Craig Eisele on …..

April 27, 2008

African Aid… Is It Really Aid Or Just Makes Us Feel Good??

African Aid… a study in inefficiency

OK… maybe I am not going to actually do a study… most of my data is allegoric (from stories). But it is a reality that Aid to Africa is not efficient for many reasons that are solvable.

When aid is given with strings attached such as the mandated use of the donor counties personnel or equipment and supplies then it is not aid to Africa it is aid to the Donor Countries’ manufacturing or consulting firms. Expert costs can be triple or even quadruple the cost of the same services in the Donor Countries because of travel, housing (to the donor countries standards) and high salaries of Donor country employees sent to Africa.

I have traveled to Africa frequently and have been in approximately 20 countries in the continent. While Greed, fraud and corruption do exist, it is the cost of goods and services that donor countries provide that takes a great deal of the AID that is supposedly given. Cash sent to most African Countries is subject to redistribution because of other more pressing needs. And sometimes the Strings on the aid have profound negative effects on other parts of the recipient African Countries economy and existing farming or manufacturing enterprises. There is an article in this blog about Namibia and Angola and the Cattle ranching that has been devastated by some of those strings to aid there.

I understand that Donor Countries want to try and maximize benefits to their domestic enterprises when giving aid… but competition for those aid funds can significantly reduce costs and maximize the benefit of the AID to the recipient countries.

Let me move to a different part of this issue… the raising of funds for Aid Organizations. Former President Bill Clinton has stated (paraphrased) that if there was profit to be made in solving global poverty then there would be no global poverty…. But that statement is based upon a false premise… that global poverty can be solved… I am adamant on this.. GLOBAL POVERTY CANNOT BE SOLVED…. Not in my life time… and not even in this century… poverty will always be with us as long as we are a society that functions on money… someone will always be at the bottom of the scale and hence we will always have poverty. This is a fact of life that cannot be dismissed out of hand. (Please note I am not tackling the issue of the measurement of poverty or its definition at this time… maybe later)

What we can do is significantly reduce poverty by revamping and reorganizing the AID that is given and the manner in which it is given.

People think that AID is free… it is not… every aid organization has to raise funds.. that take time, personnel and money… however we can make guidelines on how much of the aid given is actually used for those ongoing fund raising and strategizing efforts as well as the Organizations basic operations and expenses.. For this I am in favor of a sliding scale ranging from 3.5% to 20% depending on the total amount raised per year. This is not include the actual administration of the project (for which I feel not more than 20 % should be allocated to non-resident administration of the ACTUAL Project)

From personal experience:

I have been forming a new NGO (Non-Government Organization) and NPO (Not for Profit Organization) called the Africa Genesis Project. The mission is to “rehabilitate” the sub Saharan “trade routs” in this region. The studies have already been done showing the benefit in trade for the respective countries (a cost benefit analysis). But it does not even begin to show the increase in employment, local economies and the attraction to FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) that would accompany such a project.

The Cost for this is fast approaching 50 BILLION US Dollars. Is that a lot of money?? Yes it is… but in comparison to the 60 Billion dollars in aid for AIDS in Africa than this is smaller and brings more advantages (in my opinion) and allows the aid for AIDS to be delivered more effectively and efficiently to a greater number of people. I agree with the need for AIDS assistance… but I also know that the people of Africa need more.When it costs only 1,000 dollars to send a container to a Kenya Port but 10,000 dollars to take it inland at twice the time and takes 5 days to repair the truck afterwards,… this is an abomination and the extra costs are something the Africans cannot afford.

Roads bring JOBS, and jobs bring economic prosperity and that in turn brings peace and stability to Africa!!!

But how can we raise such amount of funds for the overall rehabilitation of Africa?? If ANYONE expects that Africa can finance this with its current economic situation and with the Debt that it already has, then that person is not fathoming the realities of the condition of Africa and worse is dismissing the prolonged suffering of hundreds of millions of people in Africa. Further it has allowed countries like China to take advantage of this situation to give “no string” loans that continue to exacerbate the problems in Africa.

The ONLY way to really help Africa is one MASSIVE injection of Aid that can transform most of Africa into a productive society. That aid can ONLY come from Governments around the world. That raises a major problem in how to even start such a fund raising effort to implement this project.

My calculations indicate I need 50 million dollars to START this project and 500 Million Dollars to continue to promote and administer the Africa genesis Project over 7 years.

Why so much?? One word answer… POLITICS!!!

I cannot even get an appointment with my own congressional or senate representative in the United States to present this project… and the form in which I presented is not in “proper form” with the relevant brochures and packages needed to promote such a massive project. Multiply that effort with my need to approach the governments of the United Kingdom, France and the rest of the EU, Japan. Australia, Canada, and the Middle East as well as many other countries, (as this is a global issue requiring a global solution) then you start to see not only the massive size of the Africa Project in Rehabilitating these trade routes, but the Global Efforts needed to see it though. And the ONLY way is to hire (at a significant cost) “Consultants” (lobbyists) who can effectively get this project into the hands of those who can make it happen in their respective Governments.

The Africa genesis Project will Guarantee that 96% of ALL money raised for the project will be spent directly on the project and not on fundraising, promotion or administrative expenses of the organization itself. Further that NO Distribution will be to any government organization UNLESS that Organization has actually performed or is performing real work on this roads project. Simply ONLY those actually working on the Road Project will be paid and 80 percent of ALL work must be by Local African Companies and using African employees.

We realize that a lot of Equipment must be purchased for this project. It is expected that Caterpillar and John Deer will receive about 500 million dollars each for equipment and spare part orders… HOWEVER WE MUST be able to negotiate process to reduce costs and maximize benefits to AFRICA. We will NOT tolerate paying even list, let alone OVER list as Caterpillar and John Deer have indicated in my limited discussions with them. The same for every other manufacture and supplier of other equipment, materials and supplies… COSTS will be PARAMOUNT in our vigilance to assure that this work can be done UNDER BUDGET. It is though our “lobbying” efforts that we will make sure that any “strings” attached to the aid given by donor countries for domestic purchases allow us to make bidding and negotiations fair practice in our efforts to supply this project. We cannot allow unfair profits (windfalls) to accrue to anyone on the backs of Africa and its people.

And yes, even I need to get paid, as I am not independently wealthy. So for those of you questioning that, I assure you I am NOT working for free and expect compensation that is reasonable for a project of this size. However I will note that I already know that there are many problems and issues that will need to be addressed on a project this size that will NOT be in the budget … hence my “compensation” will mostly be used for the resolution of those issues and to support the Africa Genesis Organization in its endeavors. Fist Aide Stations, water well drilling, education assistance and the like are just some of those things that are NOT in the Budget for this project and need to be taken care of but NOT from the 96% of the funds that were donated and are to be used ONLY for the Road rehabilitation project as already identified.

If you are a regular reader of this blog you know I have proposed creating a “backbone” infrastructure project that would transverse Africa as well as circumnavigate the Entire Continent, that would end up being approximately 70,000 Kilometers in length. This “backbone would have a 4 to 6 lane modern highway, an Electric Power line transmission, a railroad, and Fiber Optics and Oil and Gas and water pipelines, ALL TO BE FINANCED AND OPERATED BY PRIVATE (non governmental) INVESTMENT. This Investment could approach 1 trillion dollars over 10 to 15 years.

My plans for Africa my be grandiose to some… but a real vision was needed to solidify the continent for economic, and political and peace issues and the overall heath and welfare of the people of Africa… this is my mission… to transform Africa into a place where aid is not needed as much as it is now, and to improve the human sprit of all Africans.

Craig Eisele

March 30, 2008

Outragous Costs of Domestic transport in Africa Shows Needs that Can Be Addressed by Private Enterprise.

The two arms of Coega, South Africa’s newest port, extend into the Indian Ocean in graceful arcs. These breakwaters — one is 2.6 km long, the other 1.3 km — are built from thousands of dolosse, huge, oddly-shaped, 30-ton concrete blocks that interlock. They are designed to protect the vessels that, when the port is fully operational in 2007, will use this facility to ship manganese, iron ore and other South African products to China, India and the rest of the world. The government-funded Coega Development Corporation (CDC), which is building an industrial zone on 11,000 hectares of farmland next to the port, likes to think of the massive complex on South Africa’s southeast coast, 20 km from Port Elizabeth, as a symbol of industrial Africa flexing its muscles. “If you want to change lives and the history of this continent, you need to develop infrastructure,” says Vuyelwa Qinga-Vika, spokeswoman for the cdc. “We’re not going to advance if we don’t even have the roads to bring medicine to the rural areas. We’ve got to start building.”

The call to construction is ringing out across Africa. Infrastructure is the new buzzword, pushed by leaders from South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki to Senegal’s Abdulaye Wade. It’s also a key topic at this week’s World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Cape Town, where political and business leaders from Africa will meet with heads of some of the world’s biggest companies to discuss, among other things, how Africa’s priority infrastructure projects can boost growth. According to a Gallup International survey commissioned by the WEF, Africans “focus more heavily on economic issues than do citizens in other parts of the world.” One in three Africans fear a failure of the economy compared to just one in five globally.

Despite a commodity boom that pushed growth to 5% in Africa last year, the continent’s leaders want better infrastructure to win more business. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), an African initiative that aims to lure $64 billion in annual investment by tackling bad governance, ending conflicts and making the continent more business-friendly, has put improved infrastructure near the top of its to-do list. “There can be no meaningful development without trade,” reads NEPAD‘s infrastructure action plan. “And there can be no trade without adequate and reliable infrastructure.”

The need is as obvious as it is urgent. Africa’s roads and railway lines, ports and power grids are neither adequate nor reliable. Outside of southern Africa and Mauritius, much of the continent’s infrastructure is crumbling or nonexistent. Consider the Democratic Republic of Congo. You could fit France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain and Britain inside it, and the country is packed with timber and minerals, yet it has only a few thousand kilometers of paved road and 10,000 fixed telephone lines, and produces about the same amount of power as Albania. In other war-torn countries, such as Somalia and Sierra Leone, public buildings have been destroyed by years of fighting. Corruption and mismanagement have left public utilities in places such as Cameroon and Nigeria run down and inefficient.

The lack of infrastructure deters many companies from investing — and drives up costs for those that do. The World Bank estimates that to ship a container from Baltimore in the U.S. to Tanzania costs about $1,000, but to transport that same container from Tanzania to neighboring Burundi costs $10,000. “In many countries, companies have to generate their own power, dig for water, pay heavy distribution and telephone charges,” says David Hampshire, chairman of Diageo Africa, one of the continent’s biggest marketers of beer and spirits. “All these costs add up, and they end up being paid for by the consumer.”

To attract more investment, Africa has drawn up plans to spend billions over the next few decades. Zambia and Burkina Faso, both landlocked, want to build new rail lines through neighboring states to improve their connections to the sea. In East Africa, the Kenyan government and the rebel movement in southern Sudan plan to build a new railway track — at an estimated cost of more than $4 billion — from Sudan more than 1,000 km south to Rongai, Kenya, about 170 km northwest of Nairobi, where it will connect with the existing line to the Indian Ocean port of Mombasa. That notoriously inefficient harbor, along with some half a dozen others around Africa’s coast, is set to undergo a massive expansion and modernization program over the next few years.

The next decade may also finally see the completion of the Trans-Saharan Highway from Algeria to Lagos, Nigeria. Equally bold is the West African Gas Pipeline, which will tap natural gas from the Nigerian oil fields in the country’s southeast and then run almost 700 km along the coast with links to power plants in Lagos, Benin, Togo and Ghana. The most ambitious plan is for a massive dam on the lower Congo River which would eventually produce more than twice the power generated by China’s controversial Three Gorges scheme — enough to sell electricity across the continent as well as export it to Asia and Europe. But that project is at least 20 years away.

Surprisingly, funds for new projects aren’t lacking. Africa’s richest countries are eager to build. South Africa’s government, for instance, is funding the new Coega port and industrial zone. “Private business is not too keen on putting money into infrastructure, so the government has said it will take the lead,” says Lionel Billings, manager for Coega’s enterprise development and investor interaction. Rich donor nations in the West often help finance schemes in poorer countries, as does the World Bank. A growing number of private and foreign government-backed infrastructure funds based in Europe and the U.S., such as AIG African Infrastructure Fund and New Africa Infrastructure Fund, are also supplying capital.

The problem is confidence. Financiers, whether private or public, need projects that they can rely on. “We’ve got liquidity we’re embarrassed about,” says Keith Palmer, chairman of the London-based Emerging Africa Infrastructure Fund and vice chair of the U.K. investment bank NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd. “But there’s a lack of well-structured, creditworthy opportunities.” Business leaders cite numerous hurdles to investment: corruption, political instability and African governments’ lack of capacity to run huge projects and reluctance to hand over control of projects to the private sector. Richard Laing, chief executive of the Commonwealth Development Corporation, Britain’s agency for investment in the developing world, says the problem is dealing with African governments which have “an unwillingness to let go and a lot of distrust.”

There’s also a catch-22: Africa needs investment and improved infrastructure to develop, but finds it hard to attract the capital such projects need without more development. Thormählen Schweisstechnik, a German company that last year won the right to construct and operate for 25 years the planned railway line from Southern Sudan to the Kenyan coast, is already running into problems with the Kenyan government. Klaus Thormählen, head of the company, says, somewhat euphemistically, “the decision-making process [does not] maintain its dynamics during the times of our absence.” A spokesman in the Kenyan President’s office says that Kenya backs the scheme and is working with the German company to make sure the line is built.

Back at Coega port, a huge crane lifts another concrete block into position. The dock area, which was constructed behind a dam wall, has now been flooded, and is awaiting its first ship. “One of the things that will make it meaningful for South Africans is to see the first businesses set up here,” says Qinga-Vika. “It may just be concrete and steel and new roads, but this is a symbol of hope that we’re doing something to turn this city and continent around.”

March 28, 2008

Infrastructure Development Tops AfDB Projects in Africa

I have read the article below and am in awe of the lack of strategic planning and the failure of appropriate methodology to bring to Africa this much needed Infrastructure. This lack of this basic “backbone” infrastructure is what hold Africa back more than any other issue that faces Africa today. Trying to develop Africa in the same way as North America or Europe is NOT feasible. There has to be a unique and special plan such as the one developed by Trans-African Development  Strategies and the sister Company Trans African Development Company to bring this “backbone” Infrastructure to fruition. The current approach will hold Africa back for at least 50 years. When I read articles like this I can honestly say I am furious at the lack of true understanding… but then I remember that organizations like AfDB are NOT inclined to think “outside the box” …. As those who know me will tell you I subscribe to the basic philosophy “If you cannot solve the problem you are facing…. then you are facing the wrong problem” If AfDB and others would redefine the problem as I have then the realistic and implementable solutions would be obvious!!! But I have tried to discuss this with AfDB and others… and to my dismay they are not interested in even considering anything but the “Status Quo” thus dooming Africa and it’s people to decades of unnecessary poverty and suffering. My offer to AfDB and others interested in truly and honestly solving these and other issues that face Africa remains open but I am NOT optimistic that closed minded individuals will ever consider other pragmatic approaches.
Infrastructure development tops AfDB projects in Africa
 
 
The announcement was made during a recent conference on African infrastructure held in Senegal, which brought together donors, government ministers, and representatives of regional bodies such as the African Union and its intergovernmental development initiative, NEPAD.
An AfDB press release notes that the promised funds will come from the bank’s low-interest lending window, the African Development Fund (ADF). In December, the Bank secured commitments from donors to contribute a record $8.9 billion to replenish the ADF for the next three years.
It has earlier been reported that the loans will finance regional infrastructure projects, including the construction of “a number of major road and rail projects aimed at crisscrossing the continent with transport corridors.”
Proposed projects would include transcontinental transportation corridors that would require a huge outpouring of money. They would serve to benefit exporters and, by extension, transnational companies that profit the most from Africa’s commodities.Some of the more ambitious proposed projects include the construction of “Trans-African highway projects to connect Beira in Mozambique to Lobito in Angola, Dakar in Senegal to Lagos in Nigeria, and Lagos to Mombassa in Kenya.”
While Africa suffers from an acute lack of infrastructure, it is important to consider what type of infrastructure is most needed to help alleviate poverty on the continent. By and large, transcontinental highways and railroads will require a huge outpouring of money and serve to benefit exporters and, by extension, transnational companies that profit the most from Africa’s commodities. Roads and high-quality railroads are indeed necessary to move goods to and from land-locked countries such as Uganda.
The sheer scale of transcontinental projects, however, could distract effort and funds from these more manageable projects, and in the end the more grandiose projects have a higher likelihood of being abandoned because of unmet expectations.
At the same time, Africa’s poor will likely remain cut off by the lack of basic local road networks and adversely affected by the intense footprint that such large-scale physical infrastructure projects often entail.
A recent study by International Rivers and Environmental Defense also shows that large, capital-intensive infrastructure projects such as these tend to be the most prone to corruption. Questions also remain as to whether the AfDB has the requisite experience to identify and mitigate the serious potential impacts of these projects, and whether it wields sufficient leverage to ensure that its social and environmental safeguards, which are strong on paper, are enforced.
Since it resumed regular operations after facing a financial crisis in the early 1990′s, the AfDB has sought to define itself as a lender with special expertise on infrastructure in Africa. It has consistently allocated a significant portion of its lending to the sector, and was chosen to coordinate regional infrastructure initiatives, such as NEPAD’s Infrastructure Action Plan and the Infrastructure Consortium for Africa (ICA). However, the AfDB has made limited progress in its convening role, and few of its ambitious plans to create regional energy, transportation, and water initiatives under NEPAD have come to fruition.
While African governments appear keen to benefit from this and other regional infrastructure schemes, it remains unclear the extent to which this latest initiative is demand-driven or being pursued at the behest of donors. The lion’s share of new donor commitments at the AfDB have been earmarked for infrastructure, while a new high-level panel (see “High-level panel issues report on prospects for African Development Bank”) on the Bank recognizes that the board of the ADF is disproportionately influenced by its donors. A recent Financial Times article suggests that AfDB President Donald Kaberuka “is facing dissent from some African staff concerned that efforts to carve out an independent role for the AfDB are being undermined by some western donors.”

March 5, 2008

Protected: Trans-African Group of Companies (Clarification)

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

December 2, 2007

Africa’s Integration Imperative

Continent’s Integration Imperative
The Reporter (Addis Ababa)

ANALYSIS
24 November 2007
Posted to the web 26 November 2007
By Sanou Mbaye

Karl Marx predicted that states would wither away in anticipation of an idyllic communist society capable of auto regulating economic imbalances and empowering the masses.

So he would have been flabbergasted to see his prophecy realized, not by communism, but by the globalization of Anglo-American economic liberalism. Opening up markets to the free flow of capital, not the dictatorship of the proletariat, has rendered state power obsolete.

Today’s capital markets raise money for governments, corporate clients, and individual customers, manage pension funds’ investments, and bet on the level of interest rates or the stock market. Trading in derivatives by investment banks, hedge funds, and other market participants, reaps huge profits for traders while depriving the real economy of productive investment and job creation.

No population in the world is spared from the harsh treatment of such a system. Some 40% of the world’s 6.5 billion people live in poverty, and a sixth live in extreme poverty. However, the world’s black populations are the prime victims. In the United States, one-eighth of all black males between the ages of 25 and 34 are in jail, and three out of five black American households with children are headed by a single mother.

As for African countries, the politics and economics of globalization have stripped them of their assets and natural resources and left them with an unbearable debt burden. As a result, the percentage of Africa’s population living in extreme poverty increased from 41.6% in 1981 to 46.9% in 2001.

On the other hand, in the era of globalization, regions in which internal trade exceeds external trade have better economic outlooks and stronger social cohesion. This is the case for Europe, Asia, and, increasingly, Latin America, particularly among the member states of Mercosur (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, and Paraguay). The opposite is true for regional groupings in Africa and in the Middle East where trade with the outside world is more important than intra-regional trade.

As a result, any country formulating strategies to counter the destructive forces of globalisation should give overriding priority to a self-centred economic development strategy, preferably within a regional framework. This is a prerequisite to defending against market fundamentalism and avoiding the iniquitous conditions of the international marketplace.

In this respect, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) constitutes an edifying example. The ASEAN economies adopted a united front on international economic issues and accorded priority to internal economic integration and expanding linkages with major trading partners.

Exports have remained the main driver of economic performance for the ASEAN countries, contributing to 5.8% regional GDP growth in 2006. ASEAN foreign direct investment (FDI) flows reached US$38 billion in 2005, up by 48% from the previous year. The outlook for 2006 was also bullish, with preliminary data for the first quarter indicating that FDI flows had already reached US$14 billion, up from US$7.4 billion in the year-earlier period. ASEAN’s drive to establish a fully-fledged economic community has been underlined by implementation of its Priority Integration Sector Roadmaps.

By contrast, sub-Saharan Africa’s historical legacy of artificial and unmanageable colonial boundaries, ethnic antagonisms, its citizens’ deficit of self-respect, and an appalling record of leadership failures has hampered its quest for economic integration. But a sector-by-sector approach could mitigate these handicaps, and, given the pressing need to address demand for energy and climate change, it might be strategically advisable to start with the energy sector.

Africa is a continent rich in energy, holding two-thirds of the world’s reserves of hydro-electric power – trillions of kilowatt-hours representing about half of total world resources. The Congo River alone holds more than 600 billion kilowatt-hours of annual reserves. The Sanaga (Cameroon) and the Ogooué (Gabon) hold half as much. Technological breakthroughs have made it feasible to transport electricity via high-voltage direct current (HVDC) over long distances without incurring great losses (only about 3% per 1,000 kilometers).

Carbon-free hydroelectric power is the right choice as sub-Saharan Africa’s principal source of energy. Harnessing the hydroelectric power of the Congo Basin alone would be enough to meet all of Africa’s energy needs, or to light the entire continent of South America. Moreover, establishing an African grid would enable power from the Democratic Republic of Congo to be delivered to southern European countries such as Spain, Portugal, and Italy.

However, while 90% of world reserves of hydraulic energy are concentrated in underdeveloped regions like sub-Saharan Africa, HVDC technology remains the preserve of developed countries. There is thus an imperative not only for regional integration in Africa, but also for a joint strategic vision and partnership to help build global energy and climate security.

December 1, 2007

Economic Progress in Africa was Focus of Secretary Paulson’s Trip

Economic Progress in Africa Focus of Secretary Paulson’s Trip

United States Department of State (Washington, DC)
NEWS
13 November 2007
Posted to the web 14 November 2007

By Charles W. Corey
Washington, DC
Economic progress in Tanzania, South Africa and Ghana — including infrastructure development and job creation — will be the focus of U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.’s trip to the emerging market countries November 13-19.

While in Africa, the Treasury secretary also will deliver a major address to the Corporate Council on Africa’s U.S.-Africa Business Summit in Cape Town, South Africa, and attend a G20 meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors, according to Ahmed Saeed, deputy assistant secretary of the treasury for Africa and the Middle East.

Briefing reporters on Paulson’s trip November 9 at the U.S. Foreign Press Center in Washington, Saeed identified Tanzania, South Africa and Ghana as places where “sound governance and good economic polices have, over the last half decade and longer, had profound positive economic consequences.”

All three countries are enjoying “robust track records” of economic growth dating back at least five years, he explained. After implementing positive economic reforms, they exemplify the “good financial and economic news stories that are now emerging from Africa,” he said.

There are parts of Africa, Saeed said, “where there has been real poverty alleviation — particularly in those countries [Tanzania, South Africa and Ghana] that have done the right thing when it comes to economic policy.”

Along with the good news on Tanzania, South Africa and Ghana, he cautioned that there are still “numerous challenges” in today’s Africa that “we all know” and of which we must remain aware.

Saeed said the continent is seeing its “highest growth rates and the lowest inflation levels in 30 years.” The growth in economic policy management “seems to be quite widespread,” he said, with 23 of 48 countries seeing record high growth levels that seem to be trickling down.

“The last four years we have seen average per capita income growth of 3.8 percent, and … the [International Monetary Fund] is projecting 4 percent per capita income growth for this year,” he added.

While in Africa, Paulson is expected to talk about issues that are directly related to economic and financial performance. “He is going to talk about the critical role played by infrastructure … the importance of having a sound and robust financial structure” and of spreading the benefits of growth and sustainable development, Saeed said.

While in Tanzania, Saeed said, Paulson is expected to travel to a U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) farm outside Arusha that is a sustainable community focused on land conservation. He also will hold talks with the Tanzanian finance minister that will include discussion of a $698 million Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact that Tanzania is expected to sign with the United States early next year, Saeed said.

Before leaving Tanzania, Paulson also is expected to meet with East African Community (EAC) finance ministers from Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania and Kenya to talk about regional capital market integration and how that could foster further economic development across the region. Paulson also will visit the A to Z Textiles mosquito net factory, which is generating jobs and participating in President Bush’s anti-malaria initiative for Africa.

In South Africa, Paulson will be the keynote speaker at the Corporate Council on Africa’s U.S.-Africa Business Summit in Cape Town. While in that country, he also will meet with local bankers, participate in a G20 meeting and visit the Khayelitsha Cookie Company, which is creating important job opportunities, especially for women.

In Ghana, Paulson will visit the Ghana Stock Exchange and participate in a round table discussion with bankers from Ghana and elsewhere in the region. He also will meet with President John Kufuor to review Ghana’s economic progress and then travel to Akosombo Dam, where he will talk about the critical role infrastructure plays in the African development process. “Akosombo Dam is the source of more than 50 percent of Ghana’s energy,” Saeed reminded the reporters, and, as such, is an important source of economic development.

The overarching theme of Paulson’s trip, Saeed concluded, is to “shine a light on those changes that are taking place in Africa, have been taking place for some time in terms of implementing fundamentally sound economic policies, and those changes which are now bearing fruit … and talking about how we can partner with those who have a real commitment to reform.”

(USINFO is produced by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

November 30, 2007

Africa’s “Marshal Plan” (Editorial)

The Continent’s Marshal Plan
This Day (Lagos)

EDITORIAL
22 November 2007
Posted to the web 23 November 2007
Lagos
Painfully, the African continent has become the sick baby of the world, to which every other part must spare a thought by way of aids and grants. By the low development indices, Africa is understandably a leading member of the Third world community. But it ought not to be so. Given the abundant human and material resources available on the continent, Africa ought to be one of the leading lights of the world. But several intervening variables have conspired to stymied the growth of the continent. One such intervening variable being the slavery and colonialisation visited on the continent by Europe. This undoubtedly helped to get most African countries stunted. Indeed, several such African countries, although have since regained their independence, have not quite recovered from the deep lacerative effects of the invasions. As if that is not bad enough, Africa has also had a larger-than normal share of bad leaders, who are either acutely corrupt or super despotic. All of these have in no small ways helped to continually undermine the potentials of the African continent.

It is against this backdrop that we commend President Musa Yar’Adua’s call for a comprehensive Marshal plan for Africa. He had made the call at the just-concluded third African Forum in Germany. President Yar’Adua had lamented that the miserly aids and grants often given to African countries for developmental purposes are often too tokenistic to make any meaningful impact. As he put it, such aids “are usually too little, most times misdirected and generally do not make much of a difference.”

The truth is that Africa must learn to take its destiny in its hands by rising from the valley of dependence to a platform of responsibility. It must take charge of its own development challenges. One way of doing it effectively is for the continent to unite to draw a its own Marshal plan, akin to the European Recovery Programme employed by the United States of America. United States had with Europe designed a Marshal plan to reconstruct the European continent after the devastating World War 2.

The African continent must resolve from the ravages of war and despotic terrorism of its leader to work out modalities of regional integration and co-operation in a way that it can synergise its resources and launch out into the global arena with a bang.

We believe, and strongly too, that Africa surely needs an economic emergency scheme anchored on a Marshal plan. Given the fact of the human and material resources available, all that is thus germane is the harnessing of all its potentials for maximum impact. The Marshal plan, will in that sense, thus serve as a road map to the continental development plan of the region.

We call on the African leaders to immediately set in motion a process that will truly activate the practical modalities of the plan, through re-orientation and attitudinal revolution of themselves and their people. It is only when the African people themselves demonstrate a strong resolve to help themselves will they truly get out of the quagmire of underdevelopment.

One way of showing such attitudinal change will be to tackle the hydra-headed problem of corruption frontally and brutally. No donor nation or agency will be eager to assist a country where mere renovation of a government official’s residence for instance, can gulp as much as N628 million. Such high tempo graft will only repel nations willing to offer assistance. Well managed, under responsible leadership, powered by the right vision, Africa has all the potentials to be strong and independent, economically and politically. The Marshal plan can guaranty this.

In all, we believe in the Marshal plan, just as we urge African leaders to co-operate and look-inward in the task of growing the continent.

October 25, 2007

A Good .. but Older…. Paper on the State of African Infrastructure

The paper copied below is OLD… but sadly still paints a relatively close and poignant picture of the status of Infrastructure Development. It can be accessed directly in the web at: http://www.afdb.org/pls/portal/

We at Trans-African Development have a potential Solution to this dilemma that faces Africa… it is to build a BACKBONE of Infrastructure…. From Major Highways to Electrical transmission Facilities and transmission lines to Fiber Optic and Railroads… but we need the Cooperation of African Nations and Organizations to implement this . I will write more on this int he near future… but for now… this “picture” of African Infrastructure is very revealing.


ECONOMIC RESEARCH PAPERS NO. 46
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

Infrastructure in Africa: The Record
By: Afeikhena Jerome
University of Ibadan, Nigeria


The views and interpretations in this paper are those of the author and not necessarily those of the African Development Bank.


INFRASTRUCTURE IN AFRICA: THE RECORD

1. Introduction

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in infrastructure development and Policy reform in developing economies, with much of the debate centering on efficiency
of use and an increased role for private sector participation in the provision of Infrastructure (Jimenez, 1995; Mody, 1996; Kerf and Smith, 1996; and World Bank,1994). The apparent interest emanates principally from the growing realization that human and physical infrastructure are critical elements for economic growth and poverty reduction. Infrastructure plays a pointed, often decisive-role in determining the overall
productivity and development of a country’s economy, as well as the quality of life of its citizens.

A broader source of interest, however, derives from the generally poor performance of state-owned monopolies, combined with the rapid globalization of the world economies, which has brought into sharp focus the economic costs of inadequate infrastructure and prompted a growing number of developing countries to seek new initiates in promoting competition, private entry and foreign interest in the provision of  Infrastructure.

The term ‘infrastructure’ was coined during the Second World War by military strategists to indicate wide-ranging elements of war logistics. Thereafter, development Economists began to use the term interchangeably with ‘overhead capital’ considered to include: those services without which primary, secondary and tertiary production activities cannot function. In its widest sense, it includes all public services from law and order through education and public health to transportation, communication, power and water supply as well as such agricultural overhead capital as irrigation and drainage systems (Hirschman, 1958: 83).

There is no consensus in the literature on a common definition of infrastructure. What remains indisputable, however, is that is that they share some common characteristics which have hitherto been used to justify state involvement in their provision and financing. These characteristics include scale economies in production, consumption externalities and non-excludability. They are equally not generally tradeable.

Broadly defined, infrastructure refers to all basic inputs into and requirements for the proper functioning of the economy. They are usually grouped into two. The first category is social infrastructure, such as education and health which facilitate the supply if skilled and healthy personnel to manage and operate other resources. They also enhance the economic, political and social empowerment of the populace, with the
attendant positive effects on poverty alleviation and efficient use of national resources.


The second category is often referred to as economic infrastructure. Mody (1997) defines this category of infrastructure as the facilities that provide society with the services necessary to conduct daily life and to engage in productive activities. These include power, transportation, telecommunications, water, sanitation and safe water disposal, among other things.

This report is devoted to the study of the complementary physical infrastructure, comprising telecommunications, power, transport (roads, railways, ports and airports), water supply, and sewerage.

Infrastructure has a pervasive influence on the whole economy.
Telecommunications, electricity and water are used in the production process of virtually every sector of an economy, while transportation is necessary for the distribution of
commodities. The quantity and quality of these services are therefore an important determinant of private sector productivity and output. In fact, there is a strong association
between the availability of certain infrastructure -telecommunications (in particular), power, surfaced roads and safe water – and per capita GDP2. The relationship involves  both the supply side, in terms of the contribution of infrastructure to the generation of higher GDP, and the demand side, as higher incomes in turn generate higher demands for infrastructure services. Infrastructure thus makes an important contribution to expanding output.

Africa trails the rest of the world, both in the extent and quality of infrastructure. Notwithstanding the large amount of scarce economic resources absorbed in the development of infrastructure in Africa, there is clear evidence that the provision of infrastructure has been much below standard both in terms of quantity and quality in relative and absolute terms. Infrastructure bottlenecks continue to exist, particularly in the management of current stock.

Traditionally, infrastructure services have been viewed as public goods and the primary responsibilities for their provision have been entrusted to the government-owned
`natural monopolies’. Consequently, these sectors have become inextricably entangled with the public sector that dominated it. While the performance of government-owned
providers of infrastructure, vary from one country to another, their overall performance in Africa has been very poor. The sector is characterized by operational inefficiency, lack of technological dynamism and poor service to consumers. In addition to their inadequacy, the provision of infrastructural services in most African countries is characterized by high prices compared with per capita incomes and long waiting time (several years in some countries) between the time of application for services and actual connection.

