear weapons. This explains the reason why, while the African continent was promised a meagre US $6 billion by 2006 for poverty reduction, the G-8 gave out US $20 billion to Russia to assist decommission of its nuclear weaponry safely (Samasuwo, 2004). No matter how successful Africa transforms its political and economic environment through good governance, there is no guarantee that it will all of a sudden become a popular destination for resources from the industrialised countries.

The above-mentioned argument highlights that NEPAD is not a major priority in the operational framework of the G-8 countries. The only thing that interests G-8 countries is for Africa to create an appropriate atmosphere necessary for their products to penetrate African markets without any glitches. In order to achieve this means, the G-8 countries masquerade by forging an asymmetric partnership with Africa under the pretext of Africa embracing the principle of good governance and trade liberalisation. Conversely, the G-8 countries abuse their position of authority at trade negotiations by refusing to embrace a new trade regime characterised by removal of agricultural subsidies and tariff barriers.

South Africa remains one of the countries working hard to implement NEPAD. The country’s endeavour is influenced by its foreign policy pillar which advances the promotion of an African Agenda as a beacon of foreign policy objectives. The ultimate goal of this pillar is to explain South Africa’s quest for promoting the African Agenda in its engagement with the rich and developed countries in the North. Furthermore, this agenda aims at working in concert with other African states to address Africa’s marginalisation from the rapidly globalising world and attract FDI. Given the country’s past negative experience of apartheid, the principle for promotion of democracy and protection of human rights is invoked in the country’s foreign policy as a guide to engage with its neighbours, the continent and the rest of the world. Democracy remains the precondition from the G-8 to release and inject funds in the continent (Vaahtoranta, 2002).

Although South Africa’s quest to implement NEPAD is encouraged by her quest to maintain peace, security, democracy and good governance, including development which is the rudiments for sustainable development, the country’s endeavours are confronted with resistance from Zimbabwe and Sudan whose catalogue in violating democracy and human rights is well documented. Furthermore, other African countries remain skeptical about South Africa’s role in the continent because of their parochial perception about the country. In their view, South Africa’s foreign policy encapsulates hallmarks of a bully and hegemonic tendencies utilised to dominate the continent.

1.2. Rationale of the Study

There are many reasons that influenced and encouraged the researcher to undertake this study. These include, inter - alia:

- To gather more information about NEPAD.
- To find out about challenges facing Africa in implementing NEPAD.
- To understand the relationship between Africa and NEPAD.
- To gather information about NEPAD’s dependency on G-8 countries.
- To understand the nature and type of partnership between NEPAD and G-8 countries.

1.3. Statement of the Problem

The African developmental discourse provided salient features about the role and importance of NEPAD in developing the continent. In this regard, there has been insufficient data regarding the challenges facing Africa to implement NEPAD. However, the study presented these salient questions probing into the relationship among Africa, the north and NEPAD. What is NEPAD? What motivated African leaders to engender NEPAD as the developmental programme for the continent. Drawing from failed Africa’s developmental programmes, what is unique about NEPAD and the challenges facing Africa to implement it? Through NEPAD, Africa engages in an asymmetric partnership with the rich north countries premised on certain conditions. What are the benefits for Africa to implement good governance and trade liberalisation?

The above mentioned questions constitute the preeminent point of the study in examining the challenges faced by Africa to implement NEPAD. In formulating responses to these questions the study examined the fundamental aspects which are; the role and behavior of Africans, the attitude of the north countries as well as the importance of good governance and trade liberalisation. The study managed to develop an appropriate framework for understanding the role and behavior of African leaders within NEPAD as a developmental programme. Adding to that, the study examined the constraints, limitations and importance of the conditions attached by the developed north countries on Africa. The analysis of the challenges faced by Africans and the attitude of the north contributed to the understanding of the existence of asymmetric power relations between the rich, north countries and poor countries of the south including Africa.

1.4. Aim of the Study

To investigate and analyse challenges faced by Africa in implementing NEPAD.

1.5. Objectives of the Study

The study aims to attain the following objectives:

- To critically evaluate NEPAD.
- To determine if there is a correlation between NEPAD and Africa.
- To identify and understand challenges faced by Africa in implementing NEPAD.
- To determine the importance of good governance and trade liberalisation in Africa.

1.6. Literature Review

The New Partnership for Africa ’ s Development (NEPAD) is regarded as a global, comprehensive, and integrated strategic framework for socio - economic development of the African continent, explaining the shared vision for Africa in the new millennium and serving as a statement of the problems facing the continent. It is perceived as a plan of action gravitated towards resolving Africa’s socio -economic and political problems in order to reach the stated vision. It is a plan conceived and developed by African leaders to address myriad social, economic and political priorities in a logical, balanced and forward looking approach. However, it is a commitment that African leaders are making to the African people and to the international community in order to place Africa on the path of sustainable growth. It is a commitment African leaders are dispensing to increase the integration of the African continent into the global economy. It is also a framework for a new partnership with the rest of the world - a call to the rest of the world to partner Africa in its own development on the basis of its own agenda and the programme of action (Diescho, 2002).

