The debate on the decisive constraints on state intervention which might have impeded a developmental progress in Sub-Saharan African since the era of independence in the 1950s and 1960s is manifold. Whereas conventional analyses have been regarding inadequate policy choices and excessive pursuit of self-interests by developing country governments as the core reasons for unsatisfactory developmental outcomes, others criticise the voicing of such general inferences and, instead, emphasise historical and structural circumstances as the underlying causes that can explain the ‘African tragedy’. Hence, the role of the state in enabling development has continuously been subject to a shift of theoretical paradigms. The economical uprising of the ‘East Asian ‘developmental states’ during the second half of the 20th century contributed to this dispute as a functional relationship between the decisive impact of market- or state-driven approaches could not be established.
By differentiating between constraints and by focussing the analysis on the most relevant ones, it is possible to provide an analytical framework that allows for a critical review of the evolution of the restraints on state intervention in Sub-Saharan Africa in light of the policy experiences provided by the ‘success story’ of East Asia.
Henceforth, this essay will demonstrate that the central pillars restricting state intervention in Sub-Saharan Africa have been political instability coupled with an overly dependence on commodities as primary export goods. Due to these aspects, a structural inability to generate sufficient and diverse forms of public revenues prevailed which, in turn, impeded the implementation of development-enhancing public policies. The essay is organised as follows: Section 2 discusses the most central constraints on state intervention. In section 3, the conceptual framework of the East Asian developmental state is presented before section 4 analyses its relevance for Sub-Saharan Africa. Section 5 provides a country case study. Section 6 concludes.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Central Constraints for State Intervention in Sub-Saharan Africa
2.1.Endogeneity and Time Dependence of Constraints
2.2.The Persistence of Fragile Political Landscapes
2.3.The Dependence on Commodity Exports and the Inability to Generate Sustainable Public Revenues
3. The East Asian Developmental State
4. The Question of Transferability – To What Extent Can the East Asian ‘Miracle’ Resolve the African ‘Tragedy’?
5. Case Study: Constraints on State Intervention in Kenya Since Independence
5.1.Overview
5.2.History of the Political Landscape
5.3.Developmental of Public Revenues
5.4.Findings: Limited Transferability of the Developmental State
6. Conclusions
Research Objective and Scope
This essay examines the structural and political constraints that have hindered state intervention and developmental progress in Sub-Saharan Africa since independence, critically assessing whether the "developmental state" model from East Asia can be successfully transferred to the African context.
- Analysis of key constraints: political instability and commodity dependence.
- Evaluation of the East Asian developmental state conceptual framework.
- Critical investigation into the transferability of successful policy models.
- Detailed case study of Kenya's political and fiscal developmental landscape.
- Discussion of structural barriers to effective state-led economic transformation.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2. The Persistence of Fragile Political Landscapes
The ability of a state to consult, implement and effectively enforce public policies significantly depends on the political landscape it finds itself in (Young, 2004). Certainly, this characteristic is not exclusively applicable to Sub-Saharan Africa. However, reviewing the development of the political nature following the strategic destruction of human capital and economic infrastructure by colonial powers (Bertocchi, 2011), Sub-Saharan Africa is signified by enormously unstable and illegitimate regime changes. Posner and Young (2007) find that in the first 20 years following independence, political changes across Sub-Saharan African governments primarily eventuated by forceful means. Whereas in the 1960s around three quarters of the incumbent leaders where overthrown either by military coups or assassination, only 25% experienced a non-violent change of office (Posner & Young, 2007: 128). The use of violence as an instrument for voicing political concern advocates for the existence of a linkage between fragile political landscapes and a constrained framework for state intervention as decisions by the ruling authorities might instantly erupt into severe clashes. Adding to that, the paradigm of the Sub-Saharan ‘Big Men’ started to gain in prominence across many Sub-Saharan African states since the 1980s (Hydén, 2013: 103). Although formal institutions were in effect by law, the ‘Big Men’ metaphor signified the persistence of a high share of African leaders who attempted to apply informal means of personal cult and assertiveness to make policy.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the scholarly debate on developmental outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa and sets the analytical framework for reviewing state intervention constraints.
2. Central Constraints for State Intervention in Sub-Saharan Africa: Examines the interplay between political instability and commodity dependence as primary obstacles to state-led development.
3. The East Asian Developmental State: Explores the conceptual characteristics of the developmental state, focusing on market-driven economic success and policy adaptation.
4. The Question of Transferability – To What Extent Can the East Asian ‘Miracle’ Resolve the African ‘Tragedy’?: Evaluates the feasibility of applying East Asian development strategies to the unique socio-political realities of Sub-Saharan Africa.
5. Case Study: Constraints on State Intervention in Kenya Since Independence: Provides an empirical review of Kenya's history, political fragility, and revenue challenges to demonstrate the limits of model transferability.
6. Conclusions: Synthesizes the findings, confirming that systematic barriers render the East Asian developmental model of limited relevance to Sub-Saharan Africa.
Keywords
State Intervention, Sub-Saharan Africa, Developmental State, Economic Development, Political Instability, Commodity Dependence, Public Revenue, Kenya, Colonial Legacy, Industrialization, Governance, Structural Change, Policy Reform, Rent-seeking, Developmental Policies.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The research explores the reasons behind the limited developmental progress in Sub-Saharan Africa and questions whether the successful "developmental state" model from East Asia can be effectively applied to improve the region's economic outcomes.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
The work centers on the impact of political instability, the structural dependency on commodity exports, the inability to generate sustainable public revenues, and the historical legacy of colonial governance.
What is the central research question?
The core question is to what extent the "developmental state" model that drove the East Asian economic miracle can be transferred to resolve the persistent developmental challenges known as the "African tragedy."
What scientific methods are utilized?
The paper utilizes a comparative analytical approach, combining literature review on economic theories with an empirical case study of Kenya to assess the applicability of institutional and policy frameworks.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the theoretical foundations of state intervention, the constraints inherent in Sub-Saharan African political landscapes, the conceptualization of the East Asian developmental state, and a specific case study of Kenya's post-independence challenges.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include state intervention, Sub-Saharan Africa, developmental state, commodity dependence, political instability, and public revenue generation.
How does the author view the "Big Men" paradigm?
The author views the "Big Men" paradigm as a reflection of political informality and personal rule, which characterizes the high frequency of irregular leadership changes and undermines stable, credible policymaking.
Why does the case study on Kenya demonstrate limited transferability?
Kenya demonstrates limited transferability because its post-independence history of structural political defragmentation and reliance on commodity-based, volatile revenue streams created a environment incompatible with the East Asian model of state-led industrial transformation.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Kareem Bayo (Autor:in), 2016, The Constraints on State Intervention in Sub-Saharan Africa since Independence. A comparison of public policies in Sub-Saharan African Economies with the high-growth Developmental States in East Asia, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/419465