The cost of waste, in terms of forgone economic growth and lost opportunities for poverty reduction and environmental improvements, are unimaginably high. Poor infrastructure is a major obstacle to the region’s economic growth, and adversely affectsthe living standards of its people. Inadequate infrastructure adversely impacts on health, education and the capacity for effective governance as well as on the ability of industries to compete in international markets. Most evaluations of structural adjustment programmes in Africa point to deficiencies in infrastructure as a major cause of poor
supply response in economies under reform (Ghura and Hadjimichael, 1996).

The provision of efficient infrastructure is important for the development of the continent particularly in view of the fact that many of its countries are landlocked. As shown in recent literature on the economics of geography, nearly all landlocked countries in the world are poor, except a handful in Western Europe that are closely integrated into the EC via an efficient infrastructure which facilitates low-cost trade.

This chapter takes stock of the state of infrastructure in Africa, investigates more deeply the root causes of the present unsatisfactory outcomes and explores the strategies and policies that can be instituted to improve infrastructure delivery in the pursuit of the overarching objectives of private-sector-led growth and poverty reduction. Accordingly, the paper is divided into four sections. The database on infrastructure in Africa is presented in section 2 while the record of infrastructure service is the focus of section 3.
An appraisal of the causal factors in the dismal performance is conducted in section 4.

2. Data on Infrastructure in Africa

Data on the different types of infrastructure in Africa are sketchy and difficult to find in one publication. An extensive database of physical infrastructure stock for a cross-section
of 102 countries have been compiled and presented in the Appendix. The database has been compiled for 53 African countries by region according to ADB classification. To
allow for comparison, similar data is presented for 17 countries in Latin America, 8 countries in South East Asia and 24 OECD countries. The database comprises six measures:

. Population, GNP per capita and percentage of population with access to safe water and sanitation;

. Kilometres of paved roads;

. Kilometres of railway lines;

. Statistics on the power sector;

. Telecommunication statistics; and

. Information technology.

Apart from physical stocks, the database also provides some measures of the quality of infrastructure.

White It is imperative to sound a note of caution on these global statistics given their comparative basis, it should be noted, however, that the data provides a rough, albeit, useful
basis for analyzing the development of infrastructure on a comparative global and regional basis. The data reveals a strong association between infrastructure capacity and level of development. Countries with lower income level are associated with lower levels of infrastructure capacity and service provision. It should be borne in mind that the
performance of most African countries in all the indicators is quite dismal.

3. The Record of Infrastructure in Africa

It is crucial to examine in greater details the situation in the major infrastructure sub-sectors with a view to highlighting the peculiarities of each sub-sector. For each type of infrastructure , the section examines the state of the available networks, tariffs charged, supply and demand patterns, service quality; industry bottlenecks, and environmental
consideration.

3.1 Telecommunications

Telecommunications infrastructure lies at the heart of the information economy. Countries lacking modern telecommunications system cannot compete effectively in the
global economy. The telecommunications industry in Africa has made limited progress despite concerted efforts and programs aimed at modernizing and expanding the sub-sector.

3.1.1 Networks

Despite the giant strides which a number of African countries have taken in reforming the telecommunications sub-sector in recent years, telecommunication coverage in Africa is amongst the lowest in the world. There are more telephones in Brazil than the whole of Africa. While Brazil has 15,105.9 main telephone lines, Africa has only 13, 695.1 main telephone lines. Africa accounts for only two per cent of telephone main telephone lines globally as shown in chart 1. Low network densities, long waiting
Source : International Telecommunication Union.

Chart 1: Main telephone lines

Africa2%
America32%
Asia28%
Europe36%
Oceania2%
times for access to services, and clear willingness of some users to pay for access to the service illustrate the significant shortage of telecommunications services in the region.

The most common measure of telecommunications access is teledensity or the number of main telephone lines per 100 inhabitants. In 1996, teledensity varied from 0.08 in
Democratic Republic of Congo to 34.01 in Reunion. Africa averages 1.85 compared to 30.38 in the Americas, 6.02 in Asia, 30.60 in Europe and 40.39 in Oceania.

There are substantial differences among the African sub-regions, with four countries currently in the forefront; namely, Reunion 34.01, Seychellis 19.51, Mauritius 16.21 and
South Africa 10.2 . The laggards are sub -Saharan African countries with an average teledensity of 0.52. As many as 34 countries in Africa still have a teledensity of less than 1. These differences among countries are associated in part with variations in per capita GDP  In part, GDP per capita may serve as an indicator of the extent of a country’s rural population, which tended to receive fewer infrastructure services than urban areas did. It may also reflect the affordability of services. However, a nation’s teledensity is usually quoted as an average thus masking regional variability. For example, the distribution of telephone networks in South Africa presents striking internal contrasts. The average teledensity in South Africa is 10.05, but on a provisional level, this ranges between 22 in Gauteng (the region around Johannesburg and Pretoria) and 2 in the Northern pronvince.

The distribution of telecommunications services is biased in most African countries in favour of the urban areas, which account for over 80 per cent of the services, while the
rural areas, where over 80 per cent of the population reside, enjoy 20 per cent of the service.
About 72.9 per cent of telecommunications mainlines were in urban areas in 1995 compared to 27.1 per cent in rural areas. Two countries, however, had most of their telephone mainlines located in rural areas. These are Sao-Tome and Principe (87.0 percent) and Central African Rep. (57.0 per cent).

In terms of quality, networks are burdened with a high percentage of outmoded equipment and high fault rates. The information on faults per main lines, a standard measure of service quality, indicates that the average faults per 100 main lines for the region in 1996 was 78.1 compared with an average rate of 8.9 for America, 19.9 for Europe, 43.7 for Asia and 47.8 for Oceania. The recorded fault rates in the region,
however, range widely- from 1.0 (Eritrea) to 937.5(Guinea).

The most effective route to increasing service quality is the installation of digital exchanges. African countries are striving to modernize their systems – albeit at great cost – in order to remain plugged into the global network. Many telecommunications authorities in Africa, especially in those countries undergoing reforms are installing digital technologies and costly equipment in order to become competitive. In the absence of local manufactures, African countries are dependent on industries outside the region for the purchase of telecommunications equipment and spare parts. Such imports are generally made on a non- selective basis of ‘ready-made’ packages with little room for adaptation to local needs through local enterprise and know-how. Consequently, telecommunications services in Africa do not have the usual multiplier effects (via research and development, local manufacturing, services and employment) as they do in other regions of the world.

Table 1:

Comparative Statistics on Telecommunications Indicators in Africa and the Rest of
the World (1996)

SEE THE ORIGINAL REPORT WITH LINK AT TOP TO VIEW CHARTS AND DATA

i HAVE DEBUGGED ONLY UP TO HERE FOR THE READERS CONVENIENCE IN CHANGING FORMATING… PLEASE GO TO THE LINK ABOVE TO READ THIS 57 PAGE PDF FILE WITH GRAPHIC CHARTS.

Source: International Telecommunication Union

3.1.2 Supply and Demand Patterns

Comparative Telecommunications Statistics for
Africa and the rest of the WorldPer 100 inhabitantMain lines per employeeSatisfied demand (%) 1996Fault per 100 machines peryear

Source: International Telecommunication Union.

Large waiting lists are evident in several African countries, but the demand for telephone connections is in all likelihood considerably higher. A sizable latent demand Lies concealed since prospective users do not even register on waiting lists until there is a realistic chance of receiving a telephone connection. The overall average expected waiting time for services in Africa for 1996 was 3.5 years, the highest in the world, compared with 0.3 in America, 0.7 in Asia and 2.4 in Europe as shown in chart 3. Ten countries recorded a waiting time greater than 10 years. These are Algeria, Eritrea,
Ethiopia, Gambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Sao Tome & Principe, Sierra Leone and Tanzania. With such long waiting times in African economies, there may well be a significant number of discouraged potential subscribers who have not yet joined the
queue for services.

Development of cellular networks in African economies provides one example of customers’ willingness to pay for quick access to reliable services. This willingness is particularly true of businesses and high-income households. While the cellular network penetration rates are still comparatively small, (7.9 per cent of total telephone subscribers in 1996 ranging between 1.1 in Kenya and 18.3 in South Africa), the growth rates in the number of subscribers are considerable in some countries. This level of demand has been achieved despite the fact that charges for cellular services are substantially above those for fixed services in the region and those for cellular services in the EU. Surveys of business users in the region confirm this willingness to pay
for quick access to reliable telecommunications services.4

The introduction of competition has been most notable in mobile cellular and other value-added services, with almost half of the Africa countries allowing more than one provider in these areas. In the majority of markets where cellular mobile services are now provided, private capital has been introduced in the form of joint ventures with state-owned enterprises or stand-alone private ventures

3.1.3 TARIFFS

The structure of tariffs falls relatively heavily on businesses and more lightly on households, but the overall level remains low in most countries. In several African countries, there is no clear practice of pricing services, hence rough and ready norms for billing are adopted. Call waiting and forwarding for residential customers remains largely the domain of dominant local providers.

While detailed data on long-distance and international tariffs are not available, average monthly subscription and installation charges for households and businesses
provide some indication of tariff levels and structures. Table 2 presents average monthly subscription charges and connection rates for both household and business consumers by regions in the world. A comparison across these regions reveals that telecommunications tariff in Africa is the lowest in the world relative to both the global average and other
regions in the world. The relatively low levels of tariffs in much of the region limit the extent to which internal cash flows and private finance can be raised for new investments.
Most countries, characterized by underinvestment and low network growth, are unlikely to break out without reform of the tariff structure. As a rule, those countries at more
advanced stages of development have adjusted tariff structures to allow for more balanced charges between households and businesses and have raised the overall level of
tariffs. The need for investment in this sector to expand capacity and improve service quality is substantial. The necessary expansion in networks will not be achieved without
recourse to private finance. However, unlocking this finance will require a commercial approach to telecommunications and credible reform of tariff structures.

Table 2:

Telephone Tariffs in Africa and Other Regions in 1996 (US$)

3.1.4 Reform Activities the Sector

The telecommunications sector in Africa faces a challenging future given the number of internal and international constraints confronting telecommunications administration, and the demand for value-added services by increasingly sophisticated consumers. Many African countries are already committed to reforms in the field of telecommunications,
including promotion of private sector participation. In the past few years, a domino effect has occurred in Africa’s Telecommunications sector resulting in a flurry of reform
activities which put the continent at par with the developments in other regions. Some of the major reforms being carried out include creation of a regulatory environment to accommodate private companies, institution of well-defined tariff regimes, privatization of state-owned telecommunications operations; and licensing independent telephone companies to provide value added services.

Reform efforts across the region focused initially upon the separation of the telecommunications and postal operations and, subsequently, upon the development of separate regulatory agencies. By 1998, 27 countries in Africa had separated their postal and telecommunications operations, and 30 countries had corporatized the primary operator.

In the regulatory sphere, 18 countries across Africa had undertaken the establishment of a separate regulatory agency by 1998. However, most telecommunications regulatory agencies so far created in Africa have limited powers -the
sector ministry retain the authority to issue directives to the regulator, appoint the heads of the agency, and control the agency’s funding. In Uganda, for example, the ministry in
charge of telecommunications is also responsible for tariff approval and the establishment of licence fees, while in Namibia, the operator is responsible for numbering, tariffs and interconnection rates. In many instances, the establishment of the regulatory agency has occurred in tandem with the privatisation process. In other countries, the introduction of
a regulator has occurred prior to the initiation of liberalization and privatisation plans, such as in Botswana, Mauritius, Nigeria, Tanzania and Zambia.

Privatisation of state-owned national carriers in Africa began in 1989 with the sale of the majority of shares in Guinea-Telecom in Guinea-Bissau, and STP/CST of Sao
Tome and Principe in the same year. Between 1989 and 1997, close to 25 per cent partially privatised their state-owned telecommunications operator. In addition, six more countries have initiated, or announced, plan to sell equity stake in their state-owned telecommunication operator to private investors. However, competition in nation-wide basic services is allowed in just two markets, Ghana and Uganda, where second national operator licenses have been issued.

The cumulative effect of these reforms is a substantial increase in telecommunications infrastructure. In 1996, Africa recorded its highest annual growth rate of 10 per cent in telephone main lines. The highest growth rates were recorded by Botswana, the Gambia, Cape Verde and Mauritius. North African countries, however, recorded marginal decline.

3.2 Internet Access
Internet is today one of the most dynamic telecommunication markets in Africa in spite of the fact that the region remains behind the rest of the world in informatics and information
technology, accounting for less than 1 per cent of global spending in the sub-sector.
Over the past five years, the number of African countries with access to the internet has risen dramatically. It was first introduced to Africa through a range of initiatives by national,
international and non-governmental organizations, Internet is now clearly becoming a commercial undertaking with increasing private investment. Most of the countries (47 of the 54 nations) in the region have developed some form of Internet access in capital cities, either through local dialup, store and forward e-mail with a gateway to the internet, or through a full leased-line service. About 44 countries and territories have achieved full Internet public access services at least in capital cities. There are only five countries- Comoros, the Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Libya and Somalia that do not have plans for full internet assess.

3.2.1 Network

The key indicators of internet development are: (1) the number of host computers, (2) the number of internet service providers (ISPs) and (3) the number of users.

a. Internet host computers: In 1997, there were 129,326 internet host computers in Africa, of which 122,025 were in South Africa, 3,310 in North Africa and 3, 991 in Sub-
Saharan Africa. The density of internet hosts was 28.16 hosts per 10,000 people in South Africa, 0.25 in North Africa and 0.07 in Sub-Saharan Africa. The average for Africa was
1.70.

b. Internet Service Providers (ISPs): About half of the countries in Africa allow competition and have more than one ISP. Of the 300 or so ISPs in the region, around 200
offer full internet services. South Africa has the highest concentration of ISPs with nearly 80
service providers.

c. Internet Users: In 1997, there were 896,120 Internet users on the continent of Africa, in addition to 800,000 in South Africa. This is equivalent to approximately six users for each
host computer. The number of users averages about one user per 5,000 people (excluding South Africa with a rate of one to 65 people), compared to a global figure of one internet
user per 45 people; or one per 6 in Europe and North America.

3.2.2 Tariffs

The high price of internet connections and personal computer (PCs) relative to income is a major inhibiting factor to a wider use of internet in Africa.. Estimated PCs per 100 inhabitants in 1996 was just 0.66 compared with 15.87 in America, 9.56 in Europe and 30.31 in Oceania. Considering the lower incomes of most African countries, it is unrealistic to expect widespread Internet usage on the continent. As the internet market in Africa becomes increasingly liberalized, and market forces take firmer root, prices will be driven lower owing to increasing competition among ISPs, the privatisation of state-owned telecommunications corporations, and the liberalization of domestic telephone markets.

3.2.3 Bottlenecks

Internet use in Africa is limited. The basic obstacles in the path of rapid Internet growth are the lack of telecommunication infrastructure, and the relatively high hardware and transmission costs. Although many countries have taken major steps to improve their infrastructure, great variation still remains between regions and countries; rural areas, where 70-80 per cent of the population resides, are largely uncovered by telephone service.
International internet bandwidth is lacking because international leased lines are costly and crowded, and peering between ISPs is limited. Proposals, such as the Africa One and SAFE- undersea fibre-optic cables, or wireless technologies including WLL, VSAT, HF radio and GMPCS systems, or stratospheric Helium supported balloons promise to extend internet services to both urban and rural areas. Hardware is much more expensive in Africa relative to many other parts of the world due to high import tariffs and little price competition.

An increasing number of countries are allowing internet service provider (ISP) competition, even though more than ten countries still hold monopoly control. PTOs have
assumed a monopoly position especially in countries where the Public Telecommunications Operator (PTO) established the international internet backbone with some exceptions, such
as South Africa, Mozambique and Zambia. Foreign internet service providers are increasingly entering into Africa and are expected to gain market share from the local companies. Open entry for ISPs, however, is not enough to ensure rapid Internet growth. An appropriate, “Internet-friendly” regulatory framework is also important to achieve effective
entry, survival and growth of ISPs. High license fees, for example, can limit the entry of ISPs.

3.3 Transport

Transport constitutes an important sector for the enhancement of economic growth and the socio-economic integration of the African region, particularly the promotion of intra- and extra-African trade. However, despite the efforts made in the past five decades to develop the transport sector in Africa, it has remained inadequate and ineffective. The general lack of repairs and maintenance in infrastructure has led to further deterioration in the sector in recent years, and has, as well, increased the magnitude of its operational problems and costs. The environmental implications of transport policies and projects also received low priority.

However, despite the difficult environment of high operating costs and low capacity utilization, the various sub-sectors of transport have shown some remarkable resilience.

3.3.1 Roads

In Africa, road transport is the most widely used means of transportation. The fragmentary
nature of the railway system and the limitations imposed on the scope of inland water
transport by geographical factors are such that the transport of people and goods by rail and
inland waterways has to be supplemented usually by road transport over long distances.

3.3.1.1 Road Network

An accurate assessment of the development of the road networks in African countries is made difficult by the lack of reliable statistical information and the compelling necessity to employ, for analytical purposes, surrogate indicators, such as aggregate lengths, classified according to operating conditions, instead of such standard indices as ton-kilometre or passenger/ kilometre.

Africa had approximately 311,184 kilometers of paved roads in 1991 (see Table A2), with half of them in poor conditions. Chart 4 indicates that only 24.2 percent of total road network in Africa were paved in 1996 albeit with considerable regional diversity. 57.4 percent of the roads in North Africa were paved compared to 25 percent in South Africa and 10.2 percent in Central Africa. Road densities per km2 are generally much lower than those of Asia and Latin America. Road construction and maintenance standards vary greatly in
Africa: few countries are able to construct and maintain trunk-road systems to stipulated requirements and standards according to volume and weight of traffic. Road building has
traditionally been given more priority than road maintenance in most African countries, with scant attention to the imperatives of recurrent costs and road management once a road has been constructed. Besides, as the road networks expands, the institutional and financial burden has tended to increase much more rapidly than the national budget could cater for, especially in times of socio-economic crisis.

Another important dimension to the quality of infrastructure is maintenance and renewal. Lack of maintenance has left over 50 per cent of the paved roads in poor conditions. Over 80 per cent of the unpaved main roads in Africa would be considered just fair. The case of rural feeder roads is even worse; up to 85 per cent are estimated to be currently in poor conditions.

The constructing of international road networks on a sub-regional basis in Africa has received much greater attention. However, a real regional African road system does not as yet exist; what exists, instead, is a large number of separate national road networks that are ineffectively coordinated, and are at best a series of ad hoc inter-country road links and connection.

3.3.1.2 Demand and Supply Pattern

National road networks in Africa have not kept pace with the growing demand: kilometre lengths are limited and their standards of construction often low. The existence of
inadequate and poorly maintained rural and feeder roads connecting villages and farming areas with each other, and to market centres is a major gap in rural transport in most
countries. And few cities have been able to keep pace with road network needs. As agriculture and industry expand, and as national and subregional economies develop, existing road networks will require tremendous extensions and improvements in quality. In particular, road links between nations will have to be strengthened to meet large scale
demand for intra-and inter-subregional goods traffic; all of this require heavy capital investment and expenditure on roads in many African countries.

3.3.2 Rail

Railways in Africa are fragmented, and can hardly be described as a system since the railways run from the interior to sea ports, a reflection of their antecedent as a transport
system designed for external trade purposes.

3.3.2.1 Available Network

The aggregate network of African railways is estimated at 73,000 route kilometres, of which South Africa alone accounts for some 22,500 km. Eleven countries namely; Burundi,
Central Africa Republic, Chad, Cape Verde, Comoros, Djibouti, Mauritius, Seychelles, Somalia, the Gambia, Guinea Bissau and Libya have no railway system. With the exception of North Africa, railways in Africa generally have a low level of traffic. Most of the lines are of light rail, and are unsuited for fast and heavy traffic. Moreover, there is general deterioration due to maintenance problems.

The national railway networks in Africa are mostly independent of each other and, with the exception of Eastern and Southern African railways, unconnected among themselves. All the networks in Africa were built at the end of the nineteenth century or the beginning of the twentieth century, with different technical characters, gauges, couplings, brake systems, buffers, etc. The only exceptions are, Tazara, the Trans-Gabonese, the Trans-Cameroonian and the mining lines. The 1.067 m gauge predominates, especially in sub-
Saharan Africa, whereas the 1.435 m gauge accounts for 76.1 per cent of the total kilometrage in North Africa.. Upgrading existing railway lines would involve major investments in track realignment, resignalling, safety systems and rolling stock..

3.3.2.2 Demand and Supply pattern

Almost all the railways in Africa enjoyed monopoly or near-monopoly status at inception, especially for long- and medium- distance transport of goods and peoples. With the spectacular development of road transport and to a lesser extent, air transport, in the 1970s, railways have, however, faced increased competition in the transport market, to
which they have not always been able to positively respond and adapt.

3.3.2.3 Tariffs

Railway tariff has stagnated or declined in recent years, and measures of operational efficiency have shown little improvement. For example, locomotive availability remained
generally low at around 50 percent, although both Uganda and Zimbabwe have improved performance in response to restructuring plans. Most railway authorities in Africa have not pursued sustainable tariff policies. Being public or semi-public enterprises, they were not always profit-oriented or cost- conscious in their operation, limiting their ability to maintain the existing networks, let alone upgrade or expand them. Whenever they made profits, they were required to pass them to the users in the form of reduced tariff rates. The tariff basis was the same throughout the network, varying only with distance.

Freight rates by rail in Africa are on average about twice as high as those in Asia and one and half times those in Latin America. But, at the same time, rail operations run at a
deficit. A number of reform programs are under way. These include increased managerial autonomy and sub-contracting more services to the private sector. Some have sub-contracted part, or all, track maintenance to the private sector (Cameroon, Gabon, Nigeria and Senegal) and Senegal has also sub-contracted cleaning of rolling stick, maintenance of wagons, catering and parcels traffic. The broadest private sector initiative involves re-unifying the railways of Cote d’ Ivoire and Burkina Faso, with a view to operating them
under a concession agreement with the private sector.

3.3.3 Airports

Air transport network in Africa is still relatively underdeveloped. All countries in the region have at least one international airport as well as several smaller ones. Few of them are capable of handling large amount of traffic. Less than 50 per cent of the 5,304 potential air links among the countries in the region are actually operational or being actively exploited at present. The countries with the highest number of airports are Egypt (17 airports) and Nigeria (15 Airports). Most of the airports lack modern equipment and infrastructure. They are characterized by deteriorating runways, and obsolete traffic control equipment. Much of
the infrastructure required for ancillary activities, such as customs and immigration, air cargo, catering, baggage handing and connecting surface transportation, is lacking compared
with market needs. For example, operational and safety shortcoming that plague Nigeria’s international airports have given them the reputation of being among the worst in the World.

Almost every African country own at least one airline although some of them are being privatized in recent times. However, Air Afrique is a regional airline, jointly owned
by ten countries. The privatized airlines include Kenya Airways incidentally the first airline to be privatized in Africa, Royal Air Maroc and Air Tunisia both of which are
partially privatized. Nigeria, however, adopted the liberalisation of the domestic aviation industry resulting in the licencing of 22 private carriers, of which 14 offer scheduled
passenger service, 7 carry cargo and the balance provide charter fights.

Only Cote d’ Ivoire is currently actively reforming its airports with the ceding of the management of Abidjan’s international airport to a French international consortium, Aeria, which has pledged to spend CFA 14 billion upgrading the airport.

3.3.3.1 Tariffs

The airlines in Africa suffer from high operational costs compared with their counterparts world-wide, including other developing regions; they lack proper maintenance facilities
locally and their tariffs are generally uncompetitive in the absence of subsidies. With the growth of mega-airlines in many regions of the world, the African airlines, being mostly
small and poorly equipped, are unable to compete in the international market. And the only hope for survival for most of them lies in mergers with bigger and more competitive
carriers.

.3.3.3 Demand and Supply Pattern

Air services are restricted by low demand in several countries. Apart from Air Mauritius which accounted for about 50 per cent of total persenger traffic in 1997, the share of African
airlines in international traffic is very low, owing in part to a reputation of poor services and reliability. For example, the share of Air Egypt in international traffic is only 25 per cent at
most, despite fare reductions in recent times.

3.3.4 Sea Ports

Maritime transport is extremely important to African countries due to the nature of its operations, and the high proportion of traded goods transported by sea. However, the poor quality of port services and infrastructure in Africa, and the low level of trade volumes are some of the major limitations on the growth of this sub-sector. Port productivity is, on average, about a third of international norm due to poor management, excessive bureaucracy, and inadequate as well as unreliable of equipment. Delays in clearing goods are frequently a problem. Most ports are in need of modern, better managed facilities to serve traffic for which sea transport has a significant cost advantage over surface transport, such as dry and liquid bulk cargoes or containerized cargo. The port of Mombassa, for instance, has only two cranes one of which is frequently out of order. The main port of Ghana was recently rehabilitated and expanded but suffers from mostly human inefficiencies. Manufacturers habitually post employees in the port for several days on end to make sure that the goods move in and out of the port on time. There is generally a need for upgrading of existing ports in Africa.

Less than two per cent of the African merchant fleet capacity are container ships; the majority being conventional cargo ships. The shipping lines that principally service long-
distance sea routes consider most of Africa’s coastal traffic as mere subsidiary to their traditional overseas activities.

3.3.4.2 Tariff

Ocean freight charges in Africa are competitive. The impression that ocean freight charges from Africa are prohibitively high is not supported by the facts. Empirical evidence provided by Biggs, et al. (1994) and presented in Table 7 on freight and port charges from five African countries to the port of New York/Newark and a comparison with similar charges from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, two countries in East Asia, indicate that freight charges generally reflect their relative distances to the port of destination and appear to give West African countries a slight competitive advantage. However, port charges in the principal ports in Africa are higher than the comparable charges in the two Asian ports.
Consequently, when freight and port charges are added up, the costs of transportation from some ports in Africa may actually be higher than from those ports in East Asia. Interviews with a number of large shipping agents indicate that the frequency of sailing from the principal African ports to New York/Newark is also not a constraining element.

3.4 Electricity

3.4.1 Available Network

Total electricity generation in 1994 was 350,000 Gigawatt-hours. The generation mix is dominated by fossil fuel generating plants which account for 81 percent of total
electricity generation, with hydro accounting for just 15 per cent. A small fraction of available hydro resources is utilized in Africa, with 64.4 percent of the exploitable hydro capacity located in East and Southern Africa, 34.2 percent in West Africa and 1.2 percent in North Africa. This is mainly due to shortfalls in water-flow associated with climate change in some countries, low demand in countries endowed with immense hydro resources, and potential transmission losses associated with long distance transmission from countries endowed with immense hydro resources to energy deficient
countries and regions. Oil-based generation is more uniformly distributed in Africa while coal-based generation feature prominently in the southern African countries of South

Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Mozambique; and in Morocco in North Africa and Niger in West Africa. Gas fuelled plants are of increasing importance in Algeria, Nigeria
Tunisia. Nuclear and geothermal plants are relatively unimportant at 2.7 and 0.1 per cent respectively. Kenya remains the only country exploiting its geothermal resources, though progress in this direction remains lack-lustre.

In terms of regional distribution, North Africa accounts for about one third of Africa’s electricity production based largely on burning oil supported by coal and natural gas. West Africa’s share of 9 per cent is based on a mixture of hydro, oil and gas. Central Africa’s share of 4 per cent is dominated by hydro and East Africa’s share of 3 per cent consists of s mixture of oil and hydro. Southern Africa produces the largest share of Africa’s electricity production-about-55 per cent which is dominated by hydro and coal-burning generating plants.

The region’s generation, transmission and distribution systems tend to be old and inefficient, resulting in often substantial losses of generated energy, as much as 40
percent in the case of Uganda. These system losses have further limited the amount of energy available for production and consumption. Furthermore, in many countries consumers have experienced frequent power outages as well as voltage fluctuations, which damage electronic equipment and motors. This unreliability has forced many enterprises in the region to buy and install their own generators, thus raising their
overhead costs.

Self-provision of electricity is common across the region. In Uganda, most large customers maintain stand-by diesel generators.5 In Guinea, between 1983-1992 the private sector installed for its own use some 70 MW of power generation, and in 1993 produced some 109 GWH of electricity, almost as much as the national electric utility6

3.4.2 Demand and Supply Pattern

Africa’s state-owned energy sector in the early 1990s typifies some of the worst failings of the African public monopoly model. While deficiencies in the public enterprises model are
hardly unique to Africa, its weak administrative capacity and legacy of political instability exacerbate the problem.

Countries in the region have one state-owned company performing the four separable activities of generation, transmission, distribution and supply. Only a few countries, such asGhana, have separate companies responsible for generation and transmission, and distribution. Private sector participation in the power sector, although not legally
prohibited, is negligible in most countries in the region. Available data on the structures of power sectors in the region and the policies of different governments suggest that the
pattern of vertically integrated monopoly enterprises with little or no autonomy from government to operate in a commercial manner is typical of Africa. For example, the utility SONEL in Cameroon is approximately 93 percent state-owned, with a board of directors appointed by the government’ UEB in Uganda handles generation, transmission and distribution, and also regulates itself; and NEPA in Nigeria is a state monopoly, and government controls all procurements and foreign exchange transactions. Almost all
countries in the region have opted for an electric utility industry that is an arm of government and generally vertically integrated.

Table 8 presents two performance indicators for selected countries in the region: transmission and distribution losses and rate of return on net fixed asset. Countries perform
differently according to these indicators. Uganda has, for instance, transmission and distribution losses of 38 percent and zero rate of return on net fixed asset, while Ghana has
lower transmission and distribution losses (17.8 percent) and a higher rate of return on net fixed asset (6 per cent) than Uganda. Such differences are also observed when countries in
the region are compared with some countries in other regions of the world (Table 8).
Comparing the performance of the power sectors in most of these SSA countries with that of Chile, a developing country which has reformed its power sector, the latter outperforms
most of the former (at least according to the two indicators that we cite in Table 8). (The only exception is South Africa1).

Most of these countries have rates of return on net fixed asset and debt service coverage that are very low. For instance Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Guinea obtained negative returns in the range of minus 6.2 to 16 percent (Gutierrez 1996). On the issue of reliability, data for power systems in Africa are extremely limited; moreover, supply is widely considered to be low in several African countries. Alternatively, electric utility industry reforms in Chile and Argentina, which led to significant increases in plant availability factors, have reduced the number, length and frequency of outages as compared to their previous experiences (Gutierrez 1996).
3.4.3 Electricity Tariffs

Prices of electricity have typically been between 3 and 4 cents per KWH, compared to 8 and 9 cents or higher in developed economies. Prices have thus been insufficient to generate revenue to cover long run marginal cost, taking into account asset depreciation. These problems are further exacerbated by difficulties in billing and billing decision. Traditionally, state-owned enterprises have played a dual role in electric utility services, acting both as providers of services and regulators. The regulatory structure is not transparent, often characterized by undesired distortive effects. Tariffs, for example, are set by cabinet decision or by the line ministry responsible for the power sector. Most countries have had relatively high inflation (i.e., double-digit) during the past twenty years. As a consequence, there has been a definite tendency to use the cabinet’s or the line ministry’s
ability to manipulate electricity prices as part of broader anti-inflationary programmes. This suggest that real electricity prices have actually fallen drastically n those countries in the region with high inflation.

3.5 Water and Waste Management

Africa made some progress during the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (1980-90). The number of persons served in urban and rural areas rose from 110
million in 1980 to 230 million in 1990 (114 million of the later being in urban areas). But this was overshadowed by rapid population growth, resulting in more urban residents being
without adequate water supplies in 1990 that in 1980. Water supply and treatment are also deficient in the region. In 1995, only 60.1 and 40.24 percent of the region’s urban and rural
population respectively had access to safe water, albeit with substantial variation in different countries the range was 18 and 18 percent in Central African Republic and 95 and
100 percent for urban and rural areas respectively in Mauritius. Chart 5 presents a comparative analysis of the percentage of population with access to safe water for Africa
and other regions. Most of the water pipe networks are old and urgently require repair and replacement.

UrbanRural

Africa’s performance in terms of access to sanitation is equally deplorable. In 1995, only 36.6 per cent of the population had access to sanitation compare to 51 per cent in South East Asia, 64.1 percent in Latin America and 96.7 OECD countries (see Table A1).


However, why Mauritius attained 100 per cent access, the comparative figures for Zambia, Congo Republic and Lesotho are 23, 9 and 6 per cent respectively. A few urban water utilities have been restructured (Conakry, Abidjan, Banjul, for instance). They have moved from being government departments operating with little commercial autonomy and no accountability to commercially run public agencies or to fully or partially privatized firms. Experience has shown that delivery of water to the poorest segments of the population becomes both cheaper and more reliable through such reforms but this transition is still in its early stages.