The above mentioned expose presents evidence that NEPAD was produced by Africans with a common vision to get rid of Africa’s socio economic and political malaise. In this regard, African leadership took upon itself to develop an African blue print developmental programme aimed at accelerating economic growth which is the pedestal for sustainable development. This is an account of Africans taking initiatives and endeavours necessitated towards extricating themselves out of the quagmire of socio - economic malaise (Mokone, 2010).

Motula (2005) adds that NEPAD is a pledge by African leaders premised on a common vision and shared belief that they have a pressing duty to the African people to eradicate poverty, and place their countries on the way to sustainable growth and development, and simultaneously participate in the world economy and politics. These two explanations of NEPAD reflect that it is mainly geared towards promoting sustainable development in the continent. It is implied that NEPAD is envisaged that it will guarantee the social and economic development of African states. In this regard, NEPAD becomes a holistic vision shared by African leadership to steer the continent towards economic development. In this quest African leaders’ endeavour faces a mammoth task of engaging with the rich developed countries to loosen their grip on global economic governance for Africa’s benefit.

According to Farrel et al. (2005), NEPAD is an African continental initiative aiming to accellerate development in Africa through mobilisation of resources for sustainable development and eradication of poverty. In this regard, continental initiative refers to structures and programmes designed to promote development within Africa. The term continental initiative refers to a political philosophy focusing on the interests of a particular continent. The fundamental aim is to increase Africa’s influence and power and its capacity to engage mutually and beneficially in the international system.

According to Vale and Maseko (2002), NEPAD prioritises the importance of African solutions to African problems without necessarily extricating exogenous intervention. Adding to that, it comprehends the development context of the continent and aims to address those challenges by means of intertwining continental and international endeavours. This is by the fact that Africa is desperate to develop its economy and infrastructure. According to NEPAD’s explanation, economic development should not only be narrowed to economic indicators like Gross National Product (GNP) and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) but be widened to incorporate factors such as the eradication of poverty, hunger, starvation and social investment which includes harnessing resources in health and education. The focus is both on social and capital spending, with an accelerated emphasis on social wellbeing.

Moreover, NEPAD is perceived as a well detailed and integrated development plan geared towards addressing major social, economic and political priorities consistently and objectively. In this regard, it is important for the international community and more particularly, African leaders to commit themselves in building a strong and long lasting culture of democratic respect for human rights and accountability within African states while accelerating African integration into the world markets. NEPAD proposes the achievement of this through the forging alliances with the international community and multilateral organisations as well as by the consolidation of Africa’s capacity to lead its own development through improved coordination with development (Pahad, 2002).

NEPAD advocates for new policies of development in Africa and the world in such that the continent must ascend and take advantage of new opportunities and trends in the global economy. The over - aching aim of NEPAD is to eradicate poverty in the continent and to place African countries both collectively and individually, on a path of sustainable growth and development as well as rescinding the marginalisation of Africa in the globalisation process. The basic cornerstone of NEPAD is the focus on partnership and integration into the global economy to maximise benefits from them. Strategic cooperation with the international community will assist the continent to achieve its goals and eradicate poverty and hunger. This is not about aid only, but also about the prioritisation of institutional capacity development. Technological transfers and opening up of opportunities for Africa’s participation in the global economy are also the aims of NEPAD (Hope, 2002).

African leaders recognise NEPAD as an important vehicle to facilitate the continent’s transition from underdevelopment to development as well as from exclusion to inclusion into the mainstream of a rapidly globalising world. This implies that NEPAD is regarded as a historic and important opportunity utilised by Africans to seize the advantage of the current unipolar situation to integrate Africa on more equal terms into a circle of capitalist economic globalisation. It is through NEPAD that African leaders become confident to extract the continent out of the quagmire of poverty, conflict, environmental degradation, crisis and disease (Boko and Seck, 2008). This development affords the African leadership an appropriate platform for raising their problems while engaging with the developed world in resolving Africa’s socio economic malaise.

Gibb (2002) emphasies that NEPAD is unique in various respects and the following three hallmarks attest to that:

Firstly: NEPAD is an African initiative premised on African ownership and African management. This initiative was not inspired or imposed by the IFIs. Its agenda is based on what African leaders considered to be relevant for the renaissance of the continent. In so doing, the initiative assists to confront a deeply entrenched racist stereotype of Africa.

Secondly: NEPAD presents an extraordinary wide and comprehensive plan premised on policy initiatives at three level scales which are: national, regional and multilateral. Nationally, NEPAD prioritises peace, security, economic and political governance matters. Regionally, NEPAD prioritises to enhance economic and political integration while at multilaterally, the programme advocates global economic and political governance.

Thirdly: NEPAD links domestic reforms to advance new global partnership between Africa and the rich developed countries.

