Thandika Mkandawire

On Tax Efforts and Colonial Heritage in Africa

Abstract One commonly observed phenomena about taxation in Africa are regional differences and the fact that southern African countries have higher levels of shares of taxation in GDP. This article argues that the major source of differences in ‘tax effort’ is the colonial histories of various countries. Using standard measures of ‘tax effort in a panel data framework and dividing colonial Africa along forms of incorporation into the colonial system, it shows that African countries and others with similar colonial histories have higher levels of ‘tax effort’. However, the difference disappears when we control for the colonial factor. These results hold under different model specifications.

Neopatrimonialism and the Political Economy of Economic Performance in Africa: Critical Reflections

During the past two decades, neopatrimonialism has become the convenient, all purpose, and ubiquitous moniker for African governance. The school of thought behind this research program, which the author refers to as the neopatrimonialism school, has produced an impressive literature on Africa. Its analysis informs policymakers and its language permeates media reportage on African states. While neopatrimonialism has long been a focus of development studies, in recent times it has assumed politically and economically exigent status. The school identifies causal links between neopatrimonialism and economic performance, and makes predictions drawing from what is referred to as the “logic of neopatrimonialism.” Neopatrimonialism is said to account for trade policies, hyperinflation, economic stagnation, low investment in infrastructure, urban bias, and ultimately, the lack of economic development in Africa. This article examines the empirical basis of predictions and policy prescriptions. It argues that while descriptive of the social practices of the states and individuals that occupy different positions within African societies, the concept of neopatrimonialism has little analytical content and no predictive value with respect to economic policy and performance.

How the new poverty agenda neglected social and employment policies in Africa

Abstract This article argues that a shift towards issues of poverty is a welcome antidote to policy‐making that had expunged poverty from the central agenda to focus on stabilization, debt management and static allocative efficiency. Unfortunately, in correcting a narrow policy agenda the new focus pushes a good point too far when it focuses attention only on the proximate causes of poverty and narrows the development agenda. Development was aimed at more than poverty and, significantly in countries that have successfully combated poverty, the most important policy measures were not explicitly directed at poverty. Indeed in many cases, other objectives — pre‐empting social unrest, nation‐building, ‘human capital’ developmental considerations — lay behind the policies that, ex post, can be read as poverty reducing. Eradication of poverty is always embedded in social and economic development. The determinants of human development goals are multiple and cut across sectors. The new challenge in Africa is to bring back development, but now one that is democratically anchored and socially inclusive.

From the national question to the social question

Let me first thank the Harold Wolpe Trust for inviting me to give this lecture in honour of a man whom I have held in the highest esteem. I never met Harold Wolpe but, like many members of my generation, I knew of his Scarlet Pimpernel escapades not as a rescuer of the aristocracy but as a champion of the downtrodden, his deep commitment to liberation, and his prodigious and rigorous intellectual work. I do not know what he would think about what I will be saying, but the underlying theme of my paper – the tensions between race and class, between vertical and horizontal inequalities, between the “national” and “social” questions – would be familiar terrain for him, and one that he addressed with greater rigour than I am able to.

Welfare Regimes and Economic Development: Bridging the Conceptual Gap

When in 1999 I proposed to the board of the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) a research agenda on ‘Social Policy in a Development Context’, Frances Stewart was then a member of the board. A question was raised as to why context was in the singular form. I argued that we wanted to examine the role of social policy where economic development was intentionally on the agenda. We also wanted to examine how social policy could be a transformative or developmental tool without compromising its intrinsic value. Stewart was one of the strongest supporters of this new programme, which a chairman of the board was later to label the institute’s ‘flagship’ research programme. The research agenda itself was inspired by the Copenhagen Social Summit held in 1995, whose resolution insisted that social development and economic development are not separable but mutually constitutive and that, although the situations of developing countries and developed countries differ, social issues in each revolve around the same fundamental matters of economic welfare, equity and social justice. One implication of this is that conversations between the literatures on social development and economic development strategies in developing countries on the one hand, and those on welfare regimes and social policy in developed countries on the other can contribute to the construction of a single analytical framework for the shared agenda of human development.