3.5.2 Tariffs

Except in very few countries, water and waste-water sectors rely on governments for a substantial part of funding requirements, especially for capital investment. Charges are thus kept low to convey benefits to households. Table 9 presents the median price of water for several African countries in 1993. The figures compare favourably with the median price of $0.54 in Asia Pacific but low compared to $2.24 in industralized economies. As with other infrastructure sectors, the balance between household and industrial water tariffs tends to fall more heavily on industry. Currently, the price of water does not reflect its scarcity, resulting in wasteful use of water.

3.6. War Affected Countries

Many devastating conflicts have persisted in several African countries ( Ethiopia, Namibia, Uganda, Angola and Mozambique) while pernicious internal struggle continue to plague others (Liberia, Somalia, Sudan and Sierra Leone). The damage inflicted on the social capital and economic potential of these countries have been horrific. The impact of warfare on physical infrastructure has been enormous, exercebating the already precarious situation. While war ravaged, infrastructure stocks including roads and bridges were often the primary targets. Existing infrastructure stocks were often severely depleted. For example, in Uganda, the transport infrastructure suffered greatly from neglect during the troubled period between 1971 and 1986. The international airport at Entebbe was extensively damaged during the conflict with Tanzania in 1979-80. The railway system was not left out as many sectors of tract, apart from the rolling stock, were in serious need of remedial work by 1986. This has been the trend in many war ravaged economies.

.7. Landlocked Countries and Infrastructure

Africa has a considerable number of landlocked countries, incidentally among the poorest countries in the world. The current state of infrastructure provision in these countries is demonstrably poor relative to other African countries, thus constituting impediments to the growth potentials of these economies. Countries like Malawi, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Zambia rely on neigbouring countries to ensure reliable delivery. Transportation problems are compounded for landlocked countries by problems in intermodal transportation. In many cases, railway system differ among countries, schedules are not coordinated, and even in transport by road, goods tend to be delayed by customs control. It takes a typical Ugandan business man, three and half months from the time of shipment departure from Europe until arrival Kampala, three times what will be needed under comparable conditions elsewhere in the world (Donaldson, et. al. 1997).

3.8 Infrastructure and the Environment

Infrastructure development in Africa has largely proceeded with minimal consideration for environmental standards and quality. This has been a major factor in the severe degradation of the environment in the form of industrial pollution. In any case, environmental issues have not been given serious policy considerations in Africa’s development agenda. Environmental awareness has only become perceptible in recent years since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil in June 1992. The concept of sustainable infrastructure development has become relevant in Africa.
Creating a sustainable infrastructure economy based on efficient resource use should be given greater consideration. The environmental problems within urban areas often termed the ‘brown agenda’ is more immediate in Africa. The issues involve include the lack of safe water supply and sanitation, inadequate solid and harzadious waste management, emissions from cars etc. The need arises to introduce environmental sound practices in the management of existing infrastructure in Africa. 

 

Causal Factors in the Inadequate Provision and Delivery of Infrastructure Services in Africa.

A pertinent question is what led to the present unsatisfactory outcomes? In spite of the recognition that each infrastructure sector has its own peculiar problems, there are common weaknesses in most African countries. An extensive inquiry is beyond the scope of this paper, but it suffices to focus on several general reasons affecting infrastructure delivery in Africa.

While political and economic instability, low per capita incomes and often challenging geographic conditions have significantly constrained the development of Africa’s infrastructure, there is abundant evidence that the protracted crisis in the sector is due mainly to past and current policy choices. A major explanatory factor is the prevalence of a regime of price controls that for a long time had little consideration for commercial objectives including cost recovery. Prices amount, on average, to just above a third of supply costs and are half as much as those in industrial countries. The pricing regime is characterized by administered prices that are in many cases appreciably below what is required to operate, maintain and rehabilitate facilities, and consequently entail large efficiency losses and social costs. Too often, controlled prices often imposed on state infrastructure monopolies, prices that are unresponsive to changing market conditions, encourage uneconomic investment of resources targeted at meeting the inefficient and unsustainable growth in the demand for infrastructure services. It is evident that prices that are below economic costs and what is needed to finance infrastructure development and maintenance expenditure in the face of escalating cost conditions in the industry are unlikely to restrain excessive demand and minimize uneconomic investment of resources. With negative or at best low positive financial and social rates of return to infrastructure investment associated with low product prices, it is not surprising that supply shortages persisted in the sector. In response to these shortages, many businesses and households have resorted to self-provision, often at high cost. For example, according to a 1988 study of 179 Nigerian manufacturers, 92 percent of forms surveyed owned electricity generators, and 44 percent had boreholes to assure their own private water supply. In the face of chronically unreliable public services, many also had acquired radio equipment for communications (37 percent of firms) and vehicles to transport personnel (37 percent) and freight (63 percent).
For firms with 50 or more employees that could practice economies of scale, the extra costs of private power generator amounted to some 10 percent of the total machinery and equipment budget; for smaller firms, the burden was as high as 25 percent.7 Substantial self-provision of infrastructure is also the norm for low income consumers, relief from the failure of public providers often comes through the informal sector. The best known examples are private water vendors who use trucks or smaller receptacles to haul water either for distribution at central locations or to individual dwellings. In some places, private vendors served 90 percent of households, and in several places purchases of private water amounted to more than 30 percent of household income.

A fairly robust analysis of incremental reserves that would arise from moderate and achievable increase in financial returns through pricing reforms in Africa’s infrastructure, albeit dated, indicates that the net benefit on resource mobilized would amount to about one fifth and one third of public revenues as shown in Table 11 (Anderson,1989). Furthermore, such reforms apart from being easy to administer would entail negligible ‘deadweight’ or efficiency losses.

Sector Current contribution Potential Contribution as Percentage to Public Revenue of Public Revenue

Overall Incremental Effect

Electricity small or negative 5 – 10 per cent 5 – 10 per cent

Water small or negative 2 – 5 per cent 2 – 5 per cent

Telecoms varies but marginal 5 – 10 per cent 5 – 10 per cent

Roads 10 – 15 per cent 10 – 25 per cent 5 – 10 per cent
Source: Anderson (1987).

Apart from administered prices, several demand and supply-related factors, some of them interwined, have had a profound negative impact on infrastructure development in Africa. As in most other developing countries, governments in the region have assumed responsibility for almost all of these infrastructure services through state owned enterprises created precisely in order to make socially productive investments so as to eliminate impediments to the overall economic development. Almost without exception, the provision of infrastructure in Africa is the exclusive responsibility of the government.
Government own, operate and finance nearly all infrastructure. Thus, the record of success and failure in infrastructure is largely a story of government’s performance. However, these enterprises have established a poor reputation across Africa. Besides trying to provide a particular service to an acceptable quality, they are also expected to pursue a variety of social” goals, including the creation of employment and the subsidization of prices to consumers, ostensibly with the view to providing broad and affordable access to the poorer parts of society. These objectives have in reality imposed a variety of costs on the enterprises as a major employment mechanism has resulted in significantly bloated workforces. Similarly, the prevalence of widespread input and output subsidies creates significant wedges between product prices and costs and in the process confront these enterprises with soft budget constraints and dysfunctional government interference in sector activities and enterprise management functions that encourage gross inefficiency in production, distorted demand patterns and investment choices, induced endemic and expensive delays and cost overruns that encouraged widespread corruption in infrastructure construction and equipment and material purchases and minimized the market responsiveness of the sector to changing demand and supply conditions through excessive regulations. The subsidization of services in reality often allows the more affluent citizens to benefit disproportionately from artificially low prices by providing them with better access to these services. In Lusaka, Zambia, for instance, only 28% of the households in the poorest fifth of the population have access to electricity, compared to 70% in the richest segment. Similarly, it has been estimated that the poorest fifth of the population in Tanzania receives only about 10 per cent of the government subsidy for water, whereas the richest fifth receives about 40 percent. At the same time, these subsidization polices have invariably translated into smaller revenues. Public utilities have thus often found themselves in the difficult financial position of not being able to cover their operating expenses. It has not been possible in many cases to maintain existing facilities adequately, and new investments have consistently had to be postponed. At the same time, most governments have suffered from chronic budget deficits, which have kept them from filling the financial gap. In the end, countries have been left with inadequate infrastructural facilities, while the responsible enterprises, not motivated by commercial objectives, have had little incentive to improve their performance significantly. The Nigerian experience provides considerable support for the distortionary effects and the disincentives associated with excessive political interference in investment decision, pricing policy, plant location, equipment choice and employment structure resulting in higher costs and low earning ability of public infrastructure.

Economic theory justifies an important role for government intervention in efficient and equitable infrastructure use and provision. The arguments rest on several “traditional” notions of market failure, such as: externalities in consumption and production; scale economies; non-excludability; information problems about benefits alleviation. But infrastructure services are diverse and each exhibits these characteristics to varying degrees. Policies often fail when they do not make such distinctions within infrastructure.

There are several reasons why public provision of infrastructure services have not had the desirable impact in Africa.

First, under a public sector dominated regime, investments in infrastructure are often misallocate for various reasons. For example, most of the selected projects are not based on the articulated needs of the society. Hence, there is no informed prioritisation of project selection or implementation. Hence, projects of lowest priority could be preferred to those of topmost priority in terms of the real needs of the society at a given point in time. Another dimension relates to the obsession with new projects. In this regard, there is usually excessive concentration of resources on new structures and little or no allocation to maintenance of infrastructural facilities. Interestingly, however, infrastructure is the easiest prey for speeding cuts during periods of fiscal crisis, while priority is given to consumption-promoting expenditure and projects of short term benefit to the economy. Many on-going infrastructural projects are usually abandoned, only to be revived, if at all, at very exorbitant costs later on. Another major source of disenchantment with this policy stance relates to the quality of services. The delivery of high quality services is usually hampered by technical inefficiency and outright waste.
Inadequate maintenance leads to erratic service supply and distribution, while the low productivity of such facilities results in very high unit operating costs which are often times passed on to the consumers. The useful life of affected facilities are also shortened.
The World Bank (1994b), observed that low-income communities are not offered suitable transport and sanitation options that provide services they value and can afford. Rather, premature investments in capacity especially in water supply, railways, power and irrigation have often absorbed resources that could otherwise have been devoted to maintenance, modernisation or improvements in service quality. More significantly, because infrastructure investments are immobile and serve local markets, excess capacity cannot serve other markets and it remains under-used. And in some cases, large public projects have been overambitious, placing a costly burden on the economy. Also important is the twin problem of waste and inefficiency, that seems to claim a large share of resources that could be used for infrastructural services delivery.

The nature of public decision process with multiple, nebulously defined and often conflicting objectives which place less emphasis on nor provide adequate incentives for efficiency of operations is at the root of this problem. Arising therefrom, investment decisions and tariff policies are often driven primarily by political considerations. Many infrastructure projects in Africa should never have been embarked upon. Decisions to proceed with new projects are sometimes taken at the political level. It is not uncommon for the political element, for reason of prestige or with unjustified claims insist on an overdesigned capacity. Even within the state-owned enterprises, management is often appointed more on the basis of political loyalty than competence, and staffing profiles are more often dictated by political demands rather than felt needs. Costing and pricing decisions are also guided less by economic but more by political considerations. It is against this background that agitation have mounted for private sector involvement in the provision of infrastructure. This, it is hoped, would enhance the preference for economic considerations and demand-driven decisions process. Greater emphasis will be placed upon efficiency with its attendant positive effects on economic growth, enhance standard of living and poverty alleviation. The reduced pressure on government revenue will also facilitate internal and external equilibria and stimulate foreign investment. Overall, permission for private provision of infrastructure will suggest to international and national investors, or development institutions government’s commitment to sound fiscal management, efficiency and substantial role for the private sector (Kerf and Smith,
1996).

Redefining public-private sector interface in the provision of infrastructure services has become an important though controversial policy issue in the search for a more viable infrastructure sector in Africa. This is particularly vital since the efficiency, productivity and reliability of infrastructure provision impacts on the efficiency of domestic production and investment as well as the international competitiveness of the economy. A crucial variable is also the role of foreign capital. Foreign private involvement in Africa’s infrastructure has been quite limited as shown in Table 11 which presents private infrastructure projects word-wide between 1985 and 1995. A cursory examination of the table indicates that only sixty-four projects were recorded for Africa in the ten year period, compared to 223 for East Asia/Pacific and 252 for OECD countries. The project sum at $1.2 billion (less than 1 per cent) is equally deplorable and the reasons are not farfetched.

The region is yet to broaden its investment base beyond energy and mining which remain the prime attractions. Africa has the unenviable reputation of having uncompetitive product markets, thin capital markets, perceived high risks as well as legal, procedural and regulatory impediments. Public enterprises in infrastructure have a lower net worth and are
less attractive to foreign buyers, except perhaps in telecommunications. African governments until recently resist selling to foreigners. Investors are reluctant to take an equity position in infrastructure because governments have established consistent pricing
and other macroeconomic policies which continue to undermine infrastructure. Even in
countries where the sector is open to private participation, there is often the problem of
the inability of regulatory and legal institutions to provide credible commitments to create
opportunities for potential investors to cover their investment costs and make profit
including the risk-adjusted opportunity cost of capital. Macroeconomic and political instability as well as legal restrictions on foreign capital discourage the flow of direct
investment to this sector. Investors are wary of internal political volatility and the uncertainty of obtaining the enforcement of contracts.

References

Ahmed, R., (1996) A Critique of The World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure For
Development, International Monetary and Financial Issues for the 1990s. (Washington, D.
C.: International Food Policy Research Institute).

Alexander, I., and C. Mayer, (1997) Creating Incentives for Private InfrastructureCompanies to Become More Efficient, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1736.

Ariyo, A. and T. A. Jerome (1999), “Privatization In Africa: An Appraisal”, WorldDevelopment, Vol. xx, No.1 (forthcoming)

Biggs, T. (1994) Africa Can Compete! Export Opportunities and Challenges for Garments and Home Products in the U.S. Market. World Bank Discussion Papers. Africa Technical
Department Series 242.

Baumol, W.J. and K.S. Lee (1991). “Contestable Markets, Trade and Development.” The
World Bank Research Observer. Vol. 6 No. 1 pp. 1-17.

Baumol, W. J., J. C. Panzar and R. D. Willig. (1988). Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure. San Diego California: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

Brook, C. and J. Penelope, (1996). The Guinea Water Lease – Five Years On. The World Bank. Public Policy for the Private Sector. Note No. 78  (1997).

Getting the Private Sector Involved in Water – What to Do in the Poorest of Countries. The World Bank. Public Policy for the Private Sector. Note No. 102.

Commander, S and T. Killick (1988) .”Privatization in Developing Countries: A survey of the Issues.” In P. Cook and C. Kirkpatrick (Eds.) Privatization in Less Developed Countries, N.Y. St. Martins Press.

Donaldson, D. J., F. Sader and D. Wagle (1997) Foreign Direct Investment in Infrastructure. The Challenge of Southern and Eastern Africa. Foreign Investment Advisory Service, Occasional Paper 9, The World Bank, Washington D.C.

Eggertsson, T.(1990). Economic Behaviour and Institutions. Cambridge Surveys of Economic Literature. Cambridge.

Europe Bank for Reconstruction and Development (nd). Infrastructure for Transition.

Furubotn, E. and S. Pejovich (1972). “Property Rights and Economic Theory: A Survey of Recent Literature.”Journal of Economic Literature. Vol 10, No.4 December. pp. 1137-1162.

Guislain, P. (1997) The Privatization Challenge – A Strategic, Legal and Institutional Analysis of International Experience. World Bank Regional and Sectoral Studies.

Guislain, P. et al. (1996). Getting Connected – Private Participation in Infrastructure in the Middle East and North Africa. The World Bank Group.

Gutierrez. L. E. (1996) “How do Sub-Saharan African Utilities Compare?” in proceedings of symposium on Power Sector Reform and Efficiency Improvements in Sub-Saharan Africa
ESMAP, Report No. 182/96, June.

Hirshman, A. (1958) Strategies of Economic Development, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

International Telecommunication Union. (1998) African Telecommunication Indicators. ITU, Geneva.

International Telecommunication Union (1998). World Telecommunication Development Report. ITU, Geneva.

International Telecommunication Union (1998). General Trends in Telecommunication Reform. Africa Vol. I&II. ITU Geneva.

Iwayemi, A. (1998), Economic Perspectives on Infrastructure Deficiencies in Nigeria, Mimeo.

Jensen, C. M. and M. H. Meckling (1976). “The Theory of the Firm, Managerial
Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure.” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.
3, pp. 305-60.

Jerome, A. (1997) Public Enterprise Reform in Nigeria: Evidence from the
Telecommunications Industry. Final Report Presented To African Economic Research
Consortium, Nairobi, Kenya.

Jimenez, E. ( 1995) Human and Physical Infrastructure: Public Investment and Pricing
Policies in Developing Countries, Chap. 43 in Behrman, J and T. N. Srinivasan [Eds]
Handbook of Development Economics, Vol 111B, Elsevier.

Turkson J. and I. Rowlands (1998). “Power Sector Reform: Lessons for Sub-Saharan
Africa” Conference Proceedings on Experimenting with Freer Market : Lessons from the
Last Ten Years and Prospects for the Future, International Association for Energy Economics, May 13 – 16 Quebec, Canada. Pp 289 – 98.

Kerf,M. and Smith,W. (1996) Privatising Africa’s Infrastructure: Promise and Challenge. World Bank Technical Paper No.337, African Region Series. The World Bank, Washington,D.C.

Kohli, H, Mody and Michael Walton. (1997) “Making The Next Big Leap: Systemic Reform for Private Infrastructure in East Asia in Choices for Efficient Private Provision of infrastructure in East Asia (eds) The World Bank Washington, D.C.

Lee, K.S. and A. Anas .”Manufacturers’ Responses to Infrastructure Deficiencies in Nigeria: Private Alternatives and Policy Options.” Chapter 11 in Chibber, A. and S. Fischer (eds.) Economic Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa pp. 106-121.

Liebenstein H. (1966). “Allocative efficiency vs. X-efficiency.” American Economic Review. 56, 392-415.

Millward, R. (1988). “Measured Sources of Inefficiency in the Performance of Public and Private Enterprises in LDC.” Ch.6 in P. Cook and C. Kirkpatrick (eds.) Privatization in Less
Developed Countries. N.Y. St. Martins Press.

Mody, A. (1997), Infrastructure Delivery through Central Guidance” in Mody, Assokha
(ed), Infrastructure strategies in East Asian. The untold story. EDI increasing Resources
Series. The World Bank. Washington D.C.

Nellis, J. R. (1988). Public Enterprise in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Bank Discussion Paper
No.1 The World Bank Washington D.C.

Ross, S. (1973). “The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal Problem.” American
Economic Review. Vol 63 pp. 134-139.

Swarrop, V. (1996), “The Public Finance of Infrastructure: Issues and Options”, in Mody
Asokha (ed), Infrastructure Delivery: Private Initiative and the Public Good. EDI
Development Studies The World Bank, Washington D.C.

nited Nations Economic Commission for Africa (1995) Economic and Social Survey for
Africa : !994-1995, ECA Addis Ababa.

an de Walle, N (1989). “Privatization in Developing Countries. A Review of the Issues.”
World Development. Special Issue. Vol. 17 No. 5 pp. 601-615.

orld Bank (1994), World Development Report, Infrastructure for Development. (London
Oxford University Press).

World Bank (1998), World Development Report 1998/99, Knowledge for Development
(London Oxford University Press).

World Bank (1998), World Development Indicators, The World Bank Washington D.C.

October 18, 2007

Trans-African Projects Planned.

Trans-African Development Company (Not-For-Profit) continues on its path towards raising 45 Billion Dollars to rehabilitate the 108,000 KM of trade related roads in Sub-Saharan Africa. As previously disclosed this is a result of a Study done for the World Bank by David Wheeler et al. The cost benefit analysis is quantified very well showing the impact on each country and the individual routes that need attention and prioritized them as well as classified each route as to the current condition they are in. TAD/TADCO is attempting to raise this money from “donor” countries as a way of giving appropriate aid to Africa and at the same time being able to access suitable and marketable natural resources within Africa and creating job growth and opportunity while allowing other NGO and Aid Organizations to effectively get the necessary aid to their targeted markets more efficiently.

Trans-African Development  Strategies  (TADS) has continued on its quest to build MAJOR Infrastructure projects throughout Africa. The most significant is the Planned 4-lane Pan-African Highway that will first run from North to South. The final route from the Mediterranean to the Indian and Atlantic Ocean Convergence has her to be finalized but the Highway project will include a path that will bring Electric Transmission Lines, a Railroad and a Fiber Optic Cable  as well as pipelines for Water and Oil and Gas (both Crude and refined) products.  Working conjointly with TAD/TADCO it is envisioned that the road rehabilitation project will have multiple interconnections to the 4-lane highway (as well as the railroad) allowing for access to sea ports around Africa for global trade opportunities

In keeping with TADS visions it has also noticed the Democratic republic of its interest in building a major Hydro Electric Plant with intentions to connect it to the Grid being formed along the Highway Project.

All TADS projects have independent outside source financing independent of any participation or debt structure to any African Country. No TADS Project is being financed by the African Development Bank (ADB or AfDB)  for undisclosed reasons by TADS. HOWEVER, while there are Private Enterprise Projects they do not have any pre-arranged interconnections to any countries infrastructure which are the subject of future negotiations. Further, the ownership of these projects by TADS is not mandated to be exclusive to TADS and its partners and is subject to each Individual Counties choice in how of if they wish to participate. BOT (aka BOOT)  as well as public listing on diversified international stock exchanges are also possibilities to be discussed with the various Countries involved.

This post has been made to further explain the Differences between TAD/TADCO and TADS as well as to expound on the various projects that are in progress  for both companies throughout Africa.

Craig Eisele

October 15, 2007

Study Seeks to Promote Networking and Good Practices in Infrastructure Development

Study Seeks to Promote Networking and Good Practices in Infrastructure Development

African Development Bank (Tunis)
INTERVIEW
16 September 2007
Posted to the web 16 September 2007
Tunis
The African Development Bank has supported the preparation of more than 15 regional projects as part of its assistance in upgrading infrastructure in Africa, Dr. Ini Urua, NEPAD division manager at the African Development Bank, says in this interview, in which he discusses the Medium to Long Term Strategic Framework for Infrastructure development in Africa (MLTSF).

What is the MLTSF study and how was it conceived?

This is the Medium to Long Term Strategic Framework for infrastructure development on the continent. It seeks to institute a coherent strategic framework to serve as the basis for defining, implementing and monitoring infrastructure development on the continent as well as establishing partnerships that can best promote economic integration and support the development of trade on the continent.

The development of infrastructure on the continent has often been piecemeal in nature, with little or no coordination amongst agencies that support the development of infrastructure on the continent thus leading to a situation of low progress even when reasonable resources are being committed and tangible progress are being recorded. In this regard, the MLTSF will institute a well coordinated response to the development of infrastructure on the continent including measures to mobilize local and foreign private sector in the development of infrastructure on the continent.

The availability of adequate and functional infrastructure is key to accelerating the socio-economic development of any country or region. Africa, in general, lacks the basic infrastructure to facilitate its sustainable development and trade between its countries and with the external world. Given the critical nature of infrastructure for ensuring competitiveness of any sub-region, Africa with fifty three countries of which a large number are tiny in size, that is, in physical and economic terms, and a significant number are landlocked, with poor infrastructure, especially those that connect the countries of the continent and provide access to markets for land locked countries, is unable to compete effectively in the global market place as well as sustain its socio-economic development.

In this regard, the infrastructure development program under NEPAD seeks to facilitate an accelerated development and delivery of regional and continental infrastructure on the continent to foster the integration of the countries of the continent, intra-Africa trade, and trade between Africa and the rest of the world. The Medium to Long Term Strategic Framework for Infrastructure development on the continent, MLTSF, is the second part of the two pronged strategy adopted by AU/NEPAD in infrastructure development. This strategy consisted of the development and institution of a Short Term Action Plan (STAP) to kick start the process that was to be complemented with a Medium to Long Term Strategy (MLTSF) for sustainable infrastructure development on the continent. The STAP formed the foundation for a coherent and structured approach to the development of a regional infrastructure. It placed emphasis on projects and initiatives with a strong facilitation element in order to create an enabling environment for accelerated development and sustenance of infrastructure assets on the continent and, therefore, emphasized policy, regulatory, and institutional measures necessary to ensure the efficiency of existing and planned regional infrastructure assets on the continent.

Representatives of Regional Economic Communities including CEMAC, ECCAS, UMA, EAC, COMESA, SADC, IGAD, ECOWAS, UEMOA, CEN-SAD, the Economic Commission for Africa, NEPAD Secretariat, Members of the Infrastructure Consortium for Africa (ICA), Basin Organisations (RBOs), Regional Sector Organisations (RSOs), and other bilateral and multilateral development partners and agencies have been invited to MLTSF workshops. Why is there so much interest from the southern, eastern, central and western regions of the continent in the first phase of the study?

These organisations are embodiments of the wider African stakeholders in the development of infrastructure on the continent. The need for effective development of regional infrastructure on the continent in a well coordinated manner has been widely accepted. These organisations, as pillars of the integration agenda of the AU, are devoting their time and resources to facilitate the development of regional infrastructure on the continent, hence their interest and devotion to the study.

According to existing documents, the key objective of the study is to define a strategic framework for the continuous and effective development of infrastructure on the African continent based on coherent strategic goals and clear achievable targets. The framework will seek to foster networking and dissemination of good practices in infrastructure development among countries, Regional Economic Communities, sub-regional and continental sector organisations, and infrastructure development partners, as well as establish a common vision among all stakeholders on the development of Africa’s infrastructure, to support social and economic development and trade in the continent. How feasible is this objective, given the complex political set up in some countries, the incapacity for some countries to support funding of infrastructure projects and the imbalance in existing infrastructures among the regions?

The objective is realisable. The MLTSF seeks to set the guidance and steps for achieving this objective. There has been demonstrated political will between countries of the continent to work together and drive the integration agenda of the continent. The perennial problem of country versus sub-region is beginning to fade away and the emergence of the global world is adding impetus for the integration of the various countries and economies of the continent. Furthermore, in developing the MLTSF, institutional and technical capacities in the various infrastructure sub-sectors have to be developed and sustained. The MLTSF will also elaborate on these issues and set a template to guide future activities in this regard.

Sector stakeholder workshops are addressing STAP issues and the infrastructure gaps related to the African continent. At the regional workshop in Addis Ababa in July, experts reviewed the findings and recommendations of the first part of the MLTSF Study to the four subject sectors (water, ICT, energy and transport). Discussions are also underway to identify measures to accelerate implementation of the STAP. For example, in the transport sector, it is recommended that more concrete Action Plans should be prepared for implementation of the Transport Sector Flagship Projects–Road Transport Facilitation, Yamoussoukro Decision –Air transport liberalization. What constraints do you foresee in the implementation?

One of the biggest constraints is the commitment of countries to implement regional integration programmes and the regional integration agenda. Countries cannot give meaningful commitment if they are in conflict or are facing eminent internal or external conflict. In this regard, sustained peace and security are pre-conditions for accelerated development. Over the past few years, excluding two or three hotspots, we have started to witness lasting peace and stability in most of the sub-regions of the continent, thanks to the concerted effort of our leaders to resolve some of these conflicts.

On the implementation of the NEPAD program on infrastructure development, we have noticed that where there has been strong support by countries, programs are implemented quickly and these programs always achieve their stated objectives. A further constraint is the local capacity in countries and regions to support project development, implementation and maintenance of existing assets. Another important constraint is the availability of resources to do early stage project development work. Generally, most people do not fully appreciate the fact that for projects to be brought to a stage of financing and implementation, much ground work has to be done to prepare them. Where the pre-conditions stated earlier are there, including strong commitment from countries, this preparatory stage can be accelerated. Given that early stage project development is the most risky part of any project, most project development agencies are usually very cautious and generally shy away from committing funds for early stage project development activities. This situation becomes exacerbated for projects that involve more than one country – which by its nature has a level of complexity very different from an in-country project. For this reason, the African Development Bank with the support of Canada and Denmark established the NEPAD-Infrastructure Project Preparation Facility Special Fund (NEPAD-IPPF) to bridge this gap and provide the necessary risk capital for early stage project development and packaging. However, there is a need for adequate funding of the NEPAD-IPPF to be able to properly fill in this gap.

On the specific programs highlighted, a key issue that needs to be addressed is the continued commitment of countries of a given region or sub-region to implement key actions emanating from the recommendations of the STAP.

The MLTSF workshops have been organised under the tutelage of the African Union and the NEPAD Initiative with support from the African Development Bank and the Nigeria Technical Cooperation Fund of the Government of Nigeria. Given the melange of political and development institutions in these activities, to what extent will final decisions be directed by political interests of the countries in which projects will be carried out?

The MLTSF and other related activities are undertaken as part of the AU/NEPAD agenda for the integration of the continent. As such, the outputs of the study will be presented for endorsement by the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) and subsequently by the African Union next year. Once this process has been undertaken, I do not foresee complications arising from political interests. For example, with the development of the Short Term Action Plan (STAP), prior to moving into implementation, it was endorsed by the HSGIC and the AU. It formed the basis for soliciting increased partnership and support from all stakeholders after it was formally endorsed and approved by those policy organs. Nonetheless, given that we live in a real and dynamic world, political interests of countries and sub-regions of the continent cannot be completely eclipsed. Often, they are important in informing the prioritisation of key actions to encourage and ensure broad and effective participation of all in the achievement of the goal of integration of the economies and countries of the continent.

The NEPAD that initiated the STAP and its follow up, the MLTSF has been heavily criticised for not having a goal or results. Some development experts and even political leaders have publicly challenged the NEPAD. In a widely publicised interview, Senegalese President, Abdoulaye Wade, said t he New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), set up to commit African leaders to promote democracy and good governance in return for increased Western investment, trade and debt relief, had proved not delivered on its promise. “Expenses adding up to hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on trips, on hotels. But not a single classroom has been built, not a single health centre completed. NEPAD has not done what it was set up for,” Wade said June 12, 2007, during an interview on Africable, a West African TV channel. As Manager of the NEPAD Division of the African Development Bank, which the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) mandated to provide technical assistance and advisory services in support of the implementation of the AU/NEPAD initiative in infrastructure development, how to respond do you this challenge?

The majority of Africans as well as our partners want to see accelerated socio-economic development. For this to happen, there is a need to ensure the availability of reliable, efficient, and sustainable economic and social infrastructure. In this respect, we are all anxious to see acceleration in the implementation of infrastructure projects and programs on the continent.

Given this level of interest, it is proper and useful for interested persons to be critical of the pace of implementation and delivery of projects. Further, it is healthy for all stakeholders to interrogate the different programs and probe various activities and initiatives being put in place to respond to the various challenges of driving the NEPAD agenda. Overall, this is a good thing and demonstrates the interest of all stakeholders on the NEPAD program and its relevance to the socio-economic development of the continent. We welcome criticisms, especially those that come with alternative view points and ideas.

As you are well aware, NEPAD agenda on infrastructure development is about regional infrastructure to bolster the integration of the continent, thus, it is not helpful to expect NEPAD to have country specific interventions. This is what governments of the various countries of the continent are there for. As I had highlighted earlier, regional infrastructure development be it in electricity interconnection, telecommunications broadband systems and interconnections, transboundary water resource management, or in trans-border transport networks (road, rail, maritime, and air transport/aviation) is a very complex activity that transcends all phases of project development, from early stage project development through achievement of financing, delivery of the infrastructure asset, putting in place the right institutional framework to management the infrastructure asset, to highlight a few.

On the preparation of regional infrastructure projects, using the NEPAD-IPPF in conjunction with other facilities, the African Development Bank has supported the preparation of more than fifteen regional projects. Examples are the Benin-Togo Ghana Electricity interconnection which has been financed and is entering the implementation stage, the Kenya-Uganda Oil Pipeline which has secured a strategic investor and has entered the physical implementation stage, the Zambia-Tanzania-Kenya Electricity Inter-connection which is in the final stages of achieving financing for physical implementation, the East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy) project, which despite additional complexity of encompassing more than twenty countries is about to achieve financial closure. Other projects whose preparation is supported by the NEPAD-IPPF include the Gambia River Basin Organization (OMVG) Power Transmission Project, Botswana-Zambia (Kazanlunga) Bridge project , the Senegal-Gambia Bridge, the Senegal-Mauritania (Rosso) Bridge, Cross Border Electrification project in Central Africa, the Kenya-Ethiopia Electricity Inter-connection project, Ghana-Burkina Faso Electricity Inter-connection project, SATA Telecommunications back-haul project, just to name a few. We have in the pipeline more than fifty regional infrastructure projects that require funding for their preparation prior to being packaged for financing and implementation.

On the financing of physical projects, I am pleased to note that through the STAP, a significant number of regional infrastructure projects have been successfully brought to financial closure and entered the implementation stage. The African development Bank has contributed significantly to this success. Over the period 2002-2006, the ADB financed thirty-three (33) projects/programs consisting of eighteen (18) physical projects, including one private sector project, twelve (12) studies, and three (3) capacity building project for a total Bank Group financing of more than one billion dollars, and mobilized about US$1.6 billion in co-financing of some of these projects.