These three attributes highlight that Africans developed a modus operandi geared towards extrication of the continent out of socio - economic quagmire. At the heart of this programme is the respect for democracy and human rights which are regarded as the rudiments for sustainable development. Development in this regard is not only curtailed to economic indicators such as GDP but is also aimed at uplifting African masses from the scourge of poverty, hunger, squalor and diseases.

According to Rondilinelli and Montgomery (2000), NEPAD endeavours at its best to develop a strategy aimed at addressing four policy problems characterising the African continent. These policy issues are: economic growth, social equity, international transaction and public sector management:

Economic growth implies an accelerated increase in the GDP and GNI, and primarily looks at economic activities and production. Africa is confronted with the challenge of turning around weak and fragile economies to become strong and competitive through industrialization, acquisition of new technologies and investment in production. Too much attention is focussed on services and goods which accrue greater income and revenue vis `a vis public ones that are classified as social good and services. This implies that the state is duty bound to provide basic social services for its citizens.

Social Equity focuses on the role envisaged to be played by the state in ensuring that resources are evenly distributed, primarily to those who are marginalised to benefit from such a distribution. In this context, it becomes the duty of the government to develop appropriate modus operandi through safety nets to protect vulnerable groups. This is necessitated through social welfare systems which makes provision for free basic education, health care, pension and unemployment. States are supposed to continue generating additional sources for such an expensive system to be efficient. Such a system is popular in developing countries where numerous people are poor and entirely depend on the state’s intervention for their survival.

International transaction refers to all institutions and policies developed by states for effective participation in a rapidly globalising world. In case of economic growth, governments can focus their energy to create appropriate conditions necessary for trade and economic growth, thus allowing them appropriate platforms for their engagements with the world. This primarily looks at interest rates, exchange rates, inflation, trade policy and free market policies.

Public sector management: This focuses on endeavours undertaken by governments to ensure that the public sector is efficient to manage projects and finances. New forms of government focus on strict measures of efficient public sector management similar to those in the corporate sector. This ensures that similar levels of efficiency in the corporate sector are found in the public sector from recruitment, remuneration to operational models which are related to the consumer. This has been influenced by neo - liberal reconfiguration of the role and function of the state in a globalized world.

It is through NEPAD that Africa manages to invite the rich, developed countries and IFIs to support the plan developed by African leadership. This is a clarion call for a new relationship based on equal partnership between Africa and the international community, especially the highly industrialised and rich countries as well as IFIs to overcome unequal relations which accelerated the development gap between the two partners over centuries. In this context, during the year 2000 Presidents Obasanjo, Mbeki and Bouteflika converged with the G-8 countries in Japan where the elements of partnership and ownership were expounded within the developmental framework dialogue between Africa and the developed world. The outcome of the meeting resulted in the G-8 leaders demanding a workable plan for cementing that relationship. This resulted in President Mbeki being given the mandate by Obasanjo and Bouteflika to develop a workable plan that was demanded by the G-8. The mandate given to President Mbeki by his counterparts gives credence that NEPAD is driven and influenced by a distinct South African comprehension of developmental problems facing Africa (Taylor, 2005).

According to Owusu (2003), the invitation to partner with African leaders on a new development policy called NEPAD was extended to myriad actors and each responded differently. However, NEPAD was crafted out of the need for accelerating the developmental agenda between Africa and the developed world premised on a common vision for the development of the continent. This vision is premised on three factors:

Appreciation for the development needs of Africa: Africa’s shortage of industrialization and skilled human capacity renders the continent incompetent to participate fully and reap the rewards from the globalized economy. This is premised on the fact that the continent is inhibited in a lack of or insufficient capital, finance and new technologies for accelerating its integration and growth. Africa’s lack of serious commitment and allocation of resources to important sectors of the economy will always increase the continent’s marginalisation from the globalized world. This highlights the continent’s inclination on ways to accumulate and distribute wealth which became the necessary and primary development focus on Africa (Van Niekerk and Houdart, 2005).

Democratic Accountability: African governments are expected to be responsible and accountable on endeavours they undertake to expedite development and improvement of the lives of people. Decisions regarding the distribution of income and resources should be commensurate with development goals as well as finding ways to protect and promote those goals. This implies that the role of governments should be measured against their commitment and ability in addressing development challenges. This thinking was succinctly expressed through the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) introduced by the United Nations (UN). These encapsulated objectives which inter alia included reducing the poverty rate by half, achieving universal primary education, promoting gender equality and combating HIV/ AIDS by 2015 (UNDP Conference Papers, 2004).

Inability to hide behind the scapegoat of sovereignty: For many years governments utilised the sovereignty scapegoat to hide their corruption activities and contribution to plunge the continent into the abyss of underdevelopment. They failed to reveal the manner in which foreign aid was misappropriated to sponsor illegal military operations and maintenance of patronage which perpetuated insurance to the security of particular regimes. Their unscrupulous activities such as gross violation of human rights and abuse were obliviously uncovered. For development to be successful, a concerted effort by governments should commit to reality check, transparency and open scrutiny. This implies that external actors should be allowed to participate in the developmental process of the continent (Ndulu and O’ Connel, 2000).