Social Sciences and the Next Development Agenda

Abstract The author argues that todays development agenda is animated by concerns for economic growth and structural change, democracy and human rights and social inclusion. In academia this has produced ‘literatures’ that separately address problems of developmental states, democratic transitions and social policy and welfare regimes. The author argues for the need to bridge these literatures to exploit the intellectual synergies to address these issues whose interconnections are widely recognized.

Overview of an Alternative Long-term Development Strategy

Substantial agreement exists on the long-term development objectives of Africa south of the Sahara. This consensus is probably best reflected by the deliberations of the African heads of state enshrined in the Lagos Plan of Action of April 1980 (OAU, 1980). According to the Plan, long-term development policies in Africa should aim at: Reducing mass poverty and improving the living standards of the population. Attaining, in particular, greater food self-sufficiency. Promoting self-sustained development through structural changes in patterns of production, consumption and foreign trade and in the area of technological dependence. Attaining collective self-reliance through a better integration of African production structures, markets and transport, as well as communication and trade infrastructures.

The Spread of Economic Doctrines and Policymaking in Postcolonial Africa

Editors’ note: An earlier version of this article was presented as the inaugural African Studies Review Distinguished Lecture at the 54th Annual Meeting of the African Studies Association in Washington, D.C. Abstract: This article looks at the relationship between economic ideas and policymaking in Africa over the last half century. It discusses the ways in which the focus of economists working on Africa has moved from the structuralist-developmentalist and neo-Marxist perspectives of the 1960s and 1970s, through a neoliberal phase of the 1980s and 1990s, to a more eclectic combination of neo-institutionalism, growth orientation, and welfarist interests in poverty and redistribution issues. These shifts in development thinking, while not unique to Africa, have not been the subject of much debate in Africa. The article argues that such a debate is long overdue, including an interrogation not only of the leverage of foreign interests, but also of the profession of economics itself and the implications of its material underpinnings and social construction on the integrity and credibility of its research. Résumé: Cet article porte sur la relation entre les idées économiques et l’élaboration des réglementations en Afrique au cours du dernier demi-siècle. Il examine la façon dont l’attention des économistes travaillant en Afrique s’est détournée des perspectives structuralistes-développementalistes et néo-marxistes des années 60 et 70, en passant par une phase néo-libérale dans les années 80 et 90, pour se pencher sur une combinaison plus éclectique comprenant une approche néo-institutionnaliste, une orientation sur la croissance, une politique d’allocations pour les plus démunis, et un intérêt sur les questions de redistribution. Ces changements dans la pensée du développement, tout en n’étant pas propres à l’Afrique, n’ont pas fait l’objet de beaucoup de débats sur le continent. L’article soutient qu’il est grand temps d’avoir ce débat, et de s’interroger sur l’effet de levier des intérêts étrangers, sur la profession même de l’économie, sur les conséquences de ses bases matérielles et sur la construction sociale de l’intégrité et la crédibilité des travaux de recherche la concernant.

Aid: From Adjustment Back to Development

The paper argues that over the years aid has lost its initial “developmental purpose” which was to help developing countries to overcome structural constraints on their mobilisation of domestic resources or conversion of these resources into investment. This shows up in the low levels of investment in “big ticket” items such as human capital, infrastructure and industrialisation. It also shows up in the impact of aid on structures of imports. The paper argues that the detachment of aid from its structuralist underpinnings and shift towards a neoliberal understanding of the problems of developing countries have undermined the case for aid by suggesting that whatever it can do can be done better by the market.

Findings and Implications: The Role of Development Cooperation

The aim of this book is to seek appropriate measures to prevent violent conflict in sub-Saharan African countries, combining the triple perspectives of objective inter-group inequalities, subjective perceptions of inequalities, and the role of political institutions. The underlying thesis is that horizontal inequalities (His) in socioeconomic, political and cultural-status dimensions form a major part of the root causes of violent conflict. Political mobilisation for violence is more likely when His are consistent across different dimensions, in other words, running in the same direction. These considerations are especially relevant to Africa where there are multiple ethnicities and ethnic relations are extremely diverse and complex.