A number of these projects are at an advanced stage of implementation and some have been completed. Examples of the success stories include the Mozambique-South Africa Gas Pipeline project which has been completed and entered into service, the Morocco–Algeria-Spain Electricity Interconnection project and the West Africa Gas Pipeline project.

Other Development Partners such as the World Bank, the European Union, France, BADEA and the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) have also financed STAP projects. Between 2002-2006, the World Bank approved, in credit, equity and guarantees, a total of about US$1 billion for STAP projects. During that period, financing of regional infrastructure projects by the ADB and other developing partners stood at approximately US$3.6billion representing about 45% of the original total estimated cost of the STAP.

Notwithstanding these, it is important to put into perspective the nature of infrastructure development. Infrastructure, no matter how small in nature cannot be put in place in a flash. Typically, one needs a gestation time of 3-5 years before seeing the actual results. For regional countries, especially those involving more than two countries and where participating countries do not have the same level of commitment, the frame can be much larger. As such, I am optimistic that in the next few years, these projects which have achieved financing will begin to yield the right fruits for all to see.

You have served the African Development Bank for 10 years in different capacities. As an engineer by profession, how do you assess Bank’s contribution to the development of infrastructure on the continent?

The African Development Bank has always been at the fore front of infrastructure development on the continent both at the national and regional level. Given limitations on concessional financing window of the Bank, the Bank has done well in supporting the design, development and implementation of key infrastructure projects. Very often development institutions that support the development and delivery of infrastructure are usually faced with the issue of implementation capacity at the country level. This is sometimes as a result of the commitment of recipient countries to the project and sometimes due to acute shortage of local personnel. Incorporation of capacity building elements in project design is often used to ameliorate this. Nevertheless, the commitment of countries and agencies to the active building and retention of technical capacity is important and should never be relegated in the hierarchy of priorities. With continued sound macro-economic management in our countries coupled with sustenance of peace and security, I foresee in the long term a reversal of this capacity deficit and drain.

This interview was prepared and conducted by Emmanuel Ngwainmbi, NEPAD, Regional Integration and Trade Department, African Development Bank.

October 9, 2007

Trans-African Development Strategies to Open Office in Egypt.

Trans African Development Strategies is pleased to announce that it will be opening a satellite office in Nasser City, Cairo, Egypt in February 2008.

Given the location’s significance in the overall strategy for Infrastructure plans throughout Africa and the easy of transportation in and out of Egypt it is also under serious consideration as the Headquarters for African Operations in the future.

While this office will be opened before February 2008 the Official grand Opening of this office will be held in February.

The Cairo Office will supplement planned or existing offices in Paris, London, New York, Washington D.C., and Brussels. Another office is envisioned for somewhere in the Middle East and is being discussed at this time.
Craig Eisele

October 6, 2007

TADCO/TAD vs TADS… clearing up confusion.

    TADS is for the “Trans-African Development Strategies” Company which is a FOR-PROFIT Company that acts as a Strategic Planner and New Business Development adviser. It will be used to interface with Governments and Businesses and Investors primarily for Projects in Africa.

TADCO or TAD is for the “Trans-Africa Development Company”  which is the NOT-FOR-PROFIT Organization  used for the operations of acquiring funds  and distributing those funds to build Infrastructure throughout the African Continent focusing on NO Cost to any African Country, Government, Business, NGO or any other entity.

I apologise for any confusion.

Craig Eisele

October 1, 2007

Craig Eisele Creates Trans-African Development Strategies, Inc.

Craig Eisele Creates:

Trans-African Development Strategies, Inc.
 

            Trans-African Development Strategies, Inc or “TADS” is a New “Private” NGO focused on Infrastructure Development in Africa.

            The purpose of TADS is as follows:

1.    To provide Infrastructure development throughout Africa, whereas the Countries of Africa incur NO DEBT.

2.    To rehabilitate the 108,000 km of roads in Sub-Saharan Africa as identified in a study for the World Bank in 2006 (co-authored by David Wheeler) to facilitate development of trade throughout the Continent of Africa.

3.    To establish a modern limited access 4-lane “Highway” extending from the Mediterranean Cost of Africa and ending in South Africa (hopefully Cape Town, and 1 to 2 kilometers wide the full length of approximately 10,000 km.

4.    To encourage investment in the major portions of Infrastructure in the areas of Communications, Transportation and Power along the path of the “highway listed above in Item #3 and itemized below.

5.    To facilitate the development of a Trans-African Railroad

6.    To facilitate the development of a series of Pipelines to include Oil and Gas (refined and crude products) and Transportation of Water resources to areas in need.

7.    To bring a Fiber Optic Cable through the CENTER of Africa allowing Communication, Video and Internet into areas beyond the coastlines of Africa.

8.    To erect an Electric Transmission line from North to South through the Center of Africa.

9.    To develop electric Generation facilities including Hydro, Solar, Wind, Nuclear and Natural Gas along this same route.

10.  10 To assist in the development of Manufacturing Facilities and secondary and tertiary processing facilities for Natural resources to maximize value added services within Africa and to substantially add and foster job creation.

11.  To Assist in the building of Schools and Hospitals along this same pathway.

12.  Assist in the development of large scale commercial farming and ranching operations.

13.  To repeat Items 3 through 12 on at least one possibly 2 East to West Trans Continental Paths in Africa intersecting with the Primary Route of North to South and tying the Continent of Africa together with World Class Facilities.

We are certain that this will allow Africa to not only be self sufficient, but also Increases Wages to alleviate Poverty, reduce human suffering increase health care availability, and foster educational benefits throughout Africa and allow other NGO’s to better server those people who are in need but are not getting the aid they now desperately need because of the lack of infrastructure.

We also believe that the increase in GNP and GDP will spawn an increase in Tax Revenues and the ability for the countries to be able to access international financing for other projects that each individual country deems appropriate for its population.

TADS expects to raise 100 Billion Dollars of “AID” for the Roads and Highway Projects paid over the next 7 years. With Direct Spending on African Labor and materials to exceed 40 Billion Dollars up to 70 Billion dollars over the 7 year period. A Strategy to obtain these funds has been developed and refined over the last 2 years. While meet with skepticism by many the project is real and attainable despite the nay-sayers and those who would detract form the ultimate goal of a “New and Brighter Future for Africa.”

This estimate does not include anything except the road and highway projects.

TADS has a REAL Vision for Africa and invites anyone wishing to see this vision realized to participate in anyway they feel is appropriate.

While this is the first in a series of Announcements, more information will be provided over the near future.

 

Craig Eisele

Managing Director

Trans African Development Strategies, Inc.

 

September 29, 2007

US Companies losing in Africa

Yes, The headline is correct. Companies in the USA are losing out on major business opportunities in Africa… as are European Companies… and they are losing to China!!

But do not take my word for it, google “China Africa” and you will see for yourself. China is not only winning in Africa they are moving at an ever increasing pace and will dominate African trade and be the primary “investor” in Africa because of the “west’s” inability to effectively coordinate investment strategies.

What do I mean by coordinated investment strategy…. it is not a complicated idea…. it is the working with other companies in a form of horizontal integration to assure the success of the investment.

For example: If the US Company is interested in Mining. then transportation becomes an important issue… yet the availability of efficient roads or rail transport is limited at best.

The coordination becomes searching for partners who wish to build a Trans-African Railroad or who are interested in highway/road development such as Trans-African Development Company.

Telecommunications and Internet is similarly available by numerous companies wishing to justify their investment and looking for “customers” to make their network affordable.

Electricity or other power sources also lend themselves to partnering with such companies.

Simply: Since no “company” has the ability or resources of a COUNTRY… like China…. then Companies interested in investing in Africa MUST find a way to compete NOW…. by affiliating with other Companies, Groups or Organizations that can facilitate their Investment into Africa.

This Article is somewhat self serving… yet it should also help Companies interested in investing in Africa, a Strategy for making such investments.

Self-serving because Trans African Development is looking to rehabilitate the road infrastructure that could make their investment economic model look better and increase the feasibility of such investments. HOWEVER, Trans African Development is NOT looking for investors to rehabilitate the existing road infrastructure in Africa… Yes, we are looking to raise the 50 million Euro to jump start our efforts in Africa… BUT, the real money to rehabilitate MUST come from those Governments of the Industrialized world to rehabilitate the basic road infrastructure in Africa.

DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo) has but 300 miles of PAVED roads… yet it’s land mass is that of ALL of Western Europe. It is not enough to get a concession for the development of Natural resources in DRC… it must be transported to global markets.

Trans African Development is looking for sponsors to implement a strategy of marketing and promotions and PR to raise the funds for this Road rehabilitation that will not only bring African gratitude to those countries (and therefore those countries Companies) but will help hundreds of millions of Africans as well as give these “traditional” Western Companies access to those resources and be able to effectively compete with China for those resources and markets.

Sadly I believe that the “traditional” Western Companies may be too late already as their existing strategists have lacked the ability to think beyond their industry and their standard business models. But I welcome feedback form those “Companies” who wish to find alternatives to their current models and who are willing to seek markets outside the black box of traditional thinking that will only cause them to lose out to China in the long run especially in Africa.

September 25, 2007

African Farmers Forced to “Consume More” of Their Profits Despite Global Price Increase.

A definite case in pint to show and another reason WHY the Trans-African Development Company Project to Rehabilitate the 108,000 km of trade roads in Sub-Saharan Africa for FREE!!! should be implemented.

See article below:

Global Boom – Farmers Must ‘Eat’ More Profits

East African (Nairobi)
ANALYSIS
11 September 2007
Posted to the web 11 September 2007

By Ali Mchumo, John R Kaputin, Supachai Panitchpakdi and Kemal Dervis
Nairobi
It’s the kind of unfair situation that makes poorer nations wonder where the payoff is with free trade: Demand for coffee, tea, cocoa, cotton, and sugar – which is what many such countries have to offer the world – has risen. Prices paid in the supermarket have risen. Yet the share paid to the farmers who grow these basic agricultural commodities has fallen.

Robusta coffee producers in Cote d’Ivoire, for example, received 17.5 per cent of each consumer dollar spent on their product in 1980-88, but only 7.2 per cent in 1999-2003. For coffee growers in Indonesia, the decline was from 19.2 per cent to 7 per cent. Where is the profit accumulating and why isn’t globalisation “working” in this case to reduce poverty in poor or developing nations?

 

Such countries are often lectured on the importance of open markets, but the process isn’t delivering as advertised. For small rural farmers in developing nations, globalisation isn’t raising all boats.

Commodities – and not just the black, sticky, liquid variety – are extremely important for economies in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. More than two billion people make their living from agricultural commodities. That dependence is especially pronounced in the world’s 50 least developed countries, or LDCs. Global economic growth has largely left these nations behind, and it is clear that they need to expand the range of products they can offer the world.

But they also have to start somewhere. Recently, as China has grown into an economic juggernaut and other emerging economies such as India, Brazil and Russia have made impressive progress, demand has jumped for what farmers in developing countries are able to export, and their production has climbed to match: trade volume of rice was up 67.5 per cent between 1993-95 and 2003-05, cotton jumped 48.8 per cent, fresh and chilled vegetables by 69.7 per cent, and cut flowers by 72.9 per cent.

PROFITS FROM THESE Exports might help LDCs and other developing nations lift their citizens out of poverty and diversify their economies, but most of the profits seem to end up elsewhere. The complexities of the “value chain” between crop and supermarket shelf do not work to the advantage of low-income, smallholder farmers.

The process may be global, but it’s not fair. The higher end, where food and natural textiles are “differentiated” – processed in ways that appeal, packaged attractively, branded, and advertised – is where most of the money accumulates. That division of rewards goes on behind the scenes.

Now is the time to act, because commodity booms don’t last for ever. The business is notoriously cyclical, and the best time to jump-start poverty reduction is before the next crash comes. This grace period may continue for another five to 10 years. No one knows. But economic diversification – even if it is only within the agricultural sector – should be accomplished while it is underway for the same reason that a table that stands on four legs is less vulnerable to shocks than a table that stands on two or three. Some 85 developing countries now depend on commodities for more than half their export earnings. For 70 of them, more than half of their exports consist of three or fewer commodities.

PART OF THE CURRENT problem is that developing countries are still learning the globalisation game. During the 1990s, when the international financial mantra was that governments should keep their hands off and let the free market work, many developing-country governments were told to stop negotiating prices and organising transport and marketing for thousands of small farmers.

They did stop, but private substitutes for these services did not appear and thousands of little guys with limited access to market information, transport, and credit were left to fend for themselves against large, sophisticated international buyers. These farmers continue to compete with colleagues in developed countries who receive generous subsidies and whose home markets are protected by high tariffs.

The original industrial revolution was fuelled by surplus income from farming. The poorer regions of today’s world deserve the same chance Western Europe and the United States had a century and a half ago. Something is “off” about the prevailing situation. It must be fixed. Otherwise, the looming scenario offered by a Zambian farmer-trade unionist may become a reality: “If you will not pay us reasonable prices for our exports, we will export ourselves.”

Ali Mchumo is managing director of the Common Fund for Commodities; John R. Kaputin is secretary general of the ACP Group of States, Brussels; Supachai Panitchpakdi is secretary general of Unctad, Geneva; and Kemal Dervis is an administrator at the UNDP

September 10, 2007

Africa Awakening to New World Reality

Continent is Awakening to World Reality
The Monitor (Kampala)

NEWS
10 September 2007
Posted to the web 10 September 2007

By President Yoweri Museveni
This is an edited version of President Yoweri Musevni’s speech he delivered at the 6th EAC Heads of State Summit in Arusha on August 20, 2007.

Your Excellency Mwai Kibaki, President of Kenya, our host Your Excellency Jakaya Kikwete, President of Tanzania, Your Excellency Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda, Your Excellency, Gabriel Ntisezerana, Second Vice President of Burundi Your Excellency Amani Abeid Karume, President of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar, Chairman of Council and Honourable Ministers, Secretary-General, Honourable Speaker and Honourable Members of the East African Legislative Assembly, Your Lordships the Judges, Honourable MPs of National Assembly, Ladies and Gentlemen;

GA_googleFillSlot(“AllAfrica_Other_Inset”);

Africa is the cradle of mankind. All human beings lived only in Africa until about 100,000 years ago. That is when small groups of Homosapiens started leaving Africa and settling in Europe, Asia, the Americas and Australia. Otherwise, for much of the five million years or more, when the human species were evolving, they only lived in Africa.

Africa is also the cradle of civilisation. It is the Black civilisation of Egypt that was the first in the world. Jacob and his sons fled to Egypt in 1876 BC when they faced famine. Jesus, as an infant, was taken to Egypt by Joseph and Mary to hide him when Herod was looking for him to kill him. The followers of the young Muslim religion fled to Ethiopia for protection when they were being persecuted in their Arabia. This was in 640 AD.

Yet, this Africa, especially in the last 500 years, has bled, been humiliated and lagged behind other continents. While it is in order to blame other peoples for our misfortunes, it has been, primarily, the mistakes of ourselves and our ancestors that have accounted for this.

In my dialect, we say: “owayiita tachurirwa” – (people do not mourn the one that has committed suicide). African leaders, past and present (chiefs, politicians, etc.), are responsible, primarily, for the misfortunes of Africa. When the Europeans were taking slaves, it was possible for the Africans, under their chiefs, to unite and defeat them. They did not. When the Europeans were colonising Africa, it was possible to unite and defeat the invaders at various points if only the chiefs had the wisdom to unite and act together. Except for Ethiopia, our ancestors did not unite. Those who resisted did so in isolated efforts and were defeated.

The whole of Africa was colonised. Fortunately, but also as a consequence of our strong culture, we survived. We did not perish like the Red Indians, the Aztecs or the Aborigines of Australia. Yet, after independence, our leaders failed to move strategically in order to immunise Africa against future re-colonisation, marginalisation or even extermination of her peoples. We insure individuals, companies, buildings, but do not insure the collective future of the African peoples.

Except for the late Mwalimu Nyerere and Sheikh Amani Abeid Karume, who united Zanzibar and Tanganyika to create Tanzania, in the rest of Africa, leaders were content to go on managing Africa in the political units defined by colonial borders. Unfortunately, these balkanised political units, for reasons we identified in the Nairobi Summit of August 2004, have not been able to give the African the development and strategic security he needs and deserves.

As East Africa was approaching independence, the late Nyerere proposed that the East African colonies unite soon after independence. This effort was frustrated by some quarters in East Africa. Ever-since my youth, I have been a supporter of the formation of the Federation of East Africa. That is why I became a strong follower of Mwalimu Nyerere.

When the National Resistance Movement (NRM) was formed, we adopted the integration of East Africa as one of our “Ten-Points Programme”. When we had a chance to head the government of Uganda, we, immediately, contacted the other leaders of East Africa on this point. We also contacted other leaders beyond East Africa. It is, therefore, not correct to say that this is a new effort.

I salute President Kibaki and retired President Benjamin Mkapa because, when we met in our retreat of 2004 in Nairobi, we agreed to fast-track the process of integration. I salute President Kikwete because he agreed to continue the activities of fast-tracking when he succeeded President Mkapa. I also salute retired Presidents Hassan Mwinyi and Daniel arap Moi for working with us to revive the EAC.

As the primary element in the process, we decided to consult the East Africans. The process was completed recently in the three original Partner States (Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya) that constituted the EAC before the joining of Rwanda and Burundi. The reports show overwhelming support for the East African Federation. The figures for the level of support are there in the reports. In the case of Kenya and Uganda there is also overwhelming support for fast-tracking as per the time-table of the Wako Committee. There was less support for that fast-tracking in Tanzania. There were also some questions regarding land, employment security, natural resources such as petroleum, etc.

In Uganda, some of those opposing East African integration, cited the fact that Uganda, recently, discovered oil and gas. They say: “we are now going to be rich. We should not welcome the others to share in our riches”!! This is wrong reasoning. The most important point about integration is not natural resources; but the human resource. Compare the performance of Saudi Arabia, oil rich, with Japan, without oil, without any minerals and, even, without significant agricultural land.

The 125 million people of Japan are much wealthier than the Saudis in terms of productivity and material satisfaction. The growing power of China is on account of the size of their population. A developed human resource means two things: greater consumption and greater productivity. These two are the primary stimuli for wealth creation.

Therefore, it is easy to explain to the Ugandans that their petroleum, important as it may be in terms of quick cash, is not as important as the 120 million consumers, producers that are the strategic resource of East Africa. The natural resources are dormant without the human resource. We have, finally, begun to do what our ancestors should have done many centuries ago, the omission of which led to all the catastrophes in Africa: slave trade, colonialism, neo-colonialism and marginalisation.

We are continuing from where the late Mwalimu Nyerere and Karume left the process in 1964, when they formed the Union of Tanzania. The mandate the East Africans have just given to their leaders, is historic. It reminds me of what happened with the American colonies of Britain in 1775/1776 and soon after.

Even for the thirteen original colonies to agree to form the nucleus of the USA, it was not easy (because there were some who were opposed to the federation).

Your Excellencies, you all now can see the wisdom of those who worked for the unity of those colonies. We are now all worshipping the USA instead of worshipping God. The Latin American Spanish colonies, which after independence, acted differently, are now far behind the USA in all aspects of human endeavour. Europe, which was the epitome of fragmentation, war, bigotry, etc., is also waking up.

They are, actually, working towards a United States of Europe. The former Prime Minister of Belgium, Guy Verhofstadt, in January 2006, in Washington, had this to say: “My personal view is that none of these options are the right way to go. Instead, I’m advocating a fifth avenue.

I’m convinced that Europe can learn a great deal from the United States and from your country’s response to key economic developments. The United States saw that closer cooperation was the only viable option, to face huge economic challenges such as the stock market crash of 1929. That is why I too am convinced that the challenges of today, at this pivotal moment, leave Europe with just one real option: the option of a United States of Europe.

Economic growth in China, India and Japan, in total two-and-a-half billion people, will change the world as we know it. This is the natural run of things. Various European countries – including Belgium – have already understood this and are busy implementing appropriate reforms.

Only a few months ago we decided to embark on a fundamental reform of our labour market. By adopting a whole package of measures we intend to get more people to work and also allow them to work longer. To this end, we have once again lowered the tax paid on labour. At the same time we are also investing more in R&D. We’ve slashed red tape and lowered corporate tax. This is why I’m here in the USA: to promote the new incentives we have adopted in a bid to make investing in Belgium highly attractive1″.

Imagine, Belgium, whose GDP of $342.8 billion (ppp), is about 2.4 times that of East Africa ($143.4 billion by ppp), is craving for a United States of Europe in order to survive.

The young country of USA, formed by the European colonialists in America, not only has she gone far ahead of the Spanish colonies in Latin America that did not see the wisdom of integration, but the ancient countries of the World, the pioneers of civilisation, are now almost dependencies of the USA.

These are: Egypt, Israel, Greece, Italy (Rome), etc. Only the huge countries of Russia and China, built by Emperors in the past, as well as India and Brazil, built by different colonial powers, will have the capacity to contend with the USA.

Other countries with such potential are Indonesia and even Congo-Kinshasa if she was well organised. Even in Africa there is awakening. Some leaders are talking of a United States of Africa. Do not under-estimate this view.

Consequently, today’s Summit has made the following decisions:

National Consultations on Fast Tracking the process towards the establishment of a Political Federation:

Recalling its decision during the 5th Extraordinary Summit meeting held in Kampala on 18th June 2007 that an Extraordinary Summit meeting be convened in August 2007 to consider the Reports of the national consultations on fast tracking the process towards the East African Political Federation;

Appreciated the excellent work done by the National Consultative Committees of Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya in producing the Reports containing the views of nationals on the process. Having Considered the Reports of the National Consultative Committees:

Noted with appreciation the overwhelming support of East Africans in the Partner States of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda for the establishment of a Political Federation;

Further noted the need to mobilise and deepen sensitisation on political integration, stimulate greater political will to promote deeper economic integration and to lock-in gains achieved from economic cooperation;

Noted that Rwanda and Burundi shall commence, at the earliest, a consultation process on the establishment of a Political Federation;

Noted further that the Republic of Rwanda and the Republic of Burundi shall speed up the process of integrating fully in the EAC Customs Union;

Decided that there is need to move expeditiously towards establishing a Common Market and a Monetary Union by 2012 as the EAC moves on to the Political Federation;

lFurther directed that the Secretariat first explores the possibility of achieving the threshold of the Customs Union sooner; and second, develops a strategic framework to fast track the establishment of the Common Market and the Monetary Union for the consideration by the Council and the next Summit;

Called upon the Secretariat to urgently formulate an East African Community Industrial and Investment Strategy supported by an effective institutional decision-making framework with a view to promoting equitable industrial development in East Africa.

The process is now launched. We need to ensure that it is irreversible. I am most excited. All the options are leading to progress and not to stagnation that has characterised the last 50 years of Africa’s independence.

Given the results of the consultations, several options have come up in the private consultations before today’s Summit. One option suggested was to appoint a Constitutional Commission so as to design a draft that would show how East Africa should be governed under a political union and also answer, by providing appropriate mechanisms, questions raised by the East Africans; the other option is to provide a double-track process by encouraging those who are ready to go ahead with the political integration while we continue with other elements of economic integration; however, after lengthy consultations, we resolved to go with what has been stated above.

This is, mainly, for two reasons. First of all, in the three states where consultations were carried out (Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya) there was overwhelming support for the Federation.

The only deviation on the part of Tanzania was on the speed, mainly, because of their unique situation which President Kikwete explained to us. There are also the new member states of Rwanda and Burundi. They have not done the consultations. It is unavoidable that they do so.

However, as you can see the results of the consultations have created an unprecedented opportunity that never existed before. Even in 1963, when our leaders were talking about the East African Federation, they did not go this far. It is most gratifying to have come this far. Let us keep it up.

I thank you.

The author is the President of the Republic of Uganda

August 27, 2007

African Development Bank’s (AFDB) Donald Kaberuka: Africa’s unique window of opportunity




African Banker
June 2008 edition

Donald Kaberuka: Africa’s unique window of opportunity


Africa is poised for an exciting new era in its economic and social transformation. In this interview with African Banker editor, Anver Versi, African Development Bank President, Donald Kaberuka explains how the Bank has taken the leadership role in driving African economies forward.


African banker: Why is the AfDB holding its annual meeting in Shanghai?

KABERUKA : The Bank responded favourably to an invitation from the Chinese government to hold its Annual Assembly in Shanghai. China has been a nonregional member of the Bank Group since the opening up of the Bank’s capital to non-regional countries. This will be the second time that the Bank goes outside the region to hold its Annual Meeting. We were in Valencia, Spain, in 2001. The theme of the Shanghai Meeting is ‘Asia and Africa: Partners in Development’; it is therefore quite appropriate that we are able to have this discussion in China. As you know, we in Africa are very keen to see and learn first hand, how China has succeeded in achieving tremendous growth over a fairly short period of time and also to promote trade and investment between Africa and China which is mutually beneficial.

What is the state of Africa’s economies today?

At its best in 30 years. We’re seeing, for the sixth year running, sustained economic growth across Africa at 5.5%. The economies with extractive industries such as oil and gas are leading, but even countries not endowed with such natural resources are growing. After many years of policy gains and reforms, macroeconomic stability is now anchored in most parts of the continent. And the external environment continues to be benign. But let me add a rider. First, not all countries are growing above the rate of the population increase. Second, this rate of growth would have to be sustained for many years for it to have any real impact on poverty. Third, in some regions the situation is fragile and the risk of reversal is always lurking around the corner. What we are doing as an institution is to try to consolidate this progress in order to open up further possibilities for Africa. To the frequently asked question: if the economies are growing, why is there so much poverty? The answer is in two parts. Firstly, as I have just mentioned, we would have to sustain this rate of growth for a long time for us to see the impact on poverty and secondly, if economies were stagnating, it would mean that real per capita incomes would be declining given the increasing demographic pressure and therefore deeper and more widespread poverty.

You are in the midst of a major reform process within the AfDB. You also appear to have taken on the leadership role in driving Africa’s economy forward?

First of all I must underline the following: The AfDB is a very solid financial institution. It has got the highest possible ratings. Its risk bearing capacity is very solid. What we are trying to do is to move to the next stage; build on this bedrock of financial soundness to  increase our operational effectiveness and get results on the ground. That is the purpose of the current reforms: becoming result oriented, focused and selective; having greater decentralisation; aligning strategically with partners and developing excellence in a number of areas such as infrastructure, regional integration, water and sanitation and be a strategic counsellor to our member countries on development. As I mentioned earlier, the internal and external conditions have never been better and we see Africa’s own Bank playing a bigger role as a channel of choice for the international efforts and also able to respond much more effectively to the demands of our countries. This is of course a medium term process but we are on track.

At one point, the World Bank was sitting on almost $10bn of un-disbursed resources for Africa. Why is there such a gap between approvals for projects and their implementation?

It is a challenge for all multilateral institutions including the AfDB. The real measure of our effectiveness should be actual results on the ground. How many children we are able to get into school? How many kilometres of roads have been constructed? How are we doing in increasing energy availability? These are the results which count, not the volume of approvals. This said, problems of absorption capacity are real. There are many factors responsible for the gap between approvals and disbursements. If, for example, a country receives a loan from the Bank and then for some reason a conflict breaks out, the chances are, we will suspend disbursements because our operations cannot proceed and the country will, in all probability, fall into arrears. Sometimes it is due to the delays to ratify the loans on time and fulfil other conditions of effectiveness. With increased decentralisation, greater presence in the field, we’ll be able to steadily close the gap between approvals and disbursements.
We have opened 22 out of 25 offices in different parts of Africa and I am already seeing encouraging results on the ground; where conditions for effectiveness, including ratification are faster. There are a number of things we also need to do internally here, especially in streamlining conditionalities in accordance with the “Paris Delegation” on Harmonisation and Development effectiveness.

Does this call for greater harmonisation of efforts?

It calls for greater harmonisation among partners and better dialogue with member countries, better understanding of the countries’ priorities, their institutions, capacity issues so that we can provide a kind of response appropriate to each country’s concerns. That is why field presence is critical.

You are undertaking major reforms to bring about precisely what you’ve talked about, that is. Streamlining operations. But you also work with many bilateral and multilateral partners. Do you see a movement on their part to streamline their operations as well?

We have all signed up to the “Paris Delegation” on Harmonisation and Development effectiveness. The real challenge is implementation. Progress is being made but is far too slow. Over the last 30 years, the international aid architecture has changed considerably with the number and nature of development agencies vastly increasing – multilateral, bilateral agencies, benevolent foundations such as the Bill Gates Foundation as well as the so called “vertical funds” like the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS. The risk of fragmentation, stretching and overloading national capacities is high, hence the need for greater harmonisation of efforts. Progress has been made but we need to move faster.

That leads us naturally to the next question. Despite the massive fanfare and the generous pledges made to African countries at Gleneagles, the level of aid has actually contracted. How can this be explained?

It is true that “core” ODA levels, that is, excluding debt relief and humanitarian operations, have actually declined. That is a fact. While we are aware of the budget constraints and limitations, which are real, it is critical that commitments made are kept.
The political will and momentum mobilised at the Millennium Summit, Gleneagles, must not be lost. Debt cancellation for many eligible countries was a good beginning and has already been realised. As for the next engagement which was to double aid to Africa and improve its effectiveness, all I can say is that it is work in progress. Both we and the World Bank are currently in dialogue with our partners on the future replenishment of our concessional windows which are principal instruments for transferring soft loans and grants to low income countries. We are only a few years to the MDG target and that “big push” is as urgent as ever. Beyond the declining aid levels, we are also disappointed by the slow progress on trade negotiations. We are not underestimating the challenges of an ambitious round such as Doha, but the prize is within reach if the political will is there. Africa, like Asia before, will prosper only by effective participation in world trade. That can happen on two conditions. First, that we have to have a fair international trade regime which frontloads the interests of low income countries. That is why it is called a “Development Round”.
The second condition is that we are able to remove the bottlenecks on the supply side and build our trading capabilities. I am referring to the quality of infrastructure, transport, communications, energy and expanding the trading space within Africa by more effective regional integration. I feel that the window of opportunity which exists today is unique. It is the first time there is such a large global consensus on what needs to be done. In the overarching agenda to fight poverty, it is critical that despite political constraints and other realities, this Multilateral Trade Round negotiations should not be allowed to fail.

How critical, in your opinion, is leadership and governance in accelerating growth in Africa?

Economic growth is all about investment and that requires confidence and stability. Good leadership, sound institutions are essential preconditions for economic growth, as clearly articulated in NEPAD. Today, much of Africa is at peace and under democratic rule, institutions are strengthening, leaders are regularly elected via competitive elections; this has gone a long way to create an era of stability and confidence which is a major contributor to the current positive economic growth.

Africa’s fortunes are still largely tied to the global demand for its raw commodities. Can Africa wean itself away from this pattern of exchange?

You are right to note the problem of dependence on primary commodities. It is true that the current bullish conditions in the global economy and the increase in Asian imports of minerals, oil and other soft commodities has indeed given a boost to some of our economies. Two things are important here. We should use this window, the terms of trade gains, for greater diversification and moving up the value chain. But we will do so if the Doha trade negotiations succeed in dealing with issues such as tariff escalation. We should also seize the opportunity to invest in infrastructure, skills and capacity so that we gradually become less reliant on raw commodities. There is encouraging progress in some countries where services such as finance and IT are fast growing, bypassing commodities. This is what the African Development Bank is trying to encourage and promote.

What is the Bank’s relationship with the private sector?

The AfDB has a private sector window which supports our countries with different instruments: direct lending, guarantees, lines of credit to local finance institutions, promotion of local currency lending and public private sector partnerships etc. We have almost doubled our private sector operations this year, and I expect this trend to continue. We are gearing ourselves to that by increasing our internal capacity to understand and manage risk. The private sector is the future for Africa. That is why the AfDB is also supporting our countries in improving the business climate by reducing the costs of doing business and creating greater confidence.

You do take equity positions?

We are investing in a number of equity funds and the experience so far is encouraging. We are also participating in the Pan-African Infrastructure Fund.

Is the investment commercially-oriented?

We have dual objectives; to get a good return on our investment and to promote development. Our objective is to help the funds and business grow, and our exit strategy is in the region of under 10 years.

How far should privatisation of the public sector go in your opinion? Can development and profits go hand in hand?

Let me rephrase your question. What is the right balance between the state and the private sector? It is no longer the state on one side and the private sector on the other. It is more a partnership between the two. In the first 30 years of Africa’s post-independent period, the public sector became very dominant; the pendulum swung too far. This caused large fiscal imbalances and efficiency losses. Making progress on privatisation is still important but the right balance varies from country to country and therefore it benefits of greater efficiency, reduced fiscal imbalances, are beneficial and the negative impacts temporary. In a number of countries there have been transactional difficulties especially in the aviation and utilities domain such as electricity and water. These are complex transactions requiring careful attention; but the principles remain the same. This said, I think the greatest challenge in Africa is the promotion of the private sector. In some countries, the sector is young and nascent and has to be nurtured. This requires not only the right business environment, but sometimes transitional direct supportive measures.

With the opening up of the 25 field offices as you mentioned, the ADB appears to be firmly on course to decentralisation. How much central authority are you prepared to relinquish?