Obi (2001) raised concerns about the ownership and originality of NEPAD. In this regard NEPAD is home - grown because it was developed by Africans who comprehend the continent, but that does not mean that it is home based. This is by the fact that it clearly focuses on Africa’s integration into the globalized capitalistic system which marginalized the continent for a long time. NEPAD is home - grown because it supports G8 demands that African leaders should “voluntarily ” take the responsibility masqueraded as “ownership ” for a new “partnership ” between the two partners aimed at Africa’s development. This form of masqueraded partnership relies on western conditionalities but hidden in African colours by African leaders.

It is in this context however, that NEPAD was introduced to the international community and the new framework created an opportunity for African leaders to think differently about their present and future development strategies. It is a bold step forward, vis `a vis preceding plans. Over and above it puts the responsibility of solving the continent’s problems in the hands of Africans themselves. Instead of apportioning the whole blame to the developed countries and exogeneous factors which contributed to their underdevelopment, such as unfair trade policies, insufficient aid and debt burden among others, African leaders ascertained and understood how they failed their own people and entrenched the continent into a quagmire (Van Der Walle, 2000).

NEPAD is committed in finding new solutions to old problems by driving the process from continentally as a point of departure. Whenever an institution owns a process it implements it and the process runs effectively because implementation is executed by those who designed and comprehend it. In this regard, NEPAD is owned by African leaders themselves who are in a vantage point and are better implementers of their own policies which were designed in accordance to their understanding of the continent (NEPAD Documents, 2000). Because NEPAD

operates within the neo - liberal framework that afford it the opportunity to extend its development radar to include not just economic growth, but poverty eradication, environmental sustainability, peace and security, democracy and institutional governance. These factors are regarded as pre

- conditions for any sustainable growth and development. It is in this regard that conditions to development are prescribed by African leaders themselves rather than being pressurized by G-8 and IFIs. This reflects their understanding of their limits to growth and what they can do to overcome them (NEPAD Document, 2000).

The internalisation of conditionalisties can also be attributed to the global position of Africa in world politics and its curtailed leveraging power in areas of development policy and economic growth. Africa’s political and economic power declined significantly over the years and the African agenda which was about how developed countries underdeveloped the continent lost speed. Therefore, the establishment of NEPAD in this regard provided the platform for the re - definition of that agenda by emphasising how development is projected to be achieved by recognising of the emerging changes in the global economy (NEPAD Document, 2000).

NEPAD was well received by the G-8 and IFIs because it recognised a new engagement with the developed community and donor agencies which was not only curtailed to aid. This new partnership focused more to integrate Africa into the global economy instead of accelerating marginalisation. It uses myriad strategies and means to become part of the global economy in a progressive manner. Again, NEPAD is used by Africans to work in concert with the international community to solve Africa’s problems. What distinguishes NEPAD from other developmental programmes is its endeavour to look and develop strategic equal partnership with the international community to resolve Africa’s underdevelopment (NEPAD Documents, 2000).

The G-8 and IFIs on the other hand defended the development of NEPAD and its ability to accelerate development in the continent. In this regard, the World Bank’s Report of 2002 gave NEPAD a vote of confidence. The 2002 NEPAD Annual Report entitled Towards Claiming the 21 st Century was published to review the achievements registered by NEPAD to move forward and ensure that the continent has achieved its developmental goals. The then Chairperson of Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) President Obasanjo reflected that NEPAD is uniquely positioned to take the continent forward because of the then developments and changes in the global economy (NEPAD Annual Report, 2002).

Gelb (2002b) maintains that the idea behind NEPAD is a formation of a “ club ” of like-minded African heads of state who are collectively undertaking to improve governance amongst themselves by engaging in both joint and individual actions. NEPAD’s formulation rested on the leadership of a small group of African heads of state of South Africa - President Mbeki, Egypt - President Mubarak, Algeria - President Bouteflika, Nigeria - President Obasanjo and Senegal - President Wade. This created a feeling among Africans that NEPAD is a development plan developed by a small group of political elites.

African civil citizenry criticizes and rejects NEPAD because of the failure by its crafters to consult with them. Such a problem is not only confronting ordinary citizens but ordinary parliamentarians as well. For example, in Ghana, a member of parliament for Gomoa West, Ms. Ama Benyiwa - Doe shocked participants at a roundtable discussion on Strengthening Regional Capacity for Conflict Resolution in West Africa held in Accra 2003 when she lamented that members of parliament do not understand NEPAD. Surprisingly, neither of the present members of parliament denied Benyiwa - Doe’s position. The fact of the matter in this assertion is that NEPAD was sold to the governments of developed states prior it was shown to the African civil society (Ukeje, 2008).

According to Startup (2007) some African citizens are despondent and hopeless about NEPAD. Many feel that NEPAD offers nothing new and it is just another plan destined to be mired in Africa’s old problems of corruption and self-interest. At a multi - stakeholder dialogue held in South Africa in October of 2004, the consensus was reached that NEPAD was primarily another “talk shop ” .

Landsberg (2003a) adds that many African civil society actors have vehemently rejected NEPAD. They perceive it as a dependent that ignores Africa’s internal problems. Bodibe (2002) adds that African civil society rejects NEPAD because it maintains that the only way to advance African development is through neo - liberal capitalist path and yet in most of Africa capitalism does not exist. Stuurman (2004) further emphasises that civil organizations complain that the knowledge of NEPAD is relatively low among its ranks. Findings highlight that about a large percentage of African population hardly knows anything about NEPAD. Civil society argues that it was imposed by senior officials to entrench an elite top - down approach. The policy document of NEPAD became available via the internet in which myriad of Africans, especially rural masses do not have access. The limited knowledge of NEPAD within the civil society is problematic because its good intents are unknown. Even if it delivers reasonable results it becomes difficult for civil society to interrogate and evaluate its outcomes because its terms of reference are unknown. In this regard, how can an individual evaluate a process which he/she does not understand? This results in a situation of “ us ” civil society and “ them” African leadership in which the former will totally reject NEPAD.

As contained in Alternative 1 Information and Development Centre document of (2007), the elites know more about NEPAD than ordinary Africans. Consequently, the government launched the NEPAD’s outreach programme to reach the African masses. Civil society complained that the programme was imposed on people without any consultation for inputs. Civil society vehemently rejected it and maintained that it depended heavily on the policies of the Bretton Woods Institutions which entrench people in the quagmire of underdevelopment and poverty.

NEPAD’s relationship with the African Union was unclear. NEPAD was formally described as an instrument, programme or mandate initiative of the AU. However, since its inception the key leaders of the initiative, especially President Mbeki were very interested that it should not subjected to the slow and difficult procedures of the AU decision - making. They were afraid of the dangers of it being derailed by the interference of small, ill governed countries wanting to ensure that their voices were heard and their rulers paid off (De Waal, 2002). Regardless of that, NEPAD was incorporated into the AU Commission through the Kampala Declaration known as the Conference on Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation (CSSDCA) in 2002. Some analysts regarded NEPAD’s incorporation into the AU as a dilution of its objectives, arguing that it stands for better governance, but it is an AU programme, vulnerable to myriad agendas of its members (Sidiropoulos and Hughes, 2004).

There is a serious concern raised about the acceptance and commitment from some members of AU member states to NEPAD. At the inaugural Summit of the AU President Gaddafi referred to NEPAD as the project of the former colonisers perpetuating racialism. One of the progenitors of NEPAD, President Wade criticised it by emphasising that t it has achieved nothing since its inception. Conversely, the NEPAD implementation committee included some leaders who are realists, intransigent and oppose any challenge to their leadership positions, for example, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, Omar Bongo of Gabon and Paul Biya of Cameroon are of the opinion that the principles and vision of NEPAD should be balanced with the necessity of broad support of the programme (Tieku, 2004a).

NEPAD faces a daunting task when dealing with the World Trade Organisation (WTO). NEPAD maintains that African states must implement and measure up trade regulations up to global terms and standards in order for trade to be more effective. This fails to highlight Africa’s position in the WTO. Most of the developing states, including those in Africa perceive WTO agreements as being grossly imbalanced, internally inconsistent and even mutually contradictory (Jacques and Lesetedi, 2005).Matters are aggravated by the rich countries’ intransigence to codify new trade regime that is fair and balanced. Through the current system these countries wield big power and abuse it to impose their demands on poor countries. The major contestation in this regard lies in the domain of tariff barriers and agricultural subsidies.

1.7. Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

The term “ NEPAD ” is conceptualized and dependency theory linked to NEPAD is explained in this section.

1.7.1. Conceptualising the acronym NEPAD

NEPAD is an acronym for New Partnership for Africa ’ s Development. It is an innovative, people centered framework seeking to accelerate sustainable development in Africa. It is crafted to address the current socio-economic challenges facing the African continent. It is a pledge by African leaders, premised on a common vision, to address challenges such as growing poverty, underdevelopment and perpetual marginalization. It is a programme of the African Union (AU) crafted to meet its development objectives. The NEPAD strategic framework document was adopted by the 37th Summit of the African Union in 2001 (Melber, 2004).

The implementation of NEPAD is an undertaking by African countries, to ensure continental commitment to governance, democracy and human rights while attempting to prevent and resolve situations of conflict and instability on the continent. It recognises good governance as one of the pre-conditions for sustainable development. Such governance is premised on two pillars which are democracy and political governance, and economic and political governance. Within democracy and political governance there must be:

- A multiparty political system - free and fair elections, an independent electoral commission and inclusivity;
- Protection of human rights by means of the respect for the rule of law, freedom of speech and freedom of association; and
- Gender balance in political representation and the redistribution of wealth - there should be a proportional representation of women and disabled people in decision making structures such as governance and judiciary. Over and above continental wealth should be distributed evenly among all the sectors of the society, especially the marginalised groups (Ramsamy, 2004).