We are moving away from a rigid centralised system to an agile, responsive one. We aim at tailoring and customising our field presence, depending on the challenges we face on the ground. Countries are different. We are decentralising while maintaining accountability and strong fiduciary controls. Decentralisation resolves some issues but also creates other problems. We are addressing them as we gather experience. But I have no doubt it is the way to go. This is not true just for the AfDB, it is also the same for other similar organisations. The action is in the field. But I once again emphasise the importance of strong fiduciary controls, accountability and seamless links between the field and headquarters.

Are you happy with the level of capacity you have at the moment?

It is an optimisation issue. The demands on the Bank are always increasing as Africa’s expectations on the institution grow. We are aware that we will never have all the financial and human resources we need, no organisation ever does. This is why it is important to be focused, to be selective, to optimise all the resources you have. We are, at this time, engaged in an exercise to increase our staff capacity both in Tunis and in the field offices and we are working assiduously to mobilise additional resources.

How can you encourage and assist national financial institutions to mobilise domestic savings for investment?

By promoting local capital markets and strengthening appropriate local financial institutions, consolidating reforms in the Bank and non-bank financial sectors as well as developing appropriate instruments for each country, depending upon the degree of financial depth.

When you were growing up, did you see yourself as a banker?  What subjects interested you the most while at school?

Like all young boys I wanted to be a pilot! Now, I am a pilot, not of an aeroplane but of Africa’s premier development institution! This said, Africa has always been a passion for me from a very young age and I am glad to be contributing in a modest way in the position I occupy today.

Who, in your opinion, past or present, do you admire the most?

[laughs]. Madiba, Nelson Mandela, the icon of modern day Africa.

What do you wish to achieve before the end of your tenure at the Bank?

I have a job to do here and I am determined to get it done. As for the legacy, I will leave that to historians. This said, I would like, at the end of my tenure, to have consolidated the strong financial position of the Bank and a more focused, effective institution, a channel of choice of support to Africa that is truly Africa’s Premier Development Bank. I would like to see Africa at peace with itself, expanding and diversifying economically, making faster progress at regional integration, moving up the value chain, and taking its rightful place in the world trade and investment flows. It’s a challenging agenda to which I would like to make my modest contribution during my tenure at the AfDB.

What do you do in you do in your spare time?

I play squash on and off, but less and less these days because of the demands on my time; and I listen to classical music.



Source: http://www.africasia.com/africanbanker/afbnk.php?ID=1320

August 18, 2007

Call to the West to STOP Controlling African Development… or Another Reason Why China is Winning in Africa


Environment, development and Africa

Special CFACT feature article published in the magazine of the European People’s Party



The following article was recently published in the special “Energy, Environment and Politics” Autumn 2006 edition of “European View,” the magazine of the European People’s Party in Brussels. The full magazine can be read online at http://www.epp.eu/dbimages/pdf/_copy_4..As European nations adjust their internal and external policies regarding energy, the environment, and economic development to accommodate the needs and desires of the new European Union, there is a great opportunity to ensure that the new policies will be beneficial to the developing world, and in particular to African nations that were once European colonies.

Clearly, most Africans have not benefited much from the worldwide economic boom that has lifted many in the Pacific Rim and other formerly poor nations out of poverty and into the middle class. Indeed, Africa today has about 13% of the world’s people but accounts for only 2% of world gross domestic product – and the trend is downward, not upward. Reversing this trend will be good news for worldwide economic growth and for the environment. By playing a significant role in turning Africa around, Europe could likewise reap significant benefits.

The answer to Africa’s needs, however, is not more handouts, or even aid forgiveness, as was recommended at the June 2005 G-8 summit in Gleneagles. Rather, it is in creating a new class of entrepreneurs from among the poorest Africans and affirming the value of market principles, a reliance on sound science, and a re-commitment to the Judeo-Christian principle that “all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, [among which] are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

This paper will show that, despite Europe’s presumed good intentions, Africans are increasingly uncomfortable with the vestiges of the colonialist mentality, whether it be environmental mandates or restrictions on economic development (sometimes the two are intertwined). These holdover policies and practices are hurting economic growth – and thus the development of indigenous environmental movements – all across Africa.

Unless Europeans undertake a major change in course, there is evidence that Africa may be seduced by new, possibly less scrupulous, trading partners. Fortunately, there is a path that fits in with the stated desires of many Africans — a new approach to development that focuses on people-to-people, rather than government-to-government, relationships. By taking this path, Europe can greatly expand economic and political freedom in many African nations and also regain prestige and respect among African people themselves ? while also realizing significant financial benefits for individual European investors.

Self-Determination for Europe – But Not for Africa?

As Europeans turn toward creating a common approach to major policy issues, the temptation is to be Euro-centric, especially when addressing issues such as energy, economic development, and environmental policy. Meanwhile, African nations today are beset with major obstacles to achieving the kind of political and economic freedom upon which good societies are built. Among these problems are low savings and investment rates, unstable economic and political institutions, limited quantity and quality of infrastructure and human capital, the prevalence of disease, and negative perceptions on the part of international investors.

History shows that, rather than advancing freedom, a prerequisite for truly constructive development, the demands of Western institutions when addressing these issues have typically downplayed the role of the individual and instead pressured (or allowed) governments to institute policies that further limit individual rights. As a result, the West has become to Africa like the overprotective mother who refuses to let her children grow up and then blames them for not exhibiting all the vestiges of maturity. Worse, Western policies have often left Africans enslaved once again by locally grown dictators (of the sort that first sold their brothers and sisters into slavery).

A major reason, according to economist William Easterly, for the failure of Africa to prosper has been that planners at the World Bank, the United Nations, and other Western institutions of power have never motivated people on the ground to carry out the good intentions formulated in their “marvelous plans.” Easterly’s insights belie the premise, laid down by Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, that “the expansion of freedom is … both the primary end and the principal means of development.”

Indeed, many Africans today recognize that the West’s good intentions have had negative results. They see the root cause of these misfires in the failure, both yesterday and today, of the West to listen to the voice of freedom-seeking Africans. Instead, the West has sought to impose its own priorities upon Africa.

Afonso Dhalakama, president of Centrist Democrat International Africa, notes that most of the economic development in sub-Saharan Africa during the colonial period focused on meeting the needs of colonial powers. In the push toward independence that followed World War II, the departing Europeans typically (and blindly) turned over power to communist movements or parties that continued to stifle the cries of most Africans for both political and economic freedom.

Today, there are new threats to Africans’ dreams of freedom, none more daunting than that posed by China, whose president has stated, “Chinese cooperation [with Africa] does not depend on good governance and democracy in African countries.” Dhalakama’s great fear is that Europeans, by insisting that Africans do everything Europe’s way, are opening the door wide for the Chinese to exploit Africa’s resources to fuel China’s development and further frustrate the advance of democracy in Africa.

Dhalakama urged Europeans today to assist Africans in developing political parties that will be responsive to the will and the needs of their own people and to support Africa’s growing economies by undergirding and strengthening national polities. Europe will benefit from providing such assistance, but could lose heavily by failing to strengthen indigenous and free African institutions.

Expressing a similar viewpoint, former Eritrean finance minister Gebreselassie Tesfamichael responded to the June 2005 Live 8 campaign (and the nearby G8 summit in Gleneagles) with these highly charged words:

The fundamental problem in Africa is not lack of resources, but the failure of political leadership. The modern African state is a colonial creation, extractive in its design. Its mission was not to serve the people, but to dominate and exploit them. Despite independence, and despite improvements brought by numerous democratic elections, the nature of that state remains intact.

Tesfamichael also expressed his frustration that the international aid community insisted in imposing its own guidelines for Africa to follow in pursuing development. “We wanted something different. We wanted a partnership rather than a donor-client relationship,” and so Eritrea refused to follow guidelines mandated by the International Monetary Fund. Instead of micro-management from thousands of miles away, Eritrea conducted reforms dictated by the realities on the ground and grew its economy by 7% a year during the period 1992-97.

Cameroonian journalist Jean-Claude Shanda Tonme likewise wondered how Live 8′s supporters had so clearly failed to understand that “Africa’s real problem is the lack of freedom of expression, the usurpation of power, the brutal oppression,” and that none of these problems can be solved with debt relief, food aid, or an invasion of experts.

World energy statistics bear out the perception that Africa’s resources are being exploited today nearly as much as in the colonial era. World Energy Council Deputy Secretary General Jan Murray reported in 2001 that two-thirds of all energy consumption in Africa came from high-polluting and disease-causing appropriate technologies – wood, charcoal, dung, and crop residue – that Europe now disdains. Moreover, Africa’s per capita energy consumption was very low, and most of the commercial energy the continent produces was being consumed elsewhere. In short, little of Africa’s commercial energy was being used to advance freedom on the continent.

Europeans clearly understand the value of energy resources. Andris Piebalgs said in the inaugural issue of European View, “Without reliable, affordable and safe energy, our economy would simply come to a halt. In other words, we depend on energy for our prosperity.” But European policies toward Africa have ignored (or rejected) the potential for building prosperity in Africa based on such a model. Africa has huge reserves of oil and gas and coal and the potential for hydropower and even nuclear power to provide locally usable energy, yet Europe has balked at helping Africans develop these resources.

The West has also taken a peculiarly jejune, yet pharisaic, attitude toward Africa’s manifold health problems. For example, malaria was virtually eradicated in Europe and the United States through the use of the pesticide DDT, but for decades the West has imposed a virtual ban on DDT use for any purpose. Meanwhile, malaria attacks 400 million Africans a year, killing well over a million and leaving countless others debilitated for life.

Semiannual indoor residual spraying of small amounts of DDT is a proven weapon that dramatically reduces the incidence and severity of malaria without harming the environment, but Western financial institutions, in collaboration with environmentalists, have long insisted that Africans rely solely on bed nets and expensive after-infection treatments to fight this killer.

It has taken a worldwide campaign, led by Nobel laureates Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Dr. Norman Borlaug, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, American civil rights pioneer Roy Innis, and others – sparked by African voices – to effectuate a major change in policy in the United States (in May 2006) on the use of DDT to fight malaria. The World Health Organization has also switched sides on DDT, but the battle continues. Many African nations still fear that the World Bank or individual European nations will not renege on past promises to ban agricultural imports from nations using DDT to protect human lives.

Africans are also at odds with the West over agricultural issues that range from protectionist tariffs and farm subsidies (in Africa as well as the West) that leave African farm goods uncompetitive in Western markets, to the angst over biotech foods. Neither the EU nor the U.S. budged an inch at the recent World Trade Organization talks in Geneva, though changes have been discussed for years.

Economist Thomas R. DeGregori has been a major voice supporting green biotechnology as a way to help Africa raise yields and protect plants from disease. DeGregori argues that media-led opposition to the use of green biotechnology in Africa has deep roots in misguided beliefs about science, agriculture, and food production that go back two centuries. Kenyan biotech advocate Florence Wambugu likewise contends that Africa must pursue biotechnology both to feed its growing populations and to solve its environmental problems. Africans, she insists, “must [be allowed to] participate as stakeholders” in biotechnology and other emerging technologies so that they can have some control over their development and use.

Africa desperately needs to increase its food supply: Malnutrition rates are falling worldwide but are rising dramatically in sub-Saharan Africa. Whether biotech is or is not the way to go, actions to suppress agricultural biotechnology in Africa provide yet another example of how non-Africans are making decisions that affect the very survival of Africans.

On yet another front, the highly acclaimed Equator Principles, which require Western financial institutions to meet the social and environmental policies of the World Bank, may well be discouraging much-needed economic development in Africa’s undercapitalized nations. The Chinese, of course, have not adopted these principles – nor have many rogue nations with which they are gaining influence.

As Africa Develops – Is Anybody Listening?

Thanks in part to the almost universal access to cellular telephones and the Internet, Africa is maturing politically and economically, even in countries where oppression is widespread. As Africans, even in remote locations, gain ready access to real-world information (from war news to stock quotes), the old American pop song becomes applicable: “How you gonna keep ?em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paree?” European influence in Africa is thus at a true turning point. Many Africans are tired of 400 years of colonialism and its ongoing vestiges in the post-colonial era, and others are responding to their cries to “let my people go.”

Europe stands to benefit greatly by supporting increased political and economic freedom in African nations. A major reason is that Africans for centuries have been educated in European academic institutions, learned European customs and languages, and interacted daily with European businesses, governments, and non-governmental organizations. There is tremendous untapped potential.

C. K. Prahalad argues that we must stop thinking of the poor as victims or as a burden and start recognizing them as resilient and creative entrepreneurs and value-conscious consumers. Serving the world’s poor will provide wonderful opportunities for innovations that focus on conserving resources through eliminating, reducing, or recycling wastes, because the poor cannot afford to pay for wastage. These innovations can then be transferred to markets in the developed world. Better still, as poor consumers and entrepreneurs gain experience in market mechanisms, they may well be able to transform their societies and economies dramatically in a very short time frame.

Bringing an end to, or even greatly shrinking, African poverty is a daunting proposition. Yet changing the way Europe and the West look at and deal with Africa’s poor requires some major changes in perspective and philosophy – beginning with a re-assessment of the nature of man and of the state.

The American Revolution was largely influenced by the writings of John Locke, whose political philosophy promoted individual rights and limited constitutional government as the basis of freedom and economic security. Building on Locke’s vision, Thomas Jefferson penned these immortal words found in the U.S. Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ? that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Nearly a century later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, believing Locke’s worldview would divide humanity by focusing on self-interest, individual rights, and property, set forth his own “Social Contract” in which the “General Will” of the people is embodied in the power of the state. Thus the state can both create and distribute rights to whom it pleases – and is in effect the ultimate authority. In defending the American vision, James Madison agreed that the hearts of men are wicked but believed that in a free society the evil machinations of various factions would be canceled out through the political process, leaving the good to triumph.

Recently, the ideals of Locke, Jefferson, and Madison were incorporated into the Cornwall Declaration on Environmental Stewardship, an eloquent document which encapsulates a Judeo-Christian view of environment and development, but whose principles are applicable well beyond the faith community. Cornwall states that many people mistakenly view humans as principally consumers and polluters rather than as producers and stewards and thus ignore the human potential to add to the Earth’s abundance. Thus, many oppose economic progress in the name of environmental stewardship, failing to recognize the simple truth that the more prosperous a society, the more likely it is to make environmental protection a high priority.

Cornwall further asserts that free and prosperous (and informed) citizens have the potential for very beneficial management of the Earth’s resources, and that nature does not fully “know best.” This recognition, after all, forms the very basis for holding any faith in beneficial environmental stewardship. Locke and his modern-day disciple, Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, would hold that the private ownership of property is a key motivator for sound stewardship of land, water, and other resources. Common sense and empirical data both show that people take better care of property when they have an ownership interest.

Finally, Cornwall argues that some environmental concerns are without foundation or greatly exaggerated, while other critical environmental issues are ignored or downplayed. A major reason for this (for example, eschewing DDT’s benefits in combating malaria) is the failure – whether conscious or unconscious – to consider the environmental impacts on specific human populations in setting environmental policies.

Thus, based upon Cornwall’s prudent perspectives, perhaps the most vital thing that Westerners can do today in Africa is to humbly accept Prahalad’s observation that the poor are “resilient and creative entrepreneurs and value-conscious consumers” from whom we can learn much and gain much. Westerners need to stop dictating and start listening to the hopes and aspirations and plans of these thoughtful and energetic human beings who yearn for freedom to build out their own visions for tomorrow. This means Europe and the West must move from a Rousseauian to a Lockean mindset – one that seeks to address the needs of individuals rather than one that pursues political policies and agendas to impose on them.

The stakes are high. African nations could simply allow the Chinese and other like-minded entrepreneurial neo-colonialist states access to its markets, generating economic development but without any commitment to expanding human freedom or protecting the environment. One thing is certain: Africa will not long remain under the heavy thumb of their European “parents” who deny them the freedom to make their own decisions about things that matter.

A New Approach to African Development

Europeans might take a serious look at the new Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), a creation of the U.S. State Department. Under this new program, the U.S. has set guidelines for aid eligibility that require nations to meet standards for ruling justly, investing in individual people, and encouraging economic and political freedom (including freedom for women). The rules require nationwide stakeholder meetings to identify in-country barriers to development, ensure the participation of civil society, and make public the intended uses for aid dollars. These reforms should foster greater accountability for those in charge of aid-funded projects.

In Madagascar, the MCC approved a US$110 million grant to help formalize that nation’s land tenure system, modernize its land registry, expand land title services to rural citizens, improve the national banking system, and establish a body that identifies investment opportunities for rural citizens to reach markets and trains farmers and other entrepreneurs in production, management, and marketing techniques.

These are all institutional reforms that address afore-stated problems of low savings and investment rates, unstable economic and political institutions, and the limited quantity and quality of infrastructure and human capital. If implemented, these reforms, which require accountability at every step in the process, should increase the confidence of individual investors that their profits will not be stolen and thus expedite investment and business development.

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, an international NGO which works in the U.S., Europe, and other nations on issues of environment and development, is also pursuing a program that utilizes Lockean principles in a constructive manner. CFACT is developing a new international development program that is modeled in large part on work done on a very small scale by faith-based and other charitable organizations on the ground in developing nations, and in part on activities reported on by Prahalad and others. The program begins with encouraging people in local communities to devise their own plans for economic growth and environmental protection and then joining with them as partners and advisors to help them achieve success.

This Social Entrepreneurship and Free-Market Environmentalism Demonstration (SEFED) program builds on the time-honored principle that, unless people who live in developing nations take ownership of their economies and their environment, the next fifty years of foreign “assistance” is likely to be no more successful than the last half century’s efforts. SEFED’s initial efforts have confirmed that de Soto was right on the money when he stated …

The cities of the Third World and the former communist countries are teeming with entrepreneurs … The inhabitants of these countries possess talent, enthusiasm, and an astonishing ability to wring a profit out of practically nothing…. Most of the poor already possess the assets they need to make a success of capitalism.

The SEFED program provides an avenue by which Westerners all too accustomed to dealing with the poor from a charitable, paternalistic viewpoint (or worse, from the old opportunistic exploitation viewpoint) can learn to interact with intelligent, motivated, yet still poor, entrepreneurs and community builders as equal partners, supporting projects conceived of and being developed principally by people whose lifestyles have not included the myriad of amenities to which most Westerners are accustomed.

Conclusion: Time for a Change

In sum, all that is really needed for Europe to reverse four centuries of unfruitful mentoring of African economic, political, and societal development is a change of heart and of attitude – and the actions that naturally should follow such a rebirth of vision. People who can plead for species preservation on grounds that even the least impressive (from our viewpoint) species may hold the key to significant benefits for humankind and the planet should be able to see the same potential in every human being.

There is so much to be gained, both personally and economically, from expanding our horizons and partnering with people who previously may have been overlooked (or looked down upon), and Europeans are in a particularly advantageous position to take full advantage of these opportunities. The time has come and is indeed near past when Europeans (and others in the West) can begin to ask themselves, what do Africans really want and how can we work together for mutual benefit to ensure that they get what they truly need?

The alternatives to this approach all forebode trouble. Inaction or continued (hard-headed) paternalism will surely allow unscrupulous developers to enter Africa, further despoil the environment and further frustrate the desire of many Africans for freedom and respect as full partners in economic development and environmental protection. But a new engagement with Africans at the ground level will enable them to make their own economic and environmental decisions – decisions that, given Africa’s long history with Europe and the recognition that all humanity wants a healthier, wealthier future and a cleaner world, could foster real change for the better.

The keys, then, are, first, the humility to listen to the ideas and visions of the poor; and, second, the willingness to visualize and assist in bringing to fruition the economic growth and increased political and social freedom that will help the poor achieve their goals. The rewards from such an approach can be great – both for Africa and for Europe, too.

Special thanks to CFACT senior policy analyst Duggan Flanakin who greatly contributed to this article.

Africa’s NEW Colonial Powers to deal with?? IMF, WTO, EU, AGOA, MDG’s,World Bank and more??

I have been asked this question a number of times. From the IMF, World Bank, WTO  through the African Development being a puppet to these new masters… the questions keep coming in to me.

Of particular relevance to me personally is the IMF position that African Countries already impoverished and debt ridden and facing humanitarian issues are being forced to PAY for their own Road Rehabilitation  eschewing the concept of Grants or other “free” Money to make what could be the most important development project in the history of Africa for decades to come and has been proven that such Road Development work would have exceptional economic and social benefits to the Entire Continent? This quite frankly baffles me and begs a question… Does anyone really want Africa to develop is there to much power in keeping Africa A welfare Continent?

I have looked for opinions that would support these assertions and or disprove them, but what I have found are more questions and an abundance of emotions.

To this end I am opening up this Blog entry for as many of you that wish to contribute to this debate.  As such I will all almost all responses to this question provided they are not “Spam” or intellectually dishonest, or filled with vindictive unproductive utterances.

August 17, 2007

Africa: Infrastructures Are Priority For SADC Regional Integration

Infrastructures Are Priority For SADC Regional Integration

Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique (Maputo)
NEWS
17 August 2007
Posted to the web 17 August 2007
Lusaka
Developing transport, communications, and energy infrastructures is a priority for economic regional integration of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

All heads of state and of government of the SADC member countries agreed on this at the opening session of the organization’s 27th summit in Lusaka on Thursday.

Regional integration is high in the agenda of the summit, along with the crisis in the neighbouring Zimbabwe.

Zambian President Levy Mwanawassa, who started his rotative mandate as the organization’s chairperson, taking over from Lesotho Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili, said that he is very much aware of the challenges and of his responsibility to the organization and to the entire region.

In his inauguration speech as the new SADC chairperson, Mwanawassa said that it is ‘with great sense of humility that I accept this honour and I assume the chairpersonship of SADC and I assume it in the name of the government of Zambia. I am aware of the huge challenges of leading the implementation of the common SADC agenda and the priorities set up in the Regional Indicative Strategic Plan’.

One of this plan’s priorities is to develop infrastructures, which is seen as a basic element for the regional integration.

The plan is focusing on the relief of poverty and equity distribution of wealth among the SADC member countries.

SADC executive secretary Tomas Salomao said that the summit, that is running under the theme ‘Development of Infrastructures in Support of Regional Integration’ stressed the importance of the meeting, supporting the words of the outgoing Mosisili, during a plenary, also attended by former Zambia Presidents Kanneth Kaunda and Frederick Chiluba.

In his speech, Mwanawassa urged all region leaders to work together to meet the commitments taken during the last summit, in Maseru, on flexibilising the regional integration, because ‘ only thus the organization will continue progress in the ways achieved since its creation, with all member countries mobilizing resources for a common end’, he said.

‘We must continue working together next year to improve our capacities , and use regional integration as a way to attain high levels and sustainable socio-economic and levels, which are key elements for the SADC region to increment its influence, both in the African continent and internationally’, said Mwanawassa.

He said that to attain this target, one must necessarily work together and mobilize resources and the capacity for all countries through the creation of a SADC Development Fund, agreed upon during the extraordinary summit in Midrand, in South Africa, in October 2006.

The fund is to cover the infrastructures development programme, that is part of the New Partnership for African Development Programme (NEPAD), and this will stimulate intra and inter-regional communications.

Zambia has already embarked on a number of projects to improve roads, aiming at the development of its communications network with other SADC member countries.

Speaking of the regional integration, Mwanawassa admitted that ‘all SADC members states are, one way or another, committed in trade negotiations at sub-regional, regional and multilateral levels that, most probably, will generate significant results in the future’, and for that end, ‘it is the task of the member states to ensure the instruments of trade agreements may contribute to the promotion of the interests of Africa’, he said.

Among the challenges SADC is facing at the moment are the consolidation of the Free Trade Area, which highly depends on modernization or innovation of production infrastructures, the continuation of some trade barriers between some of the member countries, due to their multiple participation in various programmes in SADC and other African regions’ integration programmes, and also the issue of food security, that affected Southern Africa lately, among others.

Mwanawassa called for the respect for the calendar for a full Free Trade liberalization.

He also called for the setting up of an organization of a full institutional mechanism to flexibilize the processes toward a Customs Union as some of the priorities of his country’s chairpersonship of the organization.

Africa: New SADC Chair to Prioritise Infrastructure

New SADC Chair to Prioritise Infrastructure

BuaNews (Tshwane)
NEWS
16 August 2007
Posted to the web 16 August 2007

By David Masango
Lusaka
The new chairperson of the SADC, President of Zambia Levy Patrick Mwanawasa is to prioritise a number of focus areas during his term, including regional infrastructure development.

He takes over the chairmanship of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) from the Prime Minister of Lesotho Pakalitha Mosisili.

President Mwanawasa, will focus on among others, developing regional infrastructure, the SADC Fund and establishing a Free Trade Area (FTA).

“In order to achieve this goal [of infrastructure development in support of regional integration], road, rail air transport, telecommunications and energy development are going to be the main catalysts of our integration process,” he explained.

In his acceptance speech during the 27th SADC Ordinary Heads of State and Government Summit, which officially kicked off in Zambia Thursday, Mr Mwanawasa said he was aware of the enormous challenges of guiding the overall implementation of the SADC common agenda.

President Mwanawasa said the SADC Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan entails amongst others, strong infrastructure development.

He explained that SADC had registered “remarkable” successes since its inception because all member states mobilised their resources and cooperated closely to shape a common destiny.

“Together we must ensure that all SADC institutions fully exploit existing opportunities and explore new ones in order to promote and accelerate regional integration in a dynamic manner,” he emphasised.

Regarding the SADC Infrastructure Development Fund, Mr Mwanawasa explained that it drew its strength and support from the New Partnership for Africa’s Development initiative.

“We therefore have to focus on those infrastructure programmes and projects that facilitate quick and efficient linkages in our communication systems.

“This requires prioritising the development of the regional trunk road network, strategic air transport facilities and the most effective telecommunication network that will enhance intra-regional travel and communication,” he explained.

The consolidation of the FTA, he said remained elusive partly due to the inherent production structures, which he said had remained by and large unfavourable, and the continued existence of intra-regional trade barriers between member states.

This situation is compounded by the existence of a number of overlapping and sometimes conflicting regional integration programmes in the region and Africa at large.

He praised the work being done by the SADC Joint Ministerial Task Force of Ministers of Trade and Finance to come up with recommendations to move forward, in regional developments and relations with other regions.

He cited the negotiations with the European Union on Economic Partnership Agreements as an example of this.

He promised to work tirelessly with members and other partners, where necessary, during his tenure in office to ensure that SADC finds a solution to those challenges.

“In particular, my priorities will include ensuring the full operationalisation of a Free Trade Area in which SADC members fully implement commitments with respect to the tariff liberalisation schedules as well as addressing the elimination of non-tariff barriers,” he said.

The chairperson also acknowledged the improvement in peace and security in the region and congratulated Lesotho, Madagascar, Tanzania and Zambia for holding successful elections.

“These elections will further entrench the tenets of democracy and good governance in our region,” said Mr Mwanawasa.

Other challenges that the chairperson is faced during his term in office include food security, the environment and natural resources.

He called on member states to implement the Dar-es-Salaam Declaration on Food Security, which entails that governments allocate 10 percent of their national budgets to agriculture and increasing the use of organic fertiliser, amongst others.

The chairperson pointed out that climate change was a threat to food security and development as it amongst others negatively affected food production; caused floods that damaged crop and infrastructure and caused droughts.

Mr Mwanawasa said the abundant natural resources and wildlife found in Africa, if fully exploited, could contribute considerably to the region’s socio-economic well-being.

He also pledged to fight HIV and AIDS, and to improve gender equality.

August 12, 2007

A Cow in Japan Receives US$4 Per Day in Subsidies While the Majority of Africans Live on Less Than US$1 Per Day.

How the West Impoverishes Africa

Mmegi/The Reporter (Gaborone)
NEWS
9 August 2007
Posted to the web 9 August 2007

By Thato Chwaane
Mbabane
Participants at a regional seminar on poverty held in Swaziland are absorbing the cruel facts and figures that show the devastated face of the African continent in its state of underdevelopment. Staff writer, THATO CHWAANE, is following the deliberations and below she captures the highlights of the discussion on ‘trade, development and poverty’.

Everyday 840 million people go hungry and more than two billion suffer from dietary deficiencies, a Southern African Regional Poverty Network (SARPN) official has said.

Presenting a paper on “Trade, Development and Poverty: The Case of Africa,” in Mbabane on Monday, Jack Zulu SARPN programme manager for economic dimensions, said that children and women are the most vulnerable groups.

He said that 12 million children die every year from preventable diseases, when immunisation could save three million of them.

“Each dollar spent on immunisation saves between US$4 and US$5 in preventable direct medical costs later on,” he said.

He added that everyday 8,200 people all over the world die because of HIV/AIDS and 6,000 of these deaths occur in Africa.

He said with pharmaceutical cartels declaring profits of US$517 billion, in 2003 if there was a change in rules that protect patented medicines, millions of people would have a chance to live longer.

Meanwhile, he said expenditure on the military worldwide was more than US$1.5 billion per day in 2001.

Whilst the US military budget for 2003 was increased by US$167 billion for the war in Iraq “reconstruction of Iraq will cost between US$30 billion and US$100 billion,” he said.

He said that if US$1 billion per day in agricultural subsidies in developed countries was re-allocated, world poverty would go down by 75 percent.

Zulu said that a cow in Japan receives US$4 per day in subsidies while the majority of Africans live on less than US$1 per day.

He said rich countries claim that free trade, without local subsidies or protection is the key to escaping poverty, but that when poor countries open up their markets to free trade, foreign firms enjoy huge advantages.

This, he said, means local companies cannot compete favourably.

He said South East Asian countries have grown because of managing their economic development and not by using free trade policies dictated by the IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Zulu said developing countries have a natural comparative advantage in producing agricultural goods but that the current trade system seems designed to undermine that advantage.

“There is a system of trade rules and regulations that allow rich countries and their companies to make lots of profits but prevent poor countries from developing their own economies,” Zulu said.

He said trade done under right conditions, supported by the right quantities and qualities of aid can be a powerful tool for poverty eradication.

August 8, 2007

Can African Development Be Accomplished By Trade??

Development Through Trade

Business Day (Johannesburg)
OPINION
6 August 2007
Posted to the web 6 August 2007

By Nkululeko Khumalo
Johannesburg
HIGH-ranking officials, including US Trade Representative Susan Schwab, and representatives from African countries that are beneficiaries of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa), descended on the Ghanaian capital Accra to attend the Sixth Agoa Forum on July 18-19.

Agoa is a non-reciprocal preferential trade scheme whereby the US offers the 38 eligible countries (including all Southern Africa Customs Union member states) duty and quota-free access to its market. The scheme covers more than 6000 products.

The forum is meant to celebrate Agoa’s achievements and seek to help the beneficiaries maximise existing market access opportunities, and involves Africa’s business community as well as the civil society organisations. While Agoa has had a very positive effect since it came into force in 2001, it is high time African countries started thinking about the future of their trade relationship with the US beyond 2015, when the current arrangement expires.

This is imperative, particularly for Sacu countries that are among the biggest Agoa beneficiaries. Though Sacu is the US’s second largest trading partner in Africa (Nigeria, whose exports are mainly petroleum products, occupies the first spot), there is no contractual agreement to guarantee and extend the market access opportunities they currently enjoy.

Further, the current relationship does not include the fastest growing area of trade, namely trade in services. Nor are there legally binding pacts to regulate important issues in bilateral economic relations, especially investment and intellectual property rights.

The US-Sacu free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations that began in June 2003 aimed to address this situation. Through the FTA, Sacu sought to achieve Agoa-plus liberalisation (by locking in and possibly extending current market access); address non-tariff barriers affecting their US-bound exports; spur regional integration in Sacu; and strengthen relations with the US, possibly as an insurance against potential failure of the Doha Round.

The US, on the other hand, aimed to use the FTA to eliminate barriers to its goods and services exports in the Sacu market, strengthen intellectual rights, build alliances for the WTO negotiations, and level the playing field vis-€-vis the European Union, which benefits from the Trade, Development, and Cooperation Agreement they signed with SA.

However, owing to differences between the parties on a range of issues, including the scope and anticipated depth of commitments, the parties finally decided in April 2006 to abandon the FTA in favour of a less contentious and politically palatable piecemeal approach (which they hope will lead to a fully-fledged FTA in future).

In terms of this plan, Sacu and the US will sign a Trade, Investment and Development Cooperation Agreement (Tidca) that would enable them to consult one another with a view to facilitating two-way trade and investment, conclude mutually beneficial agreements , and work towards reaching an FTA. The parties are reportedly making headway and were expected to sign the Tidca on the margins of the Agoa Sixth Forum.

While the Tidca idea seems workable, there is a danger that it may end up replacing the original ambition to have an FTA instead of being a necessary building block towards it. There are concerns that it might simply provide an excuse for failure to resume negotiations when the US Trade promotion Authority is renewed in future.

To be meaningful, the Tidca should have a clear agenda on how the parties envisage the resumption of actual FTA talks. Sacu countries, in particular, should ask themselves whether they intend to wait for Agoa to expire — in which case they will have less bargaining power — before they consider the FTA or not.