Economic and corporate governance relies on institutional arrangements within which the public and private organisations operate. The primary concern here is about the capacity of national governments to promote economic growth and development through correct policy and regulatory frameworks for private sector led growth, and to implement social programmes aimed at reducing poverty with a strong element of inclusive participation. Furthermore, the implementation of NEPAD in this regard refers to the operationalisation of NEPAD to promote the African agenda and African Renaissance which are the objectives of the AU.

1.7.2. Theoretical Framework

According to Le Pere, van Niewkerk and Lamprechts (1998) a theory is a wide thought providing the basis for understanding a phenomenon .In this regard, the researcher utilises dependency theory to expound the phenomenon under investigation.

1.7.2.1. Dependency Theory

According to Genest (2004), dependency theory explains and reflects an uneven development of wealth between the rich and poor countries. This form of development is highlighted as the propensity of capitalism creating and perpetuating an unequal dispersal of global wealth and prosperity. Marsh and Stoker (2002) add that Dependency theory emphasises that trade, foreign investment and even foreign aid between advanced, industrialized countries, poor as well as less developed states are highly exploitative; disadvantaging poor nations; and perpetuating the dependency of poor countries to rich ones. Furthermore, Ebegbulem, Adams and Achu (2012) explain dependency theory as a situation in which a certain group has their economy conditioned by the development and expansion of another economy, to which the former is a subject.

Todaro (2000) argues that dependency theory refers to the school of thought highlighting the underdevelopment of poor countries to the dominance by rich countries in the international system. This creates a system of the core and the periphery, the latter being developing countries in the South and the former being rich industrialised countries in the North. In this context, dependency theory becomes an exploitative relationship aimed at ensuring that weaker countries are entirely dependent on developed countries for their prosperity and well - being. It provides endeavours by poor countries to be self-reliant and independent in their development, but such an effort is difficult and impossible.

Dependency theory characterises the international system to be comprising of two sets of states which are described in the formats of dominant / dependent; center / periphery; and metropolitan / satellite. The dominant, center or metropolitan states are in the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The dependent, periphery or satellite states are those in Africa, Asia and Latin America which have low per capita Gross National Products (GNP’s) and rely heavily on the export of a single commodity for foreign exchange earnings. The other assumption of dependency theory is that external forces are of singular importance to the economic activities within dependent states. These external forces include Multinational Corporations (MNCs), internal commodity markets and other means through which the industrialised countries represent their interests abroad. The relationship between dominant and dependent states is dynamic since the interactions between them reinforce and intensify the unequal pattern. Dependency theory presents the current state of underdeveloped nations in the world by examining the patterns of interactions among nations by arguing that inequality among nations is the core of those interactions (Adams, 2006).

Dependency theorists realise that underdevelopment results from asymmetrical relationship between the poor countries located in the South, and rich developed countries located in the North. Such a relationship is characterised by the ruthless incorporation of the South into the global economy which is controlled by Western capitalism. It lies in the position of influence that foreign aid accelerated by the North is harmful than beneficial to economic development of the recipient countries, and it remains an instrument of exploitation of the recipient countries by developed states (Posthumus, 2009).

The above mentioned explanations are relative to the position of NEPAD and its dependency on Western capitalists whom they welcome to extend their aid services to Africa. The conditions attached to aid are always unpalatable and this makes their repayment difficult and overstretched to perpetuate dependency. The countries in the South are not really poor because they lagged behind in the scientific transformations or enlightenment values of the developed states, rather because they were coerced into the European community system only as producers of raw materials or to serve as the repositories of cheap labour, by being denied the opportunity to market their resources in a way that competed with dominant states. In this regard, significant development will only be possible if countries in the South attempt to isolate themselves from the capitalist world economy and establish independent socialist societies (ibid).

Olaopa (2006) argues that dependency theory is appropriate to analyse NEPAD, because many sections of its document (NEPAD) portray dependency on exogenous bodies for the development of Africa. This is encapsulated in Section V, sub section (C) of NEPAD document - Mobilisation of Resources which emphasises that “Africa needs to fill an annual resource gap of 12 % of its GDP or US $64 billion. This will require increased domestic savings, including improvement on the public revenue collection.” However, the bulk of the required resources will have to be obtained externally. Paragraph 41 of NEPAD document also speaks of Africa’s dependence on the international community for the continent’s development by emphasising that: “We hold that, it is within the capacity of the international community to create fair and just conditions in which Africa can participate effectively in the global economy and body politics”.

The NEPAD document lays out a clear role for the international community to assist African development. It inter alia advocates for debt relief of African countries participating in the NEPAD programme. In its pursuit of debt relief, the programme proposes a two way approach which is: debt service ceilings are fixed as a proportion of fiscal revenue while in the long run and debt relief be linked with costed poverty reduction outcomes. Apart from debt relief, the international aid is another area recognized by the NEPAD document where the international community plays a leading role. In this context, the dossier seeks increased Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) flows in the medium term as well as the reform of the ODA delivery system to ensure that flows are more effectively utilised by recipient African countries (Ezeoha and Uche, 2005).

NEPAD’s major flaw is its reliance on exogenous forces for the realization of its goals. The NEPAD dossier maintains that in order to achieve a 7 % annual growth, the rate of US $64 billion is required, acknowledging that the bulk of the resources will be obtained externally, outside the continent. However, African leaders presented NEPAD to the G-8 Summit held in Kananaskis, Canada in 2002 to solicit funds from the rich industrialised countries. The two parties formed a “partnership ” which became known as the G8 Africa Action Plan in which the G-8 pledged to inject US $55 billion annually to the continent for debt relief and aid. Subsequently, the continent managed to receive US $7 billion. (Karuuombe, 2003). The amount injected by the G8 is far lesser than the original amount required by NEPAD’s progenitors. The major challenge in this regard, is where will other funds come from because the continent is engulfed in the quagmire of debt?

The G-8, potential donor states and IFIs impose certain conditionalities, for injecting aid in any part of the world. Much of the conditionalities are gravitated towards a commitment to the promotion of peace and security and adherence to principles of good governance. Myriad African leaders are highly concerned about the dichotomy in which Africa rests. They are eager to affirm its independence from the West and so called neo - colonialism and yet entirely depended on northern countries for the realisation of their initiative. Former Nigerian President Obasanjo remarked at the UN sponsored International conference for Development in Monterrey, Mexico in March 2002 that there must be guarded endeavours against NEPAD not developing into a tool for new conditionality (Bala et al, 2003).

It is inevitable for NEPAD to evade these conditionalities from the donor countries because the programme depends on foreign funds for its operationalization. In this regard the donor countries impose conditions to ensure that their interests such as economic investment are preserved and safeguarded. The conditions applied to NEPAD will result in skewed development of African states. Those adhering to conditions will be rewarded while those reneging will suffer the wrath of unavailability of funds. However, this approach divides African states and push people, especially skilled people to countries which are prospering.

The architects of NEPAD are convinced that African development can be accelerated by more aid and credit, both of which have been granted to Africa for almost about forty years without significant impact on poverty eradication. A particular problem with aid as indicated above is that it is accompanied by certain stringent conditions. Borrowing countries are often obliged to purchase input from corporations that are based in the countries that are granting loans. In other cases, certain conditions such as the liberalisation of markets and other conditionalisties are attached, even though the donor countries are sometimes the worst violators of every prescription they attach to aid. One classic example is their inability for democratising Multilateral Organisations

According to Landsberg (2003), NEPAD attempts to forge an agreement between two unequal partners in global politics which are the rich, developed and industrialised North as well as poor and underdeveloped Africa. The foundation of this pact is based on the exchange for Africans and Africa’s governing elite becoming more accountable and embracing the politics of democratic accountability, transparency, and good governance. Conversely, the West and the industrialized North will re - engage Africa in the following three areas, renewed commitments on ODA, market access for Africa and Africa’s trading routes to the North and the world debt relief. The implementation of NEPAD depends on external capital whereas African resources are ignored. The issue of market access remains a talk shop because rich countries are adamant about it. This rhetoric is utilised to appease Africa and encourage Africans to implement the conditions attached to NEPAD. These conditions remain favourable for the North for dumping their products in Africa. These products are not exposed to any competition because of Africa’s weak production base.

The implementation of NEPAD depends on domestic resource mobilisation and foreign aid which is attached by certain strict conditions such as reduction of state intervention on trade related issues. The relationship between Africa and the international community has been characterised by the failed lip service translating into the failure by the donor community reneging on their commitments. Subsequently that resulted in a litany of failed developmental programmes which did not yield any results and plunged the continent into a developmental quagmire. The problem with domestic resource mobilisation is that some of the African states are unable to generate enough revenue because of weaknesses in tax collection revenue as well as corruption resulting from revenue generated from mineral deposits. Over and above African states export raw materials and foodstuff which do not generate sufficient revenue because of the stringent measures such as tariff barriers and less money generated from raw materials. Africa’s inability to industrialize creates a serious loss of revenue necessary for NEPAD because between a finished product and raw materials lies a multiplier which is industrialisation. The latter demands knowledge, mechanization, technology and increased returns. Over and above industrialization creates employment which is a source for revenue (Boateng, 2011).

Generally speaking, NEPAD is positioned for Africa to “catch up ” with the rich north countries, and for this to be possible the latter countries should assist Africa. This is succinct in the provisions of paragraph 66 of NEPAD document which states: “The new long tern vision will require enormous and heavy investment to bridge existing gaps. The challenge ahead for Africa is to be able to increase the required funding under the best conditions possible. We therefore call on our development partners to assist in this endeavour ” .