In my view, it would be in Sacu’s interest to actually drive the Tidca process to ensure that they lay a solid foundation for an FTA whose terms are favourable to them. The argument that services and trade related issues should be excluded from the FTA because the region does not enjoy harmonised policies is beginning to ring hollow in light of the SADC-EU Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations. All Sacu countries have no objections to negotiating on these issues, barring SA and Namibia. Tellingly, even Lesotho, a least developing country that is not required to make any commitments on services and regulatory issues in terms of WTO rules, is apparently not threatened by them.

Clearly, the Agoa Sixth Forum was a good opportunity for both celebration and deep reflection, especially for Sacu. African countries do not have much luxury to procrastinate — the Doha Round remains semi-paralysed and Agoa and even the Generalised System of Preferences (another preference scheme catering for developing countries in general, not just Africans) are not permanent. Therefore Agoa should not be seen as a viable alternative to a contractual agreement, which typically should have a development component.

Finally, it is not clear which course Agoa beneficiaries will take post-2015, but what is certain is that unilateral preference schemes have an expiry date.

Nkululeko Khumalo is senior researcher: trade policy at the South African Institute of International Affairs.

August 3, 2007

Should Africa Continue to Be Treated Like a “Victim” By the World

Is It Time to Stop Treating the Continent As a Victim?

SciDev.Net (London)
OPINION
1 August 2007
Posted to the web 2 August 2007

By Katharine Vincent

It is commonly upheld — at least by the media — that Africa is a frontline victim of climate change.

It is true that at the continental scale Africa may suffer because of it is geographic and economic vulnerability. But branding Africa as a victim does a disservice to the many examples of small-scale resilience and adaptive capacity in evidence throughout the continent.

Furthermore, perpetuating the ‘Africa as victim’ myth runs the risk of deflecting attention away from a systematic investigation into how such resistive measures could be expanded to reduce vulnerability.

A more realistic picture

The year 2007 marked the release of the long-awaited fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which looked at the impact of climate change on different parts of the world and their adaptation and vulnerability to its effects.

The report confirms that Africa is one of the most vulnerable continents and will be exposed to the adverse impacts of climate variability and change. Agricultural productivity is likely to be constrained by water stress and a decrease in the land area suitable for farming — with a reduction in yields of up to 50 per cent predicted for some parts of the continent by 2020.

But the report also highlights evidence that African people are coping with and adapting to climate variability and change. Although it does not indicate whether these responses will be sufficient in practice to deal with the rate and magnitude of projected change, they provide grounds for optimism.

Still, the press response to the report, both internationally and in Africa, has emphasised the vulnerability of the continent over its potential adaptive capacity.

It is important to recognise that there will be adverse effects, but portraying the continent as helpless legitimises a sense of resignation to the fact that climate change will merely contribute to ongoing poverty and leave Africa on an unavoidable downward trajectory.

Groundwork to reduce vulnerability

The outlook need not be so bleak. We should be attempting to understand the complex coping and adaptation strategies that are in operation and to identify where these are working and where they need to be improved.

Researchers investigating coping and adaptive capacity at different levels on the continent — from household efforts to national strategies covering both social and biophysical systems — have compiled a cohort of studies that exemplify emerging generic processes.

Farmers, for example, are flexible in their livelihood choices, which enable them to respond to weather conditions on a year-by-year basis. In a dry year they may seek alternative pasture for their cattle and irrigate their crops. If a drought is long lasting, male members of the household might migrate to the city in search of alternative employment.

Emerging recognition of the bottlenecks constraining effective adaptation has also promoted research into tools that can be used to reduce vulnerability. For example, seasonal climate forecasting enables both commercial and subsistence farmers to respond on an annual basis to anticipated weather conditions.

Farmers in several southern African countries, including South Africa and Zimbabwe, are currently benefiting from improved information on seasonal weather conditions.

Ecologists and social scientists working on the coupling of physical and social systems have highlighted the need for adaptive co-management that recognises the interrelationship between the physical and human environment. A variety of institutions, working at local through to national and regional levels in Africa, are embracing this attitude.

They are taking a more holistic approach to development, to reducing the risk of disasters, and to mitigating and adapting to climate change. This includes provision of national weather services and of a growing number of disaster-management agencies, which are being set up following the introduction of national disaster-management policies and plans.

Confronting the situation

Faced with the media’s despair, we can hardly blame African policy-makers for feeling helpless against climate change and for not believing that adaptation can be achieved. As a result, policies focusing on national climate change are scant and weak where they do exist, although the issues are recognised to varying degrees in formulating policy in related spheres, such as water supply, agriculture and disaster management.

Taking a more proactive approach to adaptation — recognising the continent’s strengths and identifying weaknesses and obstacles in the way of achieving it — is a much more constructive response to the IPCC’s fourth assessment report.

It is one that should encourage Africans to seek the most effective means of help from themselves and others, thereby ensuring that vulnerability in the face of future climate change is reduced.

Katharine Vincent is a postdoctoral researcher with the ReVAMP research group at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, and a contributing author to the IPCC fourth assessment report.

45 Years Later… have African Leaders Failed Test of Unity

45 Years On, Leaders Failed Test of Unity

East African Standard (Nairobi)
NEWS
1 August 2007
Posted to the web 31 July 2007

By Kisemei Mutisya
Nairobi
The search for African unity is not only an emotional issue, but also a divisive subject.

While some zealously support the formation of the United States of Africa, others vehemently oppose it. Divisions at the ninth African Union summit in Ghana are a replay of the war of nerves between the Nkurumahists and gradualists in the 1960s during the days of the Organisation of African Unity, the predecessor of the African Union.

From its Diaspora roots, Pan-Africanism was a revolutionary, anti-imperial and anti-capitalist movement that proclaimed social democracy. Its proponents welcomed economic democracy as the only empowering philosophy since the 1945 Manchester conference.

No sooner had Pan-Africanism left its Diaspora roots to its organic soil in Africa than sharp differences begin to manifest themselves at the top leadership of the newly decolonised and decolonising States. Ghana’s founding President Kwame Nkrumah passionately argued that artificial divisions and territorial boundaries the imperialists created were deliberate steps to obstruct political unity and would expose Africa to neo-colonial manipulation.

Nkrumah cautioned that sovereignty, State power and flags would be too sweet to surrender. But the gradualists warned that Africa was not ready for political union and cited regional integration as the best way of realising African unity. To be sure, the Nigerian delegation in the 1960s argued that their country would never surrender her sovereignty for the sake of African unity.

The differences between Nkrumah’s position and those who counselled caution became chronic at every OAU summit, culminating in a compromise that saw gradualism institutionalised and inscribed in the OAU Charter. But this was not before Nkrumah earned himself several enemies among fellow Heads of State. History repeated itself in Accra last month when African Heads of State refused to learn from history.

Libya’s Muammar Gadaffi and Senegal’s Abdoulaye Wade’s position is similar to Nkrumah’s and Sekoh Toure’s in the 1960s. Toure and Nkrumah had argued that regional groups would make it even harder or impossible to realise continental unity. From his experience in West Africa, he knew that regional blocs retard rather than promote unification.

Deliberate political will is needed to transcend neo-colonial trappings and class interests. Nkrumah’s observation and Tanzania’s founding President Julius Nyerere’s admission during Ghana’s 50th independence celebration in 1997 that African Heads of States failed to realise the objectives of African unity. While noting partial success in liberating the continent, African leaders had failed to unite the continent.

Nkrumah argued that colonial economies competed with one another and were not compatible – just like post-colonial economies exhibit uneven development. Furthermore, each State seeks to associate with metropolitan economies on terms and conditions that favour and advance national interests. This has led to perpetual acrimony and irreconcilable contradictions prevalent in regional institutions such as South African Development Community, East African Community (EAC) and Ecowas.

The continent should learn from EAC. Its golden age was when the region had a single political entity, the colonial State, which integrated the economies of East Africa. The post-colonial State, while seeking to maximise advantage of the EAC, led to disintegration in 1977.

The African Union summit in Ghana met when Nkrumah had been proved right beyond reasonable doubt. State nationalism and neo-colonial manipulation have led to Africa’s first world war in the Great Lakes region, Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict, war in Somalia, civil war in Darfur, low-intensity conflict in Lesotho, grand corruption in East Africa, pillage of national resources and rise of regional hegemonies.

The post-colonial State is experiencing the hand of neo-colonial institutions: The IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organisation have a grip on African economies. In the 1980s, Africa lost self-determination after it abandoned the Lagos Plan of Action in favour of World Bank recommendations.

More recently, the post-colonial State has combined Structural Adjustment Programmes with the neo-liberal poverty reduction strategy papers. Conservative African leaders who wine and dine with G8 leaders have betrayed the Pan-African dream even as they fail to construct a single kiosk.

Globalisation has opened another battlefront. It has undermined the welfare of African people through privatisation, liberalisation and delinking of the State from the economy. Through this, it has abandoned its role in favour of the markets.

The rise of regional hegemonies and lack of initiative have brought this sorry state. In Ghana, South African President Thabo Mbeki and Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni were united in opposing Gadaffi and Wade’s ideas on flimsy grounds of gradualism. The status quo works for Mbeki’s comprador interests in Africa and South Africa’s national interest to keep the captive market it enjoys.

The same is true for Nigeria and Kenya. Pan-Africanism should regain the lost initiative through citizens, scholars and institutions. The most important lesson from Accra is that gradualism is an imperial thinking that has brought Africa to its knees.

Mbeki, Museveni and others should know Africa is more important than their national interests.

The writer is a lecturer at Catholic University of Eastern Africa

July 29, 2007

Can Africa Solve its Development Challenges?

Can the Continent Solve its Development Challenges?

allAfrica.com
GUEST COLUMN
25 July 2007
Posted to the web 25 July 2007

By Moeletsi Mbeki

Moeletsi Mbeki gave the keynote address at the Second Conference of the European Association of Centers of African Studies held at Leiden University in The Netherlands from July 11 to July 14. The text of the speech follows:  

Promising start and near collapse

The world has done just about everything it could do to help Africa to develop but has very little positive results to show for its efforts. While most of the world, especially Asia, is forging ahead in the development stakes, Africa is marking time at best, and marching backwards in some instances.

The breakneck industrialisation of China and India has helped Africa by forcing up raw materials prices that comprise most of Africa’s exports. Experience shows however that for Africa, raw materials booms have proved to be more a curse than a blessing.

Africa has not always been about gloom and doom however. In the 1960s soon after their independence, African countries did reasonably well. Their economies grew quite significantly on their own steam. This was the age of massive creativity when Africa produced great works of literature and music. Africa won three Nobel Literature prizes for works produced during this period. Universities and high schools sprouted throughout the continent leading to vibrant debates about how to propel Africa forward.

No sooner had this flame started to become visible from a distance than it was extinguished. Starting with the murder of Patrice Lumumba; the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah by the army with a little help from the American government; the detention of Oginga Odinga, Africa soon descended into unimaginable low depths. Africa got into the grip of civil wars in Nigeria, Algeria, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Angola; the two Congos, to name but a few; culminating in genocide in Rwanda and in failed and failing states in Somalia, Zimbabwe, and Ivory Coast. These conflicts caused untold suffering and massive destruction to already underdeveloped infrastructure.

Age of dictators and donors

When a person is poor and one gives him or her money, then that erstwhile poor person becomes richer by the amount donated. The rich world took this sensible observation in connection with individuals and extended it to African countries.

If a well-wisher foreign government gave aid to an African country, the expectation was that people in the African country that received the foreign aid would thus become richer. The shock however was that the more aid was poured into Africa the poorer Africans seemed to get.

The flaw in the donors’ actions was not necessarily lack of good intentions. The flaw was to equate an individual to a country. Unlike an individual, a country develops and its people become richer primarily by pooling the collective strengths and energies of its citizens so that they cooperate to achieve their common objectives. For citizens to pool their energies and strengths two key factors must be present. These are institutions that facilitate cooperation and leadership that ensures institutions function and deliver on expectations.

For individuals or households to pool their energies and resources with other individuals or households, there must be a mechanism or instrument, known as an institution that makes it possible and desirable for them to want to cooperate. This means that the benefits of cooperating with others must outweigh the benefits of working in isolation. Similarly, the costs of working in cooperation with others must be below the costs of working alone. In short there must be incentives to cooperate. Of course one could be compelled to cooperate as happened during slavery or under regimes of forced labour but even under these circumstances institutions to compel cooperation were necessary but these will be different from institutions that promote voluntary cooperation.

Here we are concerned with voluntary cooperation however. Embedded in our simple formulation of incentives to cooperate and institutions and leadership to advance cooperation, is experience acquired over many centuries of human history. Fairness, justice, rewards, are just a few of the qualities that make individuals and household want to cooperate with other individuals and households. Besides delivering greater productivity at the quantitative level and therefore greater welfare for the households cooperating, institutions that make cooperation possible must thus also deliver on the qualities of equity and social justice.

This is where leadership comes in. Social institutions are created by many circumstances but for them to continuously deliver fairness and equity they must be constantly modified and adjusted to continue to deliver higher productivity, fairness and equity. And as circumstances change yet new ways of cooperating must be found. This is done through trial and error. The leaders who must search for these new ways of cooperating necessitated by changing environment, must thus take the risk of finding these new ways of cooperating. Inherent in all risk taking is the probability of failure and the cost, including the punishment, which goes with failure.

This is where post-colonial Africa has come unstuck. Post-colonial Africa has failed to both develop new institutions of cooperation amongst its citizens and to produce the leadership or the leaders required to lead society forward in an ever changing global environment.

The massive social, economic and political upheavals in Africa during the generation from the mid 1960s (overthrow of Nkrumah and crushing of the Convention Peoples Party) to the mid 1990s when elements of multi-party democracy started to appear in Africa, destroyed a key indigenous African institution – the African nationalist party. These upheavals also destroyed most of the leaders who had mobilised the African people to cooperate in the struggle against colonialism. The destruction of the African nationalist party left Africans atomised and therefore stranded without indigenous, legitimate institutions of cooperation to advance their interests.

The institutions that were left standing and that prospered during the era of dictatorship and one-party rule (in practice, one-man rule) were institutions created by colonialism – the state, the military and police, the private sector, etc. These were the institutions that were re-captured by the dictators and their Western backers from the African nationalists before they, the nationalists, could change them. The dictators once more used these colonial institutions to dissemble and to impose on the African people the interests of the West and those of the dictators and associated elites and cliques. The notion that Africa “works” because it is ruled by corrupt, nepotistic and unaccountable Big Men who are alleged to reflect Africa’s traditional cultural practices is thus a fantasy of its authors. Africa’s Big Men in reality were the creation of neo-colonialism and the Cold War.

Africa’s era of dictatorships and one man rule was simultaneously the heyday of Western donors’ interventions in Africa. The two worked in partnership and reinforced each other. Their central objective was to destroy indigenous, autonomous institutions and leaders that tried to promote cooperation amongst Africans that was not devoted to advancing Western interests but to advancing the interests of the African people.

Donor donated democracy

Africa’s challenge today is that while the era of dictatorship has apparently come to an end, African countries do not as yet have indigenous institutions and leaders that promote cooperation among the citizens. Developing such institutions is a difficult and costly business that takes a long time. It is made even more complex by the fact that firstly, the re-democratisation of African countries from the mid 1990s was brought about to a significant extent by interventions of Western donors rather than primarily by pro-democracy actions of African organisations or parties. The main exceptions which prove the rule being Uganda and Rwanda, and possibly Nigeria.

Secondly, during the three to four decades of dictatorship and neo-colonialism, Africa suffered a massive brain drain, capital flight and deterioration of infrastructure. Not surprisingly African countries now do not have the skilled and experienced people to make democratic Africa more productive. The civil service in Africa is notorious for its incompetence, not to mention its corruption. Most African countries also do not have the popular institutions with the clout to combat the slide back towards dictatorships and unconstitutional practices.

Thirdly, during the era of dictatorship Africa’s manufacturing sector continued to be dominated by Western multinational corporations and by non-African owned – Indian, Arab, and Chinese etc – businesses. Dictatorships stifled the growth of an indigenous entrepreneurial class which it saw as a potential threat to its power. Even the state-owned enterprises (parastatals) that were established during the short lived nationalist era were either sold off at the instigation of donors or rapidly transformed into centres of corruption rather than centres of training for future indigenous entrepreneurs and managers.

Thus despite the recent euphoria about Africa’s economic growth by the World Bank and others, the reality is that Africa today is going through a period of de-industrialisation. It is becoming more dependent on raw materials exports. Even the countries that had achieved a significant degree of industrialisation such as South Africa and Zimbabwe are de-industrialising as well.   The Zimbabwe economy has halved since 2000, while South Africa’s manufacturing sector has declined from 25% of GDP in 1990 to 16% today. China’s manufacturing sector on the other hand is 50% of GDP while India’s is 35%.

Industrial and Green Revolutions for Africa

The indigenous people of the Americas and of Africa bore the brunt of European imperialism. From the late 15th century to the end of the 19th century systematic genocide was committed against the native peoples of North and South America and the Caribbean. It was only in recent years that the few peoples that survived the carnage in the Andean States of Peru and Bolivia have started to make their voice audible.

European imperialism was equally devastating in Africa. Vast numbers of people were carted off as slaves to the Americas. Massive conflicts within Africa were generated by the slave raiders most of whom where in fact Africans. Equally important Africa’s indigenous manufacturing industries were systematic destroyed and their products replaced with cheap imports from Europe. Africa’s arts and craft skills were thus obliterated. Africa was also overwhelmed spiritually and intellectually by European imperialism. Africans abandoned their religions which were marginalized, vulgarized and vilified by missionaries.

The states that the African political elites inherited from the colonialists were thus flawed to start with as they were imposed on the Africans by force by foreign colonisers. The colonialists used these states as instruments not only of political oppression but also of economic exploitation through, for example, poll taxes, forced labour on plantations, mines and infrastructure projects. While poll taxes and forced labour in its many forms, generated cheap labour for the colonialists, the introduction of cash crops provided the colonial state with forms of revenue and profit that were in turn used to consolidate the power the colonial state had over the colonised. Cash crops were bought from the peasants either by state corporations or by favoured private monopolies from the colonial power’s home country. Either way, the farmers got the worse end of the bargain as they were paid prices far below world market prices.

African political elites today sustain and reproduce themselves by perpetuating the neo-colonial state and its attendant socio-economic systems of exploitation devised by the colonialists. The colonial model of exploitation was however parasitic on pre-capitalist African social systems. Colonialism thus did not transform Africa’s largely subsistence modes of production. It introduced some modifications to these systems to enable the colonial powers to extract raw materials and small surpluses from these economic systems. These small surpluses were used to finance the small colonial administration infrastructures.

The societies of Sub-Saharan Africa today are thus fossilised pre-Industrial and pre-Green Revolution social formations. This is what is at the bottom of their inability to grow economically.

The surge in commodity prices over the last few years has created an illusion that African economies are growing and restructuring. To illustrate the depth of Africa’s under-development let me give the example of Nigeria, Africa’s largest crude oil producer. Nigeria has no petro-chemical industries and therefore imports most of its refined petroleum products such as petrol and diesel. Nigeria’s manufacturing industry is virtually non existent accounting for only 3% of GDP according to the African Economic Outlook for 2006/2007 published by the African Development Bank and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.

Industrial and Green Revolutions transformed the ability of labour to produce a surplus through the application of knowledge especially of science and technology. Labour became capable of producing value many times that it required for its survival and reproduction.

There are many pre-requisites for Industrial and Green Revolutions to occur. Principal amongst these are the liberation of private property from political domination. The second pre-requisite of the Industrial Revolution is the liberation of the great majority from individual access to certain means of production especially land. These pre-conditions have not occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa.

The stunted and fossilised subsistence economic systems established by the colonialists and perpetuated since their departure by successive groups of political elites are unable to absorb new technologies and new management methods. Over time these stunted subsistence systems begin to literally eat up their own foundation leading to all the ills that Sub-Saharan Africa has became notorious for – declining life expectancy; falling school enrolment; capital flight; brain drain; deforestation; desertification; unpredictable conflicts; massive and growing inequalities and endemic and growing poverty; manipulation by outside forces; growing dependence of the African states on foreign patronage; dependence on foreign initiated solutions.

Secondly Sub-Saharan Africa does not have an established and stable social class structure and stable ruling classes that are legitimate in the eyes of most of the citizens.   Africa thus lacks a leadership with the continuity necessary to sustain and implement developmental economic programmes. This seems destined to carry on for a long time to come because of the mass emigration of African professionals. The World Bank estimates that 20 000 African graduates leave the continent annually.

Can Africa solve its development challenges?

It is only in societies with an independent middle class that possesses significant scientific knowledge and managerial skills where a modernising political leadership has emerged. The origins of such a middle class could be many and varied.

  • It could be well-traveled merchants, independent artisans and scholars in a feudal society.
  • It could be ethnic minorities such as the Jews in parts of Europe or the Parsee in India.
  • In Southern Africa a new distinctive voice is beginning to emerge from leaders of trade unions, civil society organisations and academia that is addressing issues of inequality and poverty and articulating a need for new economic and social thinking.

Depending on the individual case, it is normally such middle strata that occupy the space between the traditional ruling classes and the majority of the people – usually the rural masses – that drive social change especially economic and political modernization.

We have seen that on the whole Africa does not have this independent middle stratum. This class arose briefly during the colonial era and pioneered the anti-colonial struggle. As we have seen, with a few exceptions, this class was decimated after independence during the era of dictators and donors. Kenya provides a graphic illustration of the use of assassination to destroy leaders of the middle strata who questioned the neo-colonial agenda. Within a few years of independence several progressive Kenyans were killed under “mysterious circumstances” in particular Tom Mboya, Pio Pinto, JM Kariuki, Robert Ouku to name but a few.

Africa’s development crisis could therefore be described as the crisis of the non-emergence or more accurately slow and frustrated emergence of an independent middle stratum from the mid-1960s to the present. The question ‘can Africa solve its development challenges?’ could thus be posed in another way. Is a new middle class emerging in Africa which can provide the leadership required to drive the continent’s Industrial and Green Revolutions in the face of foreign interventions that foster Africa’s traditional role in the world economy as a source of raw materials and cheap labour?

There is very little evidence of this happening: I have already referred to the brain drain. What we see happening in Africa today is the recurrence of the scramble for natural resources but this time by both West and East. Africa is benefiting from this new scramble to some extent by way of higher commodity prices, higher royalties, new sources of no-strings-attached foreign aid and soft loans. But this will not necessarily lead to a solution to Africa’s development challenges. It merely entrenches, as in the past, a parasitic bureaucratic bourgeoisie that lives off state revenues. As competition for resources between West and East intensifies, Africa is likely to be caught in another Cold War, the Cold War over resources which predictably, will lead to a new cycle of “hot” conflicts in Africa.

Conclusion

In the four to five decades of its independence African countries have gone through a wrenching period as a result in which a number of negative factors became dominant:

  1. African countries lost the key indigenous institutions that had been created by the Africans themselves to fight against colonialism. These were the nationalist parties, the independent trade unions, civil society organisations and independent institutions of learning. These institutions were crushed by the military dictators who took control of African governments in the 1960s in collaboration with Western powers.   Even in countries where the military did not take over nationalist parties degenerated into one man rule.
  2. African economies failed to breakaway from the economic model created by colonialism. Consequently African producers did not regain their autonomy but continued as had happened under colonialism to be dominated by the political elite that controlled the state. The new political class thus used its dominance over the producers to siphon savings from the producers to the private consumption of the political elite and of the state especially its repressive instruments.   According to one source African countries jointly have over 2 million security forces that cost the continent an estimated $14-billion annually.
  3. The combination of military dictatorships, civilian dictatorships and the subordination of producers to the political elites lead to the underdevelopment of a middle class of Africa as well as to a massive brain drain from Africa.

Can the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, NEPAD, change this lethal legacy that afflicts Sub-Saharan Africa? While NEPAD may address some of the worse excesses of the political elites through the African Peer Review Mechanism it does not address the fundamental malaise, that is, the enormous power imbalance between the political elite and key private sector producers.

If the driving force behind Sub-Saharan Africa’s underdevelopment is the structural powerlessness of producers and therefore their inability to retain and control their savings, it should be self-evident that until this equation is reversed there will be no development in the sub-region. But how is this to be reversed and by whom?

For Sub-Saharan Africa to develop, it therefore needs a new type of democracy, a democracy that will empower not just the political elite but that will empower Sub-Saharan Africa’s private sector producers as well, the great majority of whom are the peasants. The new democracy should be such as to restore the growth of an independent middle class as well as the development of autonomous civil society institutions.

In the first instance, it is necessary that peasants who constitute the core of the private sector in Sub-Saharan Africa must become the real owners of their primary asset, land. This is the only way that there can be land improvements in Sub-Saharan Africa instead of what is happening at present, that is, rampant deforestation and accelerating desertification. This means freehold must be introduced and the so-called communal land tenure system that in reality is state land ownership, must be abolished.

Secondly, peasant producers must gain direct access to world markets without the political elite, through state corporations, acting as the go-between. This means that internationally traded cash crops – coffee, tea, cotton, sugar, cocoa, rubber, etc. – must be auctioned by the producers themselves rather than being sold first to state controlled marketing boards.

Another important innovation that is needed are new financial institutions that are independent of the political elite that will address the financial needs of not just peasants but also other small to medium scale producers. These could be co-operatives, credit unions, savings banks etc. Besides providing financial services these institutions would undertake all the other technical services that are not being provided at present by the political elite such as crop research, extension services, livestock improvement, storage, transportation, distribution and many other services that would contribute to make agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa more productive.

This is where foreign donors could play a constructive role. Donors could support these independent institutions by providing the expertise to manage them and to some extent help shield them from predators.

These changes would for the first time bring into being in Africa a capitalist market economy that answers to the needs of African producers and consumers. Up to now capitalism in Africa promoted the interests of colonialists, and since independence, it promoted the interests of parasitic political elites which saw its survival as been threatened by the emergence of an independent middle and professional class.

If NEPAD is to contribute to Africa’s economic development it should help to re-design Africa’s political economy so that it promotes the interests of producers instead of those of the rent-seeking political elites.

An important lesson Sub-Saharan Africa could draw from are the agricultural reforms that took place in China during the past 25 years or so. It was in the first instance changes in the agricultural sector that made it possible for China to embark on its current break-neck industrialisation process. This was followed by the recognition by the Chinese Communists that the state alone could not industrialise China. The Chinese government therefore opened the space for the emergence of an independent private sector driven by the middle and professional class.

See also: Concepts of Transformation and The Social Structure

July 24, 2007

Do New Trade Deals Mean Africa “Loses” while EU “Gains”??

New Trade Deals – Continent to Lose Out As EU Gains

East African (Nairobi)
ANALYSIS
24 July 2007
Posted to the web 24 July 2007

By Gichinga Ndirangu
Nairobi
As Africa’s leaders met in Accra, Ghana, last week to consider ways of consolidating continental unity through increased trade, pertinent questions were being raised over the impact that a new trade arrangement between the European Union and the 75-member ACP trading bloc will have on regional integration.

At least four regional trading blocs in Africa – Comesa, Ecowas, EAC and SADC – are working towards establishing Customs Unions to reduce their dependence on the EU market and take advantage of regional economies of scale.

But as the clock ticks towards the end of 2007, the deadline for concluding negotiations between the ACP and EU, uncertainty looms on what will happen if the deadline is not met and the impact that a deal will have on the trade fortunes of individual countries within the regional blocs.

A deal between the ACP and EU will usher in a new trade framework based on reciprocity that will require agreement on uniform tariffs on at least 80 per cent of goods traded. This will effectively end years of preferential access enjoyed by the ACP countries, under which their goods entered the EU market duty-free even as EU exports to ACP markets attracted tariffs.

The current negotiations have been necessitated by the imminent expiry of the waiver granted by the WTO, which allowed the EU-ACP preferential trade arrangement to continue until the end of 2007. This has been viewed as discriminating against non-ACP members and in violation of WTO trade rules; it is also implicit that the EU wants a share of the pie by increasing exports to the ACP markets on more favourable terms.

But the entry of EU goods on more favourable terms has raised concerns that more efficient EU firms and subsidised agricultural goods will out-compete local enterprises involved in value-added production and farmers, thus limiting the benefits of regional integration to individual countries.

THE EU believes that the economic partnership agreement (EPA) negotiations will strengthen regional integration through more predictable trade policies, but the limited time left to conclude negotiations and the serious capacity constraints facing many ACP countries have raised concern that they actually risk slowing down regional integration.

A major concern is the isolation of members of the same regional trading blocs forced to negotiate under different EPA configurations, which now creates the risk of members of one regional bloc committing to different tariffs and trade liberalisation measures from those agreed upon under regional blocs.

For instance, Tanzania, though a member of the East African Community, is negotiating under the Southern African Development Community (SADC) while Kenya and Uganda negotiate under the Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) configuration.

Yet, even as EPA negotiations raise mounting concern over their potential impact on the African trade blocs, the reality is that integration efforts in most regions have been slow due to cumbersome border controls, inefficient Customs administrations and poor transport infrastructure, which have limited intra-regional trade to an average 10 per cent for individual countries.

BUT DESPITE these difficulties, regional trade for some countries, like Kenya, has grown. A total of 49 per cent of Kenya’s exports are now destined for other African countries, dominated by the Comesa region, while the EU takes up 25 per cent of the country’s exports.

However, the EU still remains an important market destination for many ACP countries as a result of limited intra-regional trade. For instance, whereas the EU absorbs 49 per cent of Ghana’s exports, the country exports an insignificant 2.6 per cent to neighbouring Benin – a situation replicated in many other African countries.

Even as the EU market remains a prime destination, it is ridden by uncertainties over constantly changing criteria of eligibility, especially from EU consumers and the private sector. Strict sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures, pesticide traceability criteria and other health certification standards are among the most challenging non-tariff barriers to trade facing exports into the EU.

Under EPAs, the different regional configurations will be expected to liberalise at least 80 per cent of their trade over an average 12-year period, even though many African countries favour a time frame pegged on the achievement of specified development indicators rather than arbitrary timelines. This approach is intended to allow local enterprises prepare adequately for competition from EU firms.

The Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) has warned that the EU stands to benefit the most from a reciprocal trade arrangement with the ACP countries. In particular, the EU would benefit from improved access to regional markets, while African countries are likely to lose out on intra-regional trade.

FOR INSTANCE, intra-regional trade in the Comesa region is expected to decline by 5.8 per cent, which translates into a loss of $242 million. On its part, the EU stands to increase exports to Comesa to the tune of $1,152 million under a new trade arrangement based on reciprocity.

The situation is replicated in West Africa, where the ECA estimates that Ecowas countries could lose trade worth $365 million to EU competitors, who are expected to increase their exports by an estimated $1.87 billion into this regional market.

These trends emphasise the relative efficiency of EU firms over local enterprises, which will result in increased presence of EU products in their markets, hence eating into the share of individual country exports within these markets.

Indeed, with an anticipated elimination of existing tariffs on at least 80 per cent of the ACP’s trade with the EU, it is estimated that regional trade in ACP countries will decline by about 22 per cent, which will translate into a loss of jobs and investment in different regions.

Rwanda is, for instance, expected to increase its imports from the EU from the current 27.4 per cent to 32.2 per cent, even though a large number of these imports could be sourced locally and hence help augment trade in industrial goods. The ECA warns that, “This threatens to weaken regional integration efforts as Comesa countries could significantly lose out to the benefit of the EU countries, especially Belgium, France, Germany and Netherlands.”

KENYA’S DEVELOPMENT strategy, which is increasingly shifting emphasis to regional markets, is also expected to experience the effects of the EU’s foray into key regional markets like Comesa, which accounted for an estimated 67 per cent of the country’s manufactured exports (excluding agro-processed products) in 2003 compared with 9 per cent to the EU market.

Currently, Kenya’s trade with Comesa stands at nearly Ksh80 billion ($1.2 billion), an increase of Ksh19.3 billion ($288 million) over the 2005 earnings totaling Ksh60.7 billion ($906 million). This has made the region Kenya’s most significant trading partner.

However, as the main destination for Kenya’s agricultural exports, the EU remains a significant market, accounting for 25 per cent of total exports, while Africa takes up 49 per cent. A full 37 per cent of Kenya’s total exports to Africa go to the Comesa region.

THE KENYA Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis (Kippra) estimates that Kenya stands to lose 15 per cent of its regional trade under an EPA. It adds that Kenya will lose out to the EU, especially in exports of manufactured products to the EAC and Comesa.

“This will undermine the country’s trade in value-added goods and increase dependence on primary exports, narrow the range of products that Kenya currently trades in as well as the diversity of its trading partners,” observes Kippra.

Given the fears that a broad liberalisation of trade with the EU could adversely impact on intra-regional trade, negotiators must try for a less ambitious liberalisation, excluding higher-value products traded among individual African countries, even as the EU seeks a more ambitious regime encompassing broad tariff reduction.

Gichinga Ndirangu is a lawyer and trade policy analyst based in Nairobi

July 20, 2007

A “REAL” Vision for African Development!

A “REAL” Vision for African Development!

A proposal by Craig Eisele and the Trans-African Development Company.

First and foremost I must say that “most” of the “Aid” to Africa is needed and serves a good purpose. HOWEVER… I believe, that the most important “aid” to African Development is not being given in the manner in which it is most needed.