1.8. Hypothesis

The operational hypothesis of the study is premised on the rationale that Africa’s developmental success ushered by NEPAD depends on the continent sticking to the prescribed conditions of the rich north countries. In this regard, the rich north countries entered into an asymmetric partnership with African leaders with the aim of developing the continent. The development of Africa depends entirely on adherence to good governance and trade liberalisation. However, the rich north countries are hypocrites on trade liberalisation because of their continued tariff barriers for exports as well as subsidies for their agriculture.

1.9. Significance of the Study

The study is important conceptual and wise for policy makers. Conceptually, the study applies dependency theory to analyse Africa’s implementation of NEPAD. In its implementation of NEPAD, Africa is guided by the pan African spirit for promoting African Agenda and African Renaissance which are aimed at promoting democracy and protection of human rights across the continent. In this context, democracy and human rights are regarded as the rudiments of socio - economic and political development of the continent.

Dependency theory is applied to highlight NEPAD’s dependence on external aid and credit for its implementation. In this regard, the architects of NEPAD emphasises that in order to achieve 7 % annual growth rate, an amount of US $ 64 billion is required and the bulk of these resources be acquired externally outside the continent. The other dependency factor is that of NEPAD’s expectation for developing countries to reduce subsidies offered to their farmers and also removal of various disguised tariff and non - tariff barriers to African products entering their markets. The element of partnership with the rich developed countries highlight that Africa is unable to develop on its own but depended on assistance from the international community.

In policy terms, the study provides the policy makers and technocrats with an alternative mode necessary for implementing NEPAD. This alternative approach directed to policymakers is that they should protect domestic market from dumped goods coming from rich industrialised countries. Furthermore the study continues to amplify the dangers of Africa’s dependency on the North for the development of the continent. In this regard, it is important for African policy makers to seek alternative means of generation of funds which are not accompanied by certain conditionalities.

The study will be helpful to a broad spectrum of the society such as researchers, government officials, development practitioners, as well as to students of Politics, Peace Studies and International Relations. Preeminently, the study provides original and innovative ways of the implementation of NEPAD to policymakers.

1.10. Methodology

1.10.1. Research method

This study mainly employs a qualitative, analytical and theory-testing approach based on the relevant international relations theories and methodology. An important theoretical -analytical tool was derived from well-developed concepts and notions of NEPAD, particularly partnership, good governance, socio economic development and trade liberalisation. Throughout the study, appropriate documents relating to the topic were examined. These included books, articles, journals, and official websites of NEPAD, AU and South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation. This study is original and all references are included.

1.10.2. Research Sites

In order to have a comprehensive and critical understanding of the research problem, the researcher undertook efforts to collect data from various government and international institutions and relevant organisations associated with the implementation of the NEPAD. These include:

South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO): The researcher is based in South Africa and much of the work was compiled in the country. The country, through its foreign policy objectives and the vision of African Renaissance crafted by former President Thabo Mbek,i contributed to the development of MAP that was joined to Omega Plan to form NEPAD. Thabo Mbeki travelled globally especially to rich countries to present the programme. Secondly, South Africa plays host to the Secretariat of NEPAD located in Midrand. Another reason why the research takes place here is that a good number of Research institutes dealing on NEPAD are located in the country. They include:

South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA). The institute has a long and proud record as South Africa’s premier research institute on international issues. Its key strategic objectives are to make input into public policy and to encourage wider and more informed debate on international affairs and with particular emphasis on African issues and concerns. There is programme dealing on development through trade, focussing on unpacking key multilateral (WTO) and regional issues as well as free trade area negotiations. SAIIA has been playing an appropriate a role in providing the researcher with primary information on issues around trade and WTO, including challenges they pose on South Africa’s implementation of NEPAD.

African Institute of South Africa (AISA): AISA is an independent research organisation focussing on African political, economic and social issues. AISA has been important in providing an African perspective of, especially socio economic and political challenges facing South Africa in implementing NEPAD.

Institute for Global Dialogue (IGD): This is a South African non - governmental organisation providing policy analysis on the changing global environment . It covers areas on Africa, multilaterals and foreign policy. The research afforded the researcher to understand the dynamics of South African foreign policy in relation to Africa and multilateral institutions. Furthermore, it offered the researcher a deeper understanding of those challenges faced by South Africa in implementing NEPAD.

Institute for Security Studies (ISS): The ISS works towards a stable and peaceful Africa characterised by sustainable development, human rights, and the rule of law, democracy and human security. This institution helped to expand the researcher’s understanding of human security problems confronting South Africa to implement NEPAD.

NEPAD Secretariat in Midrand: The Secretariat has been the centre for NEPAD. It afforded the researcher an opportunity to understand newer developments on NEPAD including issues relating to challenges faced by South Africa to implement the programme.

Addis Ababa - Ethiopia - This city is the de facto capital city of Africa. The researcher visited this city once to carry out the research. Here information on the role of the AU and the prospects of NEPAD was found. The researcher conducted interviews with the Deputy Permanent Representative of South Africa to the to the AU and also attended the ordinary of the Summit of the AU held in Addis Ababa.

[...]