Given the Statement released at the Last AU Meeting in Accra this month (July) and the focus on Regional Integration and the Ultimate Goal of African Integration and Unity I feel that this proposal, I put forth today, is in keeping with these stated Goals and Ideals. I hope the leaders and governments of those Countries read this and believe in it half as much as I do and commit to making this “Vision” a reality… for the future of Africa is at stake.

It is no secret that the “Keys to Investment” (as well as economic prosperity) are Power, Communications and Transportation. No society can develop without these three key components… and the lack of these components also hinders (actually cripples) the ability to have an effective (let alone vibrant) “manufacturing” sector of the economy. Manufacturing brings most jobs to the most people. Without these Components poverty, and despair become the norm. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in Africa today… yet that can change dramatically and substantially within 10 years IF we can do what I propose.

So what can be done for Africa that is “really” in Africa’s Best interest… and even in the best interest of the world at large. If you believe my introductory statements above, then I will hope you agree that what Africa needs, more than anything, is a MAJOR COMPREHENSIVE Development of its Infrastructure. A form of Governmental/Private development needs to be initiated. A Developmental Project that will NOT create any Debt to any Country. A project that will have a portion of it as private (but publicly traded components) as well as a segment or portion under “Governmental Ownership and Control” …. specifically, the Highway Portion of the project.

I envision this Comprehensive Infrastructure Development Project as follows:

It is through the building of a “Highway” and “rehabilitation” of the major trade roads in conjunction with the establishment of a “uniform” railroad; Development of the Power Generation and Transmission sector and the Ability to Communicate with the outside markets and the world for Technology, education, ideas and innovation that matters the most. If this is done, then I believe, that not only will the economic benefits proliferate throughout the ENTIRE Continent of Africa, but that the overall health education and welfare of the vast Majority of Africans can be established quickly and effectively.

The world has tried to “fix” or otherwise address problems throughout Africa without the basic means of delivering their “aid” to Africans. Kofie Annan, in his recent quest for better Agricultural production, has indicated in a footnote that transportation is necessary for the Agricultural Sector to flourish. It is evident that Africa can not only grow sufficient food for every person in Africa and have more than enough for a productive export market for basic food products, but there is no effective way to get that food to markets before it decays throughout its own Country or to even a neighboring Country …. let alone the rest of the Continent or the world.

OK… sorry I am impassioned on this subject and sometimes I get carried away in what I want to say… so here is MY Vision for the Future of Africa that I firmly believe will not only be able to create a 100 plus million strong “Middle Class” of Consumers within Africa, but will exceed the Millennium Development Goals that CANNOT be met without the program that I will articulate below. ANY person who believes that the MDG’s can be met without this and believes Africa can be self-sufficient within 20 years without this project is at the least incredibly nieve’ or worse delusional.

Africa today is in a unique position of building infrastructure from the ground up using 21st century technology that can be effective for the next 50 years with minimal maintenance and upkeep before major upgrades will be required… by that time the “tax base” and revenues generated by the individual countries will be sufficient to upgrade that Infrastructure the same as all industrialized countries currently can do today and without international “aid”.

My Vision on How to best accomplish the MDG’s (and so much more) and actually give Africa an opportunity to be something more than a depository for international aid, is listed below in three phases that are to be implemented simultaneously:

  1. Phase 1: Obtain a right of way one kilometer wide from each Country that the first segment of a “highway” will go through. This is envisioned as a Trans Continental Highway similar to the ones that Most Industrialized nations have and close to the US Model of Interstate Highway System. However the FIRST segment must be constructed to prove its worth.

I have already received expressed interest from 3 of the first nine countries that this first segment will go through.

ALL of this Construction MUST be done by a Private Company with focus on costs and efficiency and completion and MUST be done at NO COST to any country. The Highway Component of this Infrastructure along this “right of way”, will be transferred to COMPLETE Ownership by the AU (African Union) and the individual Countries for the revenue generated to be used for routine Maintenance, security and general governing purposes.

It is hoped that each country will take advantage of this “highway” to create planned communities, cities and Industrial parks along this path. Planning for Potable water, Electricity and sewage and trash and looking for synergies between industries and natural resources along the way is imperative to maximize economic benefit and the quality of life for the citizens. I suggest a 50-kilometer “zone”or buffer on either side of this project for the planning to be professionally engineered and developed for maximum effectiveness.

I would like to see a fleet of NEW Trucks and tractor-trailers built by someone like Peterbuilt ON THE CONTINENT of Africa. Given that Peterbuilt has a factory that produces 5000 trucks a year in a single factory today in the USA, it is obviously more cost effective to build a NEW plant in Africa for the Construction of these trucks… AND, I would be willing to not only help them build such a plant but to BUY the first 5,000 trucks for exclusive use on this highway. The Domestic Market in Africa and the export potential is worth this type of investment IF we build such a “highway”. Just look at South Africa now who is building cars for export to Europe!

Simply the creation of such a Highway by itself gives access to huge economic benefits that those countries involved are not able to see without this “highway”.

Now the scary news for some… the cost for this 4-lane highway is estimated at 45 to 50 Billion dollars (35 to 40 Billion Euros). Given the 60 billion to be spent on Aids in Africa the next 5 years by the US Government… I DO NOT expect the US Government to pay the entire cost for this highway… but I do expect them to substantially contribute to this highway. And yes, I do expect them to mandate that a certain amount of this money be spent with US Companies as I expect any other country “donating” to this project will also expect benefit from their “donation”. But, the majority of labor MUST be African and local subcontractors within Africa MUST be incorporated into this project to maximize the benefit within Africa and create an economic benefit far greater than the highway itself in the short run. Further… wages must be at least 2 times the current local wages.

I consider this “Highway” a bargain at twice the price. But again the key is to let a “PRIVATE” company under the auspicious of a “Not-for-profit” subsidiary to build it to keep cost LOW and assure that the monies spent are mostly on the “Highway” and then transfer ownership as indicated above. Using the Non Profit Company forces greater transparency in the process and assures a corruption free development.

I consider this HIGHWAY a moral imperative for aid by countries claiming they want to help Africa. This Highway however should be incorporated into “Phase 2” of this project as listed next… making the total cost over 7 to 10 years close to 100 Billion Dollars or 75 Billion Euros. But Combined, the benefits as indicated by David Wheeler would be many times that amount on a regular and recurring basis… and that was a study just on Trade… if you factor in the self-imposed mandate I am offering that 80 percent of labor and available raw materials be purchased in Africa… the economic benefit on a local level is staggering. I also proposed to make pay for workers 2 to 3 times the current wages being paid locally for the greatest benefit to the local economy.

  1. Phase 2: Joining ALL the Sub Sahara Countries. I mentioned a study by David Wheeler earlier. In this study (which I consider extremely enlightening and beneficial) he and his group, in a study done for the World Bank, were very specific in identifying the existing roads, the quality of these roads, the trade that exists on those roads, and the economic benefit that repairing these roads would bring based upon Trade alone.

Phase 3: Components to be added along the “right-of way”. The right of way does not mean that these components can link into any country or their infrastructure… only that the Skeletal Structure of this build can be available and ultimately subject to “Interconnect Agreements” with each country. It is obvious that those agreements will need to be worked out on an individual basis and that those will involve complicated negotiations… but the idea that these “Components” of the Infrastructure are available ultimately makes the interconnects a matter of reality for all parties. The Components I am hoping to build along this “right-of-way” are as follows:

      • Power: I would not want to establish a sewing factory in most places in Africa because of the unreliability of Power. Power is one of the 3 key components to attract investment and to develop a healthy economy. While Eskom (South Africa Power Company) has make strides in building out, to the northern neighboring countries, Electric Transmission lines, it is no where near sufficient to satisfy the needs of those other countries.
      • It is my hope that we can attract a Company like GE to build a factory IN AFRICA that will produce Wind Power generators for deployment along the “ right of way”. I envision the installation of Four thousand (4,000) 3.6 Megawatt wind turbines to run alongside of this “right of way”. As the highway will be newly build the transport of the blades and the Generators themselves, for these turbines will be possible. Given the world wide demand and the 2 year wait because if existing manufacturing facility constraints I feel this facility would be a great idea and whoever builds such a facility will “lock-up” the market in Africa for these wind turbines.
      • What is the COST of this electric Transmission line and 4,000 Wind Turbines and a few Gas Turbine Generators for specialty manufacturing such as smelting or processing of Ores from Mining or processing wood from Lumbering operations… about 25 billion dollars… and how do I expect it to be paid for… simply, it will ultimately be paid for by a sale of Equities in a Public Company that will be traded on at least 6 International stock exchanges around the world.

      Railroad: What is the sense of having an abundance of natural resources that can create jobs not just in the mining of such resources but in the processing of ores and ultimately the production of finished goods throughout Africa…. but that is the case now in Africa. Highways alone cannot handle all the requirements of economic development… a railroad is necessary to move huge quantities of goods to ports and markets around Africa and the globe and currently there is no standard rail system in place to do that… but that can change by use of a double track rail system capable of carrying rail cars set to various widths (gauges) but with the main gauge of standard gauge and a secondary gauge in many areas of “cape gauge”.

The initial Cost of a MODERN Rail System with RF readers and GPS (which can also be utilized on the “highway” for truck locations etc.) with a Modern State of the Art “Central Operations Center” electronically controlling all operations of the system I have been able to estimate at 35 to 40 billion dollars… again as with the Power Project Component, I plan on this to be financed by Equity issuance in a Publicly listed Company on international stock exchanges.

Fiber Optic Cable: So much as has been done to bring Fiber to the coast of Africa that it is like saying that only the coastal areas of Africa are worthwhile… I propose a Fiber Optic Program through the interior of Africa with FREE access to the WWW for Schools established along the corridor that this project will go through… the estimated cost (high actually) for 10,000 kilometers (6,000 miles) of Fiber Optic Cable is under 500 million dollars. And Yes, I have a plan for that financing as well but it is NOT via Public Offerings.

Pipelines: As with the section I wrote on Railroad there is extensive wealth of Oil and Gas that is locked within the Continent of Africa… not easily accessible without the “highway” and even if it was accessible the transport is next to impossible without this being a major component of the right of way I am proposing. This pipeline should be used for “Crude” as well as “Refined” as the “Power” Component listed above will make it realistic and economical for Oil Companies to develop their field, refine a portion of their products IN AFRICA and sell those products in Africa as well as export to the world. Remember that Major Oil Companies have already said that existing Oil Production is not sufficient for the demand expected in 2030… so 200 a dollar a barrel prices are realistic generation will allow for refineries within Africa. This is also a case for the development of the Wind Power generation listed above as the revenue from Oil will be more important and better used from sale then for domestic consumption… a fact most industrialized nations are facing now and are rushing to use renewable energy to sustain their economies in the future. Cost: I have no Idea…. nor do I care… as the price of Oil and Gas makes this component economically feasible and a necessity for Oil and Gas Companies. So simply… they will have to pay for this.

But I also want to add the most precious commodity… a Water pipeline… this commodity is required by every country… and its availability… or unavailability is of extreme importance to every country on the continent. As Natural and renewable energy becomes the norm and oil and gas is in short supply the need for water will only continue to grow around the globe. Currently it is not economical to ship water around the globe… but agriculture and populations within Africa will need this in ever greater numbers and quantities… so the addition of this component is looking forward to the basic future of the Continent of Africa.

 

 

Well this is my Vision for Africa. One that I see creating 75 million jobs on the continent within 20 years. One that will bring development, the creation of wealth The Industrialization of Agriculture and reduction of hunger, one that will bring new opportunities in improving the human condition in Africa in areas such as education, health and the reduction of poverty to levels comparable to industrialized nations… but honestly it requires a commitment by the industrialized nations to actually want to improve Africa for the people of Africa… it requires a commitment of 100 billion dollars over the next 7 to 10 year to build the Phase 1 and 2 components of this project… to build the road structure necessary for the delivery of goods and services necessary for an economy that can be vibrant and not a welfare state … A Commitment that will allow Africa to grow itself into an Industrialized Continent capable of taking care of itself. Where the aid that may still be necessary in Medical and Education can be delivered to those that need it and done so in an expeditions fashion and minimal delays… A Continent that can feed itself, getting food to the people who need it will take days, and not months…. But again the Industrialized nations around the world MUST DONATE this to the Continent so as not to saddle the continent with excessive debt and where dribbling of aid that currently takes place is supplanted but a surge in aid with the objective of significantly reducing that aid as Africa grows and prospers from this project.

 

I have more than this… but I feel this is sufficient… the “Highway” will need to be expanded to run through at least 43 countries. While the rehabilitation will be a temporary substitute for that, it will be necessary to grow such a “highway” of 4 lanes or more of high speed from the benefits that the first 2 phases of this project I am proposing will be able to generate.

While this is my “Vision” for Africa… it is also a Moral Imperative that this take place for the benefit salvation of 800 million Africans.

This article is not a “puff” piece article… it is my drive in life to make this a reality… and so far I am extremely encouraged by the response I have gotten. Yes. There are the Naysayers. Those that say Africa will never develop. Those people and organizations that only see Africa as a giant war zone… Those that have no real comprehension of the real Africa, its people or its potential…. And those that say the project is simply too big to be accomplished… and yet I say to them “Pashaw!” ok… maybe that is too nice… but it is a nice way of saying that this project CAN AND MUST be done… and I expect to work on this for the rest of my natural life to assure that it is done and done right…. That being NO DEBT to already impoverished Countries!!!

If you have read this and are in a position to help make this a reality then I encourage you to write to me at the address listed on “About Craig Eisele” section of this blog. If you are not able to help and support this idea or concept… then please leave a message to let others know that this project has broad support.

I am willing to meet and discuss this with ANY Governmental or NGO group or organization that truly wants to help Africa and wants to see them flourish. Anyplace, Anywhere, Anytime… I will always try to be available to make this project succeed… heck I have even established a methodology to that 92.5 percent of ALL funds donated to this project are used for the Construction with complete transparency to the world… not how is that for a capitalist….

July 19, 2007

President Kufuor Urges U.S. Investors to Look Beyond Oil

Kufuor Urges U.S. Investors to Look Beyond Oil

BuaNews (Tshwane)
NEWS
19 July 2007
Posted to the web 19 July 2007
Accra
Ghana’s head of state has urged private sector operators from the United States to increase their investments in Africa beyond the extractive industries of oil and precious minerals.

Addressing the Sixth African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) Forum Wednesday, President John Agyekum Kufuor identified agriculture, processing, manufacturing and tourism as some key areas that they could put their money into.

This, said Mr Kufuor, would assist in technology transfer and build the continent’s capacity to become more competitive and effective partners in trade.

Additionally, investors chould also look at the re-location of industries and outsourcing Information Communication Technology (ICT) contracts to the region, he told the three-day forum.

The meeting is also providing a platform for trade ministers from 39 AGOA-qualified countries in sub-Saharan Africa, representatives of the private sector, civil society groups and US officials to discuss ways of increasing US-Africa trade.

The African Growth and Opportunity Act is a US Trade Act that enhances US market access for 39 Sub-Saharan African countries.

The Act originally covered the period from October 2000 to September 2008, but amendments signed into law by President George w. Bush in July 2004 further extended AGOA to 2015.

The theme for this year’s AGOA Forum is: “As Trade Grows, Africa Prospers: Optimizing the Benefits Under AGOA.”

AGOA opens up the US market to eligible countries to export more than 6,400 duty-free and quotation-free products, estimated at more than 10 trillion USD without reciprocity.

Imports from Africa under this initiative totalled 44.2 billion USD last year, a five-fold increase over 2001, when the programme began. The increase involved mostly crude oil and apparel exports.

The programme ends in 2015 and this, President Kufuor said, must be extended by five years to give Africa space to take full advantage of the opportunity.

“Given the time constraint and the very serious capacity challenges, we must admit, Africa can hardly exploit the benefits of this huge initiative anywhere to the full.

“I will therefore appeal, first to the US Government to extend the time of AGOA to 20 years, then to the countries in Africa as well as our development partners in the US to design and implement a specific and efficacious vehicle targeted at empowering African nations in terms of capacity building.”

President Kufuor said AGOA benefits must not be seen only from the perspective of the African.

He quoted the statement made by President Bush, while signing the AGOA Acceleration Act in 2004 that, “When America sells to Africa, it means employment for somebody in America” and said the programme, should therefore work both ways to everyone’s advantage.

The Head of the US Delegation, Susan Schwab, said the US was determined to serve as a strategic partner with Africa and would not stop, until the continent has realised its enormous potentials.

She noted that if the region could increase its share of the global trade, which stands at two per cent, by a single percentage, it would be generating 70 billion USD annually.

This would be about three times the amount of development assistance it has been receiving.

Ms Schwab spoke of the need for enhanced intra-African trade and South-South trading and re-affirmed the US commitment to reducing agricultural trade distortions.

Ms Schwab, who is the Trade Adviser to President Bush, described the future of Africa as full of hope saying, there was now a new breed of political leaders who were determined to turn the economic fortunes of the continent around. – BuaNews-NNN

July 17, 2007

Mbeki “Lectures” on African Unity and Integration.

In Defence of Yar’Adua’s Speech – Unity And Integration in Africa

Vanguard (Lagos)
DOCUMENT
17 July 2007
Posted to the web 17 July 2007

By Thabo Mbeki

A LECTURE DELIVERED BY THE PRESIDENT OF SOUTH AFRICA, THABO MBEKI, AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST, GHANA, 4TH JULY 2007:

Guy Arnold observes in is book: Africa – A Modern History, that: “At the beginning of the 1960′s, Africa was the world’s most precarious region, its vast geographic centre was ‘empty’ of power, its northern and southern extremities (Algeria and South Africa) in the grip of forces that appeared irreconcilable to the rest of the continent. Its newly independent States with their fragile infrastructure and miniscule economies desperately required help, but help that would not be accompanied by political demands and ‘strings’. Political power depends upon economic strength, and economic strength was what Africa lacked. There were also complex psychological problems associated with independence: African nationalist leaders had to demand and take independence, they could never appear just to receive it. Moreover, the scars of colonialism ran deep for, as Nigeria’s Dr. Azikiwe had said back in 1948: ‘My country groans under a system which makes it impossible for us to develop our personalities to the full.’ And, as another young nationalist said to a European at this time: ‘You have never known what it is to live under colonialism. It’s humiliating’.” (P55, ibid)

Indeed, the former colonial powers were not prepared to let Africa find a development path on her own. In the midst of the Cold War, the western countries, unashamedly and unapologeti-cally, interfered and intervened directly in the internal affairs of independent African countries, resorting, in some instances, to violence and assassinations of those deemed to be against their interests.

Thus, neo-colonialism was not merely a descriptive political term but an actual lived experience of many Africans who had to content with this new insidious, but, still deadly phenomenon.

The fragile infrastructure and miniscule economies that Arnold talks about meant that many African countries were forced to agree to economic aid measures which were, however, accompanied by political demands and manipulations as well as both political and economic strings, which, in some instances, had invariably defined the destinies of some of our countries. Those African leaders bold enough to refuse these forms of neo-colonialism became the targets of the powerful nations of the North and their collaborators on the continent. It would, indeed, be disingenuous to suggest that the same phenomenon is non-existent today.

By the end of the 1970′s, a number of African States had tried, with less success, to take full control of their economies. At this period, many African countries were faced with adverse terms of trade, rising debt, poor and deteriorating infrastructure as well as declining economies. As a result, these countries sought more aid, got into more debt and found themselves increasingly at the mercy of former colonial powers.

Undoubtedly, the western powers liked what they saw because there were limited possibilities for African countries to escape their economic stranglehold.

Clearly, the problems experienced by African States, between the 1960′s and the 1980′s, stem from a number of factors, which include:

The emergence of neo-colonialism which meant few African countries could independently embark on any political and economic development route outside those designed, approved and managed by the erstwhile colonial powers;

The Western powers never envisaged independent African countries to decide their own development paths, rather, they sought to create dependent client States which could be manipulated according to the strategic and economic requirements of these western countries;

Through a number of measures, both political and economic, former colonial powers maintained their ‘spheres of influence’ consistent with old colonial divisions, hence, the zoning and entrenchment, thereof, of our continent as Anglo-phone Africa, Franco-phone Africa and Luso-phone Africa.

The weak and fragile economies of the newly independent countries left them vulnerable to the variety of political mechanisations of imperial powers;

The coincidence in the 1960′s, of the advent of African independence, with African States still being weak, and, the height of the Cold War, made it possible for new actors to enter the African scene in the form of the USA and the USSR. These two powerful players used the continent as one of their sites for their global confrontations at the time when the continent was trying to shake-off the shackles of colonialism. Today, the lives of many Africans attests to the fact that the wounds of those Cold War confrontations are yet to heal;

The colonially-imposed boundaries became fetters in the processes of nation-building, serving as flashpoints of internal conflicts and instability as well as fuelling inter-states conflicts;Debt, aid, manipulations by aid donors and unfavourable trade terms, especially for exports, falling agricultural outputs, natural disasters and others, became an albatross on many African countries;

Conflicts, wars, military interventions and autocracy became widespread, supplanting democracy.

World recession in the 1980′s had a negative impact on the continent’s weak economies;

Economies became either stagnant or declined during this period.

Clearly, for three decades, the combination of these negative factors conspired to deny our countries, individually and collectively, the possibilities of development and economic growth and, thereby, postponing the attainment of a better life for millions of Africans. Unity and integration, as envisaged by Nkrumah, could not happen under these conditions.

It is clear, then, that there are a number of conditions necessary for the attainment of the higher level of unity and integration of Africa. One of these conditions is that all of Africa had to be free. However, with many parts of the continent not free, even in the1970′s, especially most of southern Africa, the matter of integration became practically feasible only in the last decade of the twentieth century.

Chairperson,

In 1991, 51 independent African states gathered in Abuja, Nigeria, to establish the African Economic Community (AEC) as an integral part of the OAU. The following are the objectives of the Community:

To promote economic, social and cultural development and the integration of African economies in order to increase economic self-reliance and promote an endogenous and self-sustained development;

To establish, on a continental scale, a framework for the development, mobilisation and utilisation of the human and material resources of Africa in order to achieve a self-reliant development;

To promote cooperation in all fields of human endeavour in order to raise the standard of living of African peoples, and maintain and enhance economic stability, foster close and peaceful relations among Member States and contribute to the progress, development and economic integration of the Continent; and

To coordinate and harmonise policies among existing and future economic communities in order to foster the gradual establishment of the Community.

To realise these objectives it was agreed that, among others, the existing economic communities will be strengthened and new ones established; agreements would be finalised with the aim of harmonising and coordinating policies among existing and future sub-regional and regional economic communities.

Further, there would be the liberalisation of trade through the abolition, among Member States of Customs Duties and Non-Tariff Barriers so as to establish free trade areas in each regional economic community.

The countries also agreed to adopt a common trade policy, ensure a common external tariff and establish a common market. Of importance, there was to be a gradual removal, among Member States, of obstacles to the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital and the right of residence and establishment.

The 51 African countries then agreed to implement these and other decisions in six stages over a transitional period of 34 years.

The First Stage of a period of five years, for instance, was for the strengthening and establishment of regional economic communities. The Second Stage of eight years was to deal among other things, with the gradual removal of tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers and gradual harmonisation of customs duties.

Then, the Third Stage of ten years had to deal with the establishment of Free Trade Areas while the Fourth Stage of two years would address the harmonisation of tariff and non-tariff systems among the various regional economic communities with a view to establishing a continental Customs Union by means of adopting a common external tariff.

The Fifth Stage would establish an African Common Market for a period of four years and also include the harmonisation of monetary, financial and fiscal policies as well as ensuring the free movement of persons.

The Sixth Stage of five years would be used for the consolidation and strengthening of the structures of the African Common Market, the integration of all sectors, namely economic, political, social and cultural; the establishment of a single domestic market and a Pan-African Economic and Monetary Union, the establishment of a single African Central Bank and the creation of a single African Currency. This Stage would also see setting-up of the structure of the Pan-African Parliament and election of its members by continental universal suffrage.

Of course, as we have seen with the matter of the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament, some of these processes may in fact come earlier than envisaged. But a review of the various regional economic communities (REC’s), which are the building blocks of our integration, will reveal that some of our regions have not advanced beyond the first stages identified by the prescriptions of the African Economic Community (AEC) as outlined in the Abuja Treaty.

For instance, there is uneven development of the REC’s, resulting in some of these bodies being unable to implement the prescriptions of the Abuja Treaty. Accordingly, it would be difficult to argue successfully that we have strengthened all the REC’s.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has made remarkable progress on many of the prescriptions of the African Economic Community. The region has signed a protocol on free movement of persons including the abolishment of visas for citizens of ECOWAS; has approved the free movement of goods, established an ECOWAS common external tariff, removal of all non-tariff barriers of a monetary nature and introduced the ECOWAS travellers cheque. So clearly, this is great achievement in the direction of integration.

My own region, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which has not achieved as much as ECOWAS, has adopted an overall strategy so as to realise the lofty vision of the African Economic Community as contained in the Abuja Treaty. SADC has adopted the Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan as well as Strategic Indicative Plan for the Organ on Politics. These two strategic plans are consistent with the vision of continental integration and focus on policy harmonisation as directed by the Abuja Treaty and help with the acceleration of SADC integration agenda.

There are views that, because we have difficulties in implementing the Abuja Treaty, we should abandon our attempts to strengthen the building blocks of our integration and go straight to integrating at continental level. I must say, I have never heard of a builder who abandons the foundation and start with the roof of a house because the building site is full of rocks.

Further, it is clear that the African countries that met in Abuja, Nigeria in 1991, understood very well that integration should happen hand in hand with development. Hence, the emphasis on drawing programmes aimed at the facilitation of better economic activities and the removal of barriers to economic growth and development.

Accordingly, integration is a means through which all Africans should and must collaborate to harness diffused energies and competencies, utilise our vast natural resources and internal economic strengths so as to give our continent a comparative and competitive advantage in the world market.

Because our individual economies are small, our hope for a better market share in the global economy lies in our combined efforts. That is why the Abuja Treaty is such an important benchmark which we should use as we address the many prescriptions it contains among which is the urgent challenge of strengthening regional economic communities.

Clearly, the integration of Africa will be easier and faster when we have, among others, dealt with the many challenges identified by the Abuja Treaty because this is a Treaty drafted from the practical experience of the African people and expressed by a leadership that is undoubtedly committed to the integration of Africa.

If we are to look at the experience of European integration we will realise that part of the challenge faced in this process of integration was to address underdevelopment. Accordingly, the European Union (EU) set up what they called Structural Funds to give financial support to under-developed and economically weak EU regions and countries.

These Structural Funds comprised of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund (ESF), European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Pre-Accession Aid and the Cohesion Fund. Between them, they now make-up a major part of the EU budget.

Through these Funds, the EU has managed to help with the further development of the economies of countries such as Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Greece as well as the poorer regions of countries such as Sweden and England.

Clearly, Africa is different from Europe in many respects, especially with regard to their respective economic development.

Today, the annual budgets of many African countries are made-up mainly of foreign aid money. Usually, as we know, the donor countries exert pressure on the recipient countries to pursue particular policies.

In this regard, the question that Africans should ask is: what impact will the donor-recipient unequal relationship impact on our process of integration. Will we achieve an integration that benefits the ordinary people of Africa, or would this process ensure easy control of Africa by powerful nations since these outsiders had an influence on the integration path of the continent.

However, these are challenges, which we cannot avoid but should be examined fully and honestly by all of us. Whatever difficulties we encounter we should not lose sight of our main objective of unity and integration. Accordingly, at all times we should consistently and faithfully pursue the prescriptions of the Abuja Treaty and the objectives of Constitutive Act of the AU, develop our economies and ensure that integration and development proceed side by side.

Chairperson,

Some observers talk about the coincidence of historical processes represented by the adoption of the Abuja Treaty with the evolving of a very important era in modern African politics, represented by an unprecedented democratisation process and the deepening of that democracy by measures taken by Africans themselves with the participation of the masses of our people.

Although in the 1990′s our continent still experienced a number of wars and conflicts, the decade was characterised more by the return of democracy to many countries such that by the end of the decade, multi-party elections and democratic governments were more a norm than an exception. At this period, with the exception of the Western Sahara, all of Africa was free.

The economies of many of our countries were beginning a process of recovery, registering better rates of growth than had been the case for almost three decades. The masses of our people were themselves, in the midst of socio-political changes, redefining their role in society, away from the docile and pliant citizens to being active agents of change.

Emboldened by these developments, we made bold to declare the 21st century an African Century where our collective energies, the processes and programmes that we have adopted would defeat the wretched conditions of the African people as they confidently march towards a prosperous future.

We entered the new century having transformed the OAU into the African Union and adopted its development programme, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. Many of the NEPAD programmes are being implemented and because we are dealing with a century-old colonial legacy, it will obviously take years for some of these projects to begin making a visible impact on the lives of our people. But the indisputable fact is that: we are on the march!

On Sunday, in Accra, we launched the Pan-African Infrastructure Development Fund – part of the NEPAD initiative – with the governments of South Africa and Ghana, as well we African Development Bank playing a central role together with private sector financial institutions from our continent.

We are indeed happy that the launch of this Fund, starting with an initial amount of US$625 million took place when Africa is celebrating Ghana’s 50th anniversary of independence.

The Fund, which will invest mainly in four key areas of Energy; Transport – including rail, roads, ports and airports; Telecommunication; and Water and Sanitation will clearly have a positive impact on the lives of many people.

We are happy that the initial investors are from Africa because they have demonstrated, in a practical way, that we as Africans have both the determination and the ability to meet the challenges facing our continent. As we embark on the projects identified by this Fund, we will need the skills of people such as these that have gathered at this university because we obviously need a lot of expertise to build infrastructure on our continent.

We will also need our brothers and sisters who are in the Diaspora to be part of this initiative as well as the hundreds of thousands of the skilled Africans who left the continent during the difficult years of the past.

In this regard, we have a duty to strengthen our universities, ensure that they have requisite resources to produce graduates with high kills and attract back into the continent, thousands of those skilled Africans who left for the developed countries. This is part of the building blocks that we must use to attain the important steps identified in the Abuja Treaty for our integration. We may not have the billions the EU has in its Structural Funds, but African initiatives such as the Infrastructure Fund affords us the space, among others, to ensure that Africans own their assets and we are able to determine our own loan terms that will help develop our countries rather than put debt albatross in the necks of succeeding generations of Africans.

Dear friends,

In one of the epic dialogues of his latest masterpiece, Wizard of the Crow, the Kenyan writer and thinker, Ngugi wa Thiong’o, has this line of thought:

“Why did Africa let Europe cart away millions of Africa’s souls from the continent to the four corners of the wind? How could Europe lord it over a continent ten times its size? Why does needy Africa continue to let its wealth meet the needs of those outside its borders and then follow behind with hands outstretched for a loan of the very wealth it let go? (p681 wa Thiong’o, Ngugi, Wizard of the Crow, 2006, Harvill Secker, London).

The pathos embedded in our history as captured in this moving dialogue invokes the need for Africans to look hard at the mirror of history and at the challenges entrenched in the womb of the present.

We have already started this irreversible process to redress the failures of history. We dare not fail!

Chairperson,

The AU Ordinary Session to which I referred at the beginning and which was ably chaired by President Kufour, adopted the important Accra Declaration. We agreed to accelerate the economic and political integration of Africa and move towards the formation of a Union Government with a view to ultimately realise the objective of the United States of Africa as envisaged by the founding fathers of the Organisation of African Unity, and in particular, the visionary leader, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana.

The meeting recognised the need for common responses to the major challenges of globalisation facing Africa and boosting regional integration processes through an effective continental mechanism. We also agreed to open-up narrow domestic markets to greater trade and investment through freer movement of persons, goods, services and capital so as to accelerate growth an reduce weaknesses of many of our Member States.

Further, the meeting also recognised that the Union Government should be built on common values that need to be identified and agreed upon.

In all these processes, it is agreed that the African peoples should be involved in order to ensure that the African Union becomes, in reality a Union of peoples and not just a ‘Union of states and governments’. Both these masses of our people as well as the African Diaspora should be involved in the processes of economic and political integration of our continent.

Chairperson, if we implement fully all these decisions that will clearly advance our processes of integration and development then we will have the right to say to Ayi Kwei Armah that indeed the beautiful ones are now being born!

NOTE BY CRAIG EISELE:

    I hope that President Mbeki has been apprised of the Trans African Development Company project plan for Africa… it seems we share some of the same visions.  

July 12, 2007

Western Firms Scramble for Africa’s Wealth as Africa Struggles

Africa Slumbers As Western Firms Scramble for Its Wealth

The Nation (Nairobi)
NEWS
8 July 2007
Posted to the web 9 July 2007

By John Mbaria
Nairobi
As Western – and now Chinese – companies gather around the greatest concentration of Africa’s natural resources, countries on the continent are yet to embark on positioning local businesses to share in the windfall, analysts say.

Although many international companies in Africa are of Western origin, China seems to be determined to challenge this hegemony, particularly as far as securing oil concession and other businesses in many African countries are concerned.

Analysts add that in doing this, China is not only driven by its own energy predicament, but also by a realisation that Africa is a place Western capital has not entirely “colonised”.

The US’ Energy Information Administration estimates that the continent holds 8 per cent of the known global oil resources and 11 per cent of the world’s production. This might seem a low percentage, but when it is taken into account that much of Africa’s oil is neither discovered nor exploited, one appreciates the fact that it is a substantial resource.

But as global economic growth rises with the US needing an estimated 119.2 million barrels a day and China 14.2 million by 2025, it is believed that Africa’s oil resources will increasingly become a strategically important resource. Already, the “scramble” for this resource has begun in such countries as Chad, Guinea, Nigeria, Uganda, Angola and Sudan, while others such as Kenya, which do not have known oil deposits, are being targeted for exploration.

Global capital

The million-dollar question is how different African countries will position their economies to benefit from not just oil royalties and taxes, but also in terms of attracting global capital to invest in industries and ventures that will create significant multiplier effects and lift millions from poverty and depravity.

As Kenya’s case shows, Africa has not even started to make this a priority. The Sunday Nation has keenly observed that in areas with the greatest concentration of natural resources in Kenya, the local people and, by extension, the country as a whole, has not even started to appreciate their worth.

Africa is asleep in as far as creating modern business ventures from its resources is concerned. For instance, long before subsidiaries of multinationals came in to bottle and offer “designer” water in the market, springs and streams were regarded as a communal resource to be used by all. And until very recently, locals would merely go to the nearest forest to collect as much fuel wood as their backs could carry.

And although some communities used wildlife for protein while others had long traded in ivory, many in Kenya had not learnt to commercialise its “aesthetic” value. But as Africa sleeps, American, European and Asian companies have based “roaring” businesses on its resources. With a history of innovation, better resource exploitation technology and the ability to strike very lucrative deals with the local elite, such capital is moving fast and furious, and might eventually root out what remains of Africa’s social system of yester years.

The new international concerns investing in Africa’s oil and other resources are completing a pattern started in the colonial period and which is almost intact in many African countries. For instance, perched in the periphery of Kenya’s principal forests or concentrated in the vicinity of principal national parks and pristine springs and streams are remnants of the colonial business order.

But now newer companies have set in – credit to the apparent triumph of globalisation – to give the Kenyan economic landscape a newer, refurbished and increasingly exclusive look. Today, we can talk of Coca-Cola’s designer water Dasani, Brooke Bond’s Green Label tea, Kakuzi’s more efficient kilns, Homegrown’s multi-million-dollar horticultural outfits around Naivasha and in Nanyuki or the luxurious spread of African Safari Club’s exclusive resorts in Mombasa’s North Coast.

This scenario is replicated in many African countries. For example, while on a tour of areas around Lake Malawi last year, I learnt that the locals can no longer access much of the lake as it is almost envelope’ by companies that have put up a stream of exclusive tourist lodges and private estates. Malawi newspapers had reported complaints by the traditional chiefs who threatened to mobilise their subjects if the situation was not rectified. The lake is the second largest in Africa after Victoria.

All this has been going on despite a reawakening in many parts of the continent. But interestingly, there is a world of difference between how Western analysts and their counterparts in Africa view this scenario.

Those in the West seem to believe that the continent’s resources are up for grabs by international businesses and that the only “outlandish” threat is China which, they say, will be an economic superpower in the near future.

For instance, writes Assis Malaquais, an associate professor of government at St Lawrence University, New York: “China’s attempt to quench its own growing energy thirst in Africa will hardly be welcome by the US.”

He goes ahead to explore global security scenarios that China’s quest for Africa’s oil portends and concludes; “the stage is set for a colossal tug-of-war between the United States and China over Africa’s oil resources.” Reading through his article, one gets the impression that Africa and its people do not feature anywhere in making decisions on who is to benefit from the continent’s oil and other natural wealth.

On their part, local analysts, especially the lobby groups, feel that the trend in which Africans’ needs and views are disregarded when it comes to strategically positioning their resources portends grave danger for future peace on the continent.

Many cite rising levels of hopelessness, debilitating poverty and stunted economies, thanks to mismanagement, outright looting and increasing global emasculation as the fodder nurturing mass anger and resentment. They cite the case of the oil-rich Niger Delta of Nigeria where there has been a long running and well documented confrontation between the local people and government forces.

African governments should move fast to ensure all the agreements they make with international companies on exploitation of natural resources cater for the local people’s interests. Such deals ought to be fashioned in such a way that they will enable the nurturing of local talent and capacity for future takeover.

Protectionism, some analysts believe, may help to secure local interests in the short term, but ultimately what Africa needs is to develop its own ability to be truly competitive. The continent needs also to develop from its own resources.

ICT Africa Investment Summit

ICT Africa Investment Summit

Accra Mail (Accra)
NEWS
12 July 2007
Posted to the web 12 July 2007
Accra
African stakeholders in the ICT sector are gathering in Accra today, Thursday 12-14 July 2007 for the annual ICT Africa Investment Summit where issues of investment and service delivery in the broadcasting and telecommunications industry will fall under the spotlight.

Telkom’s Senior Executive for Business Development, Wayne Song, will chair the topic Broadband infrastructure projects and applications in Africa.

This topic will examine some of the broadband infrastructure projects and applications through the following sub-topics: broadband via satellite, satellite system, the Nepad infrastructure projects, challenges of implementing infrastructure projects in Africa: experience from SAT-3 operations.

The summit is an annual forum where Africa stakeholders in the ICT sector come together to address issues that are critical to securing increased investment in the broadcasting and telecommunications infrastructure and service delivery in the continent.

“It makes perfect sense for Telkom to be involved in such conversations as they are aligned to our growth strategy which seeks increased footprint into the continent,” said Song.

The summit also highlights the investment opportunities in the sector and identifies options for accelerated development of the ICT infrastructure in Africa. The summit brings together diverse stakeholders in the sector ranging from policy makers, regulators, operators, service providers, potential investors, financial institutions and consumers.

As a leading telecommunications service provider, Telkom has previously attended the summit. In this regard, Telkom has, in the past two years consecutively, won The Kemilinks International ICT Award for the Best National Fixed Line.

Kemilinks International is the coordinator for the ICT Africa Investment Summit. The awards were established to promote the use of ICT in Africa and to encourage best practice. They have been designed to recognise and reward those organisations and individuals that have demonstrated excellence in promoting the use of ICT for the overall development of the African continent.

Other topics for discussion will include rising to the challenge of the broadband gap in Africa, convergence and digitalisation: issues arising for Africa, spectrum planning and allocation: what are the stakes in Africa, country strategies in deployment of broadband networks in Africa, investing in broadband infrastructures: funding sources and strategies, ICT infrastructure development in Africa: issues arising.

“Telkom’s expansion strategy commits Telkom to increasing its broadband footprint in the African continent. Our latest acquisitions of both Multi-Links and Africa Online are a case in point,” stated Song.

Do Rich Nations Hold Key to Africa’s Success??

Continent Leaders, Rich Nations Hold Key to Africa’s Success

New Vision (Kampala)
COLUMN
11 July 2007
Posted to the web 12 July 2007

By Dr. Tajudeen
Kampala
SATURDAY July 7, 2007 marked the halfway point in a journey whose destination and time of arrival was set by 189 heads of state and governments from most countries of the world, including all the 53 member states of the African Union (AU).

It also included the only African country that is not a member of the AU, Morocco.

It was a large bus of hope that the leaders invited the peoples of the world but especially the poor, the marginalised, the sick, the weakest to join with promises that come 2015, the bus will deliver them to a better life and give them more concrete reasons to have faith in leaders, states and society.

The Millennium declaration was transformed into concrete, achievable, measurable; time- bound commitments known as Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). A journey of 15 years should have reached its midway point by July. So are we halfway to all the targets set in the eight goals?

If we are on target there will be no cause for alarm even though the driver and even some of the passengers may demand more effort to save more time. There is no harm in arriving early as long as we arrive safely. If we are not in the midway town, questions have to be asked why. Did the vehicle have a puncture? Or even worse was it involved in a headon collision or did it crash? Is the driver ok? Or did any of the passengers fall off or felt seriously sick needing emergency attention?

If the bus is still on the road but travelling slowly, we have to ask what can be done to make the journey smoother and safer, to catch up for lost time. The MDGs bus is happily not involved in any serious accident. It is still running across different regions of the world but the road-blocks are more in some places than in others.

Even within the same region there are varying speeds because in some parts the drivers seem to dose off whereas in others they are on full alert.

It is in Africa that the bus has been facing many road-blocks. Some of these were deliberately constructed by armed robbers of development (such as inept political leadership, corrupt elite and insensitive government and docile population) while others were artificially created by uncooperative users of the road (such as rich countries that continue to rob poorer countries through unfair trade) while some of the obstacles could be the result of what in Hausa is termed ‘gudu ba gyara’ – reckless driving.

The general global picture from the UN General-Secretary’s MID-term Report shows that Africa is the only continent where the MDGs risk not being met. Unfortunately, Africa is the region that needs the MDGs and really more than the MDGs than any other region of the world. But the general picture hides the growing success stories that show that it is not all bad news.

There are countries that are doing quite well on a number of the goals even if they may not meet all of them. Across the continent in education, most of the countries have seen huge rises in enrolment in primary schools as a result of debt relief and new prioritisation of the education of our children by many governments. Uganda, for instance, has raised the gear from universal primary education to the secondary level; Kenya is considering the same. Malawi has proven that where there is a will there is a way and even Africa’s sleeping giant, Nigeria has reintroduced compulsory universal basic education.

On maternal death in childbirth, infant mortality and education, Mozambique(returning to peace just in a decade) and Rwanda (that ended genocide only 12 years ago) are making steady progress. Uganda’s pioneering leadership in HIV/Aids awareness, advocacy, prevention and treatment are catching on in many countries that are actually beginning to do better than Uganda.

All this is good news and shows that it can be done and more can be achieved. South Africa is the only African country to have made a promise to achieve the MDGs not in 2015 but by 2014. Given the enormous resources of the country, it cannot be a congratulatory effort but it will be welcome.

Resource-rich African countries and those with big economies like Nigeria, South Africa, Kenya, Angola, DRC, Egypt, Libya, should really be judged by the MDGs because they and should do much better than that. Even the poorer countries like Ethiopia can do better if they set their priority right. If Ethiopia has resources to occupy another country it can certainly do better at home.

The main internal and external obstacles to not achieving the MDGs remain the political will of our leaders and the insincerity of the political leaders of the rich world. The covenant on the MDGs was a very simple one.

If poor countries deliver on goal 1-7, i.e. hunger, poverty, health , education, governance and rights issues and livelihood the richer countries will also deliver on Goal No 8: improved quality and quantity of aid, debt relief and reform of the unjust global trading system that penalises the poor. We need to hold our governments accountable for our side of the bargain.

But even as we are succeeding in that respect, our gains will not translate into sustainable development and social progress if the West and other rich countries of the world do not deliver on their own promise.

Mutual accountability of the political leaders of the world to their citizens (who are the passengers on the bus) is what will grease the rusty bits, service the engine and refuel the MDGs bus at mid-term so that it can coast home successfully by 2015.

July 9, 2007

Analysis of Options left for African Leaders in Formation of a “Unified” Government or African Union Government.

Union Govt – Options Left for African Leaders

This Day (Lagos)
NEWS
9 July 2007
Posted to the web 9 July 2007

By Gboyega Akinsanmi
Lagos
African Union (AU) leaders convened last week in Ghana to discuss modalities for establishing the United States of Africa, a regional government being designed to redefine the continent’s roles in the international community. But opinions and views differ on this agenda. While some leaders advocate for gradualism, others support immediate action. Gboyega Akinsanmi writes.

Just a fortnight ago, members of the European Union (EU) gathered in Brussels to deliberate on the union’s mandate, which analysts describe as a constitutive mechanism of regional governance. It was a moment of restating and defending national interests. Even when the agenda for better integration was tabled for crucial redefinition, each member state was conscious of not just what its nationals stand to gain if “a fuller continental governance framework is agreed upon, but what becomes its internal institutions, structures and values the moment EU Mandate is passed.” This has pushed countries like the United Kingdom (UK) to declare that it would not support of any mandate that contravenes her governance ideals. Turkey, for reasons not limited to defending its sovereign entity, did not endorse the mandate, but this did not stop the process.

In Asia too, member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are becoming wearied of regional economic communities (RECs), thus meeting at different summits and fora discussing how better continental government could be constituted. While the United States (US) too is left with the option of joining EU, African Union (AU) just concluded its 9th Ordinary Session where its 53 member states from Cairo to Cape re-examined the possibility of establishing the United States of Africa, an idea which and Ghana’s maiden President, Osagyefo Kwame Nkrumah first introduced more than fifty years ago. Unlike what gave rise to this idea in the day of Nkrumah, African leaders perceived the importance of coming together with a view to redefining the continent’s roles in the global community, where according to realists might and strength determine what a nation-state state stands to gain in the process of inter-state relations.

As Akin Oyebode, a professor of International Law, recently argued at a roundtable which Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), the regional government is becoming a new order in the world of 21st century not because of the expansionist drive that shaped the world from the nineteenth to twentieth centuries. He termed its rationale for the need for better cooperation and integration among nation-states aimed at ensuring sustainable peace and security. This gives credence to the emerging trend of regional governance, which some analysts argue it is essential for global development and peaceful co-existence. This development must have informed Martin Khor, an eminent Asian economist when sometimes in June, stated that “one can no longer doubt the fact that globalisation is shaping the world of 21st Century more rapidly than ever imagined.

From what experts have said, the benefits of regional governance are unlimited and uncountable. But African states are lame ducks, most of which depend on foreign aid and assistance in order to meet the public needs. At the summit, this seemed not to have rung bell in their minds as the AU Government agenda was reduced to academic debate. The agenda polarised the continent’s Heads of State. At last, there was no consensus on what seems to have set the pace another EU administration in Africa. According to most commentators, the union government has potential to set pace for the birth of regional good governance on the continent. However nationalists flawed this position, stating that regionalism “does not transform to sound democratic governance automatically. It is argued that some level of people-oriented governance, peaceful co-existence and sustainable development must first be achieved at the national level. These qualities, as donor agencies and foreign partners have observed in various reports and studies, are present in African states. Rather African countries are plagued with bad governance, corruption and large-scale corruption. This kind of environment, as evidences shown in all parts of the world, is not good enough for this model of governance, which could have been tagged the United States of Africa.

AU’s Antecedent

Like EU whose creation was traceable to the European Economic Community, AU has a long historical antecedent. The spirit of African cooperation and integration, some historians have opined, is as old as the origin of mankind on the continent. According to them, the continent was characterised with social harmony and peace prior to the advent of colonialism, the experience which further sealed off the cracks in the continent’s walls of brotherhood and united them as the same brothers and sisters in battle against the justice of the west. So, argued Oyebode, the integration of African states has been existing in mind and spirit before Nkrumah, the Father of African Union, proposed the idea just after Organisation of African Unity (OUA) was established almost fifty years ago.

He made two major proposals. First is the United States of Africa while second is African High Command. The former, he argued, “requires African independent states irrespective of their colour, language and race to come to together and form a common government strong enough to meet the meet their people who were just let loose from the manacle of colonial power.” But his first proposal was not supported among other African leaders because most states were ready to surrender their sovereign powers. The latter was meant to establish an African Armed Forces. As some experts said, this idea was borne out of the need to defend the territorial integrity of Africa. Nkrumah’s proposal of African High Command was informed by the continent’s decades of servitude under different colonial powers. But the fear of domination or what some scholars called internal colonialism, discouraged most African leaders like President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania and Sir Abubakr Tafawa Balewa to cast off his proposals in the waste bin of history.

The OUA existed for forty years with insignificant success and mixed reactions of poor performance. The institution could be likened to a monument of African independent, though as analysts observed, “this does not translate to desired governance, peaceful co-existence and sustainable development. Rather the history of African states is no better than the history of war, which has brought untold miseries to both extinct and existing generations of African people.” In this light, as the new institutionalists argued, it “will take decisive efforts of African leaders to set their loose from this jinx of decades.”

It was upon this impression that the leaders of Africa convened seven years ago to redefine the framework of intra-African relations. The idea of Nkrumah was invoked again to shape the continent that was then being consumed in the furnace of civil wars and armed conflicts. These form the challenges which development agencies and foreign partners would lead to the collapse of civil order in Africa. Ghanaian President John Agyekum Kufuor stressed this while addressing the summit that the need to end the continent’s nightmares culminated in the establishment of AU. Unlike when Nkrumah proposed it decades ago, the continent’s tune of cooperation and integration has now taken a new dimension. In the last summit, almost all African leaders agreed that there “is a need for regional government if the continent must be relevant in the new world and compete reasonably, but the speed to evolve this kind of government polarised the leaders into either the axis of gradualism and that immediate action championed by South African President Thabo Mbeki and his Libyan counterpart President Muammar Ghaddafi respectively.

Inside the Summit

A lot of questions were raised on how to evolve the union government. When started, African leaders were united on how to manage conflicts in Darfur and Somalia. In harmony, they called for another United Nations (UN) resolution to end the years of violence and armed conflict, the ripple effects of which some of them believe would hinder the flow of foreign direct investments (FDIs) to the continent because of the spread of terrorist attacks and activities therein. Besides, there was emphasis on how to end the regime of poverty, health crisis, bad governance, human trafficking and massive unemployment, which still constitute the major challenges of Africa.

Reacting to what one could term “major threat to human survival,” Kufuor took the position of Nkrumah when he said “we must not fail the people of Africa and its future by unexamined decisions during this grand debate”. This was the notice he served to other Heads of States and Governments at the opening of the Session. “We are at the crossroad, and at the same time at the threshold of a new era, with great opportunities but also many challenges and responsibilities for Africa. Whatever position any of us will espouse in the debate should be guided by tolerance and critical analysis, even when we disagree with each others’ positions. Given our high sense of responsibility to the course, I am confident that this Summit will rise to the occasion and the challenges ahead,” Kufuor said.

He was hopeful that since it was agreed that this all important issue of union government should be debated upon within the various countries by their respective citizenry, it is hoped that whatever the African leaders would put forward as their view points would reflect the views of their people. With this guiding principle, the leader of modern Ghana said, everything else should be secondary. He stressed “gender, religion, ideology and country should all be subsumed under the welfare of the peoples of Africa who empower us as their leaders to meet at this Summit, emphasising, “only our peoples’ ownership of this debate will give this conference its legitimacy and sustainability”.

Kufuor hammered on the need for individual African countries to merge their resources for the common interest of the continent in order to stand the howling tide of globalisation, which requires might and strength to prove African relevance in the new global order. Using the effusive words of Nkrumah, Kufuor said in resounding echo that “Africa must unite.” This, according to him would seek to accelerate Africa’s development, had been slowed down by a litany of factors including slavery, colonialism, imperialism, diverse cultures, language, geographical barriers, racism and bad governance.

Given the complexities and practical difficulties in the path of attaining the proposed Union Government, Kufuor charged the various Africa leaders to make mutual trust and respect their topmost priorities. We must, he said, acknowledge the necessity for shared values in terms of respect for human rights, principles of good governance and the rule of law. These values Kufuor described as the requirement of an effective Union Government that should constitute the fabric of the Union’s budding institutions like the Pan-African Parliament, the Union Court of Justice and Human Rights among others. Concluding with the words of encouragement, he said: “We should be able to arrive at a common understanding of the sort of continental government we want for ourselves and how to develop a roadmap with timelines towards its realization. This is our cross”.

Summit of Storms

When the summit started, there seemed to be harmony among African leaders. But the trouble kicked when the agenda of Union Government was tabled, and the leaders were divided on its pace. Ghaddafi, who led the radicals, advocated for immediate action. He was aflame about the idea indicating that this is an idea, which has for some time been consuming him. He ceased the opportunity to drum up the need for unity for Africa to overcome its myriad problems. He did not waste time in setting the agenda, calling on the continent to unite under a single government to compete effectively in a globalised world. But while he was supported by Senegal’s President Abdoulaye Wade, President Umaru Yar’Adua and his South African counterpart Thabo Mbeki opposed on the ground that the plan for union government should be implemented without rush.

But Foreign Minister Sheikh Tidiane Gadio said Senegal was ready to put its name to a new government, stating that a breaking down of barriers could only benefit the continent. We can even bypass the discussions, according to him, Africans are ready, but the question is: are the African governments ready to catch up with their people. Like Ghaddafi, he subscribed to a common foreign and defence policy in Africa as well as an easing of trade barriers, which according to him, are clogs in the wheel of African development.

In the view of Mbeki, the troubles experienced by the AU since it was launched at a summit he hosted in Durban half a decade ago should be addressed by strengthening arms such as the current executive, the AU commission. At the last summit in Ethiopia in January, Mbeki told one delegate there was no point in building the roof over a house without cementing the foundations. Speaking from the perspective of Mbeki, African Union commission President, Professor Alpha Oumar Konare acknowledged at the opening of the three-day meeting that the current executive had to be improved and its remit was ill-defined.

But Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe did not support the above position as he joined the radicals to advocate for immediate actions. He said: “To tell you the truth, until and unless we put our act together, organise and start pulling our resources together, we will never ever prosper from any aid and assistance from any source outside Africa.”

What Options?

When the continent leaders could reach consensus, Ghaddafi called for referendum to determine what the masses support the idea or not. Even though referendum is conducted and majority of African people throw their weight at the constitution of Union Government, can a myriad of African crises and contradictions not bedevil it? Just as it is in Europe, both governance and security environments play key roles in building an effective regional government. Unlike the EU whose member states have good records of governance except in few countries that are just emerging from the ashes of armed conflict, Africa does not have enabling environment and basic infrastructures required to establish an effective continental government. This is what is required of African states to achieve before discussing a union government, which can only be facilitated by accountable governance, good standard of living, functional infrastructures and peaceful co-existence.

July 2, 2007

IMF Blamed for 854 Million Hungry.

Food for 12 Billion. So Why Did 854 Million Go Without?

Inter Press Service (Johannesburg)
NEWS
29 June 2007
Posted to the web 2 July 2007

By Christi Van Der Westhuizen
Geneva
“As you are suffering from over-consumption, I am suffering from under-consumption. We need to strike a balance,” said Mary Wahu Kaara from the Kenya Debt Relief Network with reference to the North and the South.

Her words were echoed by Hilkka Pietila, honorary president of the World Federation of United Nations Associations: “We are wasting food in the North. We are eating too much, burning grain as fuel, and growing grain to feed pigs to slaughter for ham.”

Their contributions were part of a heated debate over the past two days about the eradication of hunger, this at the Civil Society Development Forum. The three-day meeting is being hosted by the Conference of Non-governmental Organisations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO) and the United Nations Millennium Campaign. It ends Saturday.

Jean Ziegler, U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, alerted the more than 500 delegates that while 854 million people went without food in the world last year, enough food was produced to feed 12 billion people. “This is why a child that dies from famine is murder,” Ziegler said.

Food is being over-produced in industrialised countries where some 349 billion dollars have been spent on agricultural subsidies for a minority of people. Only 2.5 percent of the French and 4.9 percent of the Swiss population are farmers, said Ziegler.

“You can go to the Dakar market (in Senegal) and find Spanish, French, German and Italian fruit and vegetables at half or one-third of the local prices. The African farmers work 15 hours a day but they cannot compete with subsidies. This is systematically destroying Africa’s agriculture,” he pointed out.

“Nothing is being done about the dumping policy. The Third World is feeding us (Europeans). That is what is keeping this system in place.”

Ziegler called the International Monetary Fund (IMF) the “mercenary organisation of the financial oligarchies that dominate the world”.

He gave the following example to justify his comment: Niger, the second poorest country in the world, had a national veterinary office which provided free vaccinations and other services for the 22 million head of cattle in the country.

The IMF insisted on the privatisation of the service and threatened to withdraw its funding, something Niger’s government fought without success. Since privatisation, herds have been destroyed because people could not pay for vaccinations. “The IMF has destroyed the way of life of tens of thousands of families,” Ziegler said.

According to him, the argument of those in favour of market-based policies is that any state intervention in the market is a perversion. If famine was to be ended, for instance, it would have to be through increased market-based production. However, the legal right to food is the only weapon against the daily massacre of people by famine, Ziegler concluded.

Martin Khor, director of the global non-governmental organisation Third World Network, echoed these sentiments, saying that he disagreed with the World Bank on the issue of cheap poultry from Europe being dumped in Ghana and destroying the local chicken market.

“I would say the government has the right to put up protective tariffs to save its chicken industry. But the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are urging developing states to drop their tariffs as close to zero percent as possible while rich countries continue with their agricultural subsidies,” Khor added.

“The IMF told Ghana they cannot push up tariffs. If they do it, the IMF will withdraw its loan from Ghana.”

A similar situation exists in Senegal, according to Demba Moussa Dembele, director of the Forum for African Alternatives, which is based in that country. European chickens had “invaded” Senegal, causing local farmers to lose 70 percent of market share.

Similarly, an agreement with the European Union on fisheries had seen Senegal’s fishing waters depleted of fish. “Now young migrants follow the fish to Spain in small fishing vessels,” Dembele said.

The cotton sector has also suffered. African farmers have been put out of business by subsidies to U.S. cotton farmers.

“The Group of Eight says they want to help Africa. We do not need help. We need to be allowed to live off our own resources and what we produce. We need to eliminate policies that go against this right and we need to claim food sovereignty,” Dembele argued.

Nikhil Seth, director of support and coordination at the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), said a contradiction has emerged when looking at the first Millennium Development Goal, which focuses on halving hunger and poverty by 2015. While the number of poor people has dropped below one billion, increasing numbers of people are suffering from hunger and malnutrition.

He places the blame squarely on the tariff barriers and agricultural subsidies of rich countries. Land holdings are becoming fragmented and no productivity gains have been seen in poor states.

Food security, agricultural development and the role of trade and aid are interlinked issues, said Lakshmi Puri, director of international trade at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

The majority of the poor in developing countries are mostly subsistence farmers undermined by subsidised produce and dumped food. In the developing world, agriculture is frequently the engine of development. But aid to boost agriculture has been dropping since the 1980s, Puri said.

Richard Newfarmer, economic adviser on international trade at the World Bank, came to the organisation’s defence, denying that the Bank had urged all countries to reduce tariffs to as close to zero percent as possible — as alleged by Khor. In cases where the bank opted for lower tariffs, it was in order for the poor to get cheaper food.

He also insisted that when the Bank talks about property rights, it is referring not to those of big corporations, but to the property rights of the poor. If farmers are given ownership of land they can invest money in that land, he added.

However, Colm O. Cuanachain, international campaigns director at ActionAid, pointed out that while 80 percent of food is produced by women, only 10 percent of land is owned by women. This is caused by World Bank policies which undermine the ability of poor people to own and work the land, he said. Governments are not addressing this problem through their policies.

The result is that the income gap between farmers and food companies has grown tremendously and is currently at 100 billion US dollars, he said. The top 30 companies control one-third of the global grocery market.

Similarly, ActionAid’s Nancy Kachingwe said that as more arable land is being used for cash crops in Africa, more women lose access to land — which has a direct effect on nutrition in the household.

As a solution, Pietila proposed that agriculture be removed from the ambit of the World Trade Organisation because, as people have a right to food, food is not a commodity.

The U.N. agencies dealing with food and agriculture, such as the World Food Programme and Food and Agriculture Organisation, have to be welded into one organisation that should also take responsibility for trade in food products, she said.

Seth also said investment is needed in agriculture, specifically for basic economic infrastructure, seed, water and equipment.

June 29, 2007

Language a Barrier to Investment, Plea to African Journalists to Provide Better Explanations of Events

Simply enough English is a common language… but not really.

Take the word Scheme… in the African and European language it is commonly meant to mean a plan… but in the Americas it has a negative connotation meaning a plan to defraud.

It the word Exploit. In Africa it is the mining or development of natural resources or other benefits for a greater good…. but in the America’s it is commonly meant as a raping or pillaging or otherwise taking advantage of a person, group of people or others that have no abilities to defend or protect themselves.

Sadly I believe that words used by many reporters in articles emanating from Africa, are often misinterpreted by Americans and others around the globe, who then immediately have a negative opinion of the events being described no mater how good or beneficial they are.

Words have tremendous impact in Investors… how they are used and a failure to explain them for a broader audience often ends up alienating those who cannot understand the meaning of words within the context of the culture using them.

I therefore urge those who write about business and events in Africa to try and give more detailed information in their articles to better inform the global population of the actual meaning of those events.

I am not asking you to change your language that you use for that would be inappropriate. I ask that you only make your meaning a bit more clear to help erase the negative stigmatism that certain words reflect to others around the globe and to foster an understanding of the marvelous things that are taking place in Africa today.

South Africa’s State-owned “Transnet” makes Great Strides in Turnaround

True Test Further Down the Track

Business Day (Johannesburg)
ANALYSIS
29 June 2007
Posted to the web 29 June 2007

By Hilary Joffe
Johannesburg
ASKED recently which projects he would most like to finance, the project finance chief of one large bank began by listing the coal line to Richards Bay, the iron-ore line to Saldanha and the Durban port. But, he said wryly, Transnet CE Maria Ramos had made it clear she wasn’t about to let any of those core assets out of her hands.

And indeed she is not. State-owned Transnet is spending R78bn over the next five years to modernise and expand its rail, port and pipeline infrastructure, but the parastatal plans to fund most of that with its own cash flows, and with about R25bn of borrowing from debt capital markets. So while it has sold a collection of assets deemed noncore, in order to strengthen its balance sheet and position itself as the focused freight and transport logistics company Ramos wants it to be, its freight rail, port and pipeline assets are no longer up for grabs.

So while concessioning out the Durban port, for example, was once an option, it no longer is. “I have yet to be convinced that there is an overwhelming case for replacing ownership of these core assets, whether by sale or by concession. I just don’t see it,” says Ramos.

“And I’m saying that as someone who has sold assets.”

The point perhaps is not so much that anyone is pushing any longer for privatisation or even for public-private partnerships in Transnet, but rather that there would, at least in theory, have been different ways of pursuing the objective of building public infrastructure.

The government chose this route, backing the strategy Ramos began to implement when she took the helm in January 2004. So it’s ironic, but probably not coincidental, that now that the pieces have fallen into place and Transnet is starting to look really respectable, there are as many questions as ever.

They are not so much about ownership but more philosophical ones about what kind of tariffs a state-owned enterprise, which is a monopoly player in most of its operations, should be charging and on what basis it should finance its infrastructure spending — spending being key to the government’s efforts to reduce the cost of doing business, improve SA’s competitiveness and raise its long-term economic growth rate.

This is a state-owned company that is positioning itself as if it were a private company, ensuring its capital projects will earn commercial returns and that it will no longer have to turn to the government for subsidies and guarantees it needed in the past. That’s the route Transnet’s only shareholder, the government, chose, and Ramos is adamant, for example, that it is making its investment decisions, and running its business, on the same basis as any listed company. Which prompted one economist, at a briefing this week, to ask why Transnet was not listed. “I don’t know what the answer to that is,” Ramos eventually replied. “I just work here.”

Work she certainly has in the past three years, and the latest set of results shows the turnaround strategy is starting to bear fruit.

The group is still working on cleaning up its balance sheet, but it has disposed of some big assets and the balance sheet is looking much healthier. Turnover increased by 8% and operating profit by 15% in the year to March, reflecting efforts to re-engineer the group’s core businesses and boost their productivity. But look at the real, rather than the financial, figures and it’s clear there’s still lots of work to be done, specifically in rail freight business Spoornet, which accounts for more than half of Transnet’s revenue but only a third of its profit. Where volumes rose in ports and pipelines, volumes transported by rail declined, particularly in general freight, the business that’s been most neglected by Transnet in the past.

In part, that was anticipated as investment in maintenance began. But it’s also the case that Spoornet has been so inefficient and so unreliable for so long that even when it does start improving, it takes time for customers to boost their output in the confidence that the railways will be able to transport the higher volumes.

In general freight, which is where the bulk of Spoornet’s capital spending is aimed, the group will have to prove itself before customers who have a choice contemplate switching from road to rail. But Transnet is working to build the capacity to support expansion in industries such as manganese, ferrochrome and cement, negotiating agreements with key players in these industries who will use its services.

Then there are the coal and iron-ore lines, to Richards Bay and to Saldanha, where large expansions are planned to support higher output of these commodities. The idea is that Transnet is not only investing to fix its existing infrastructure but also putting in capacity ahead of time to support growth in specific industries and in the economy as a whole.

Investment spending in the latest year almost doubled to R11,6bn. The next three years will see even higher levels of investment and though spending R78bn will be a challenge, Ramos is confident it can be done.

But will the programme fuel inflation in coming years as Transnet attempts to recoup part of the costs through tariff increases, as Eskom seeks to do? Ramos argues that unlike Eskom, Transnet isn’t truly a utility. It provides transport to industry, but there are very few of its customers who don’t have other choices. Added to that is Transnet’s drive for greater efficiency.

The biggest impact on costs will come if it can use its assets better: “If we can get more tonnages moved on rail, for example, and reduce unit costs, we can pass that through to our clients”.

Being a monopoly doesn’t mean you don’t face competition, says Ramos, and she complains that Spoornet hasn’t been able to pass on any of the effect of higher fuel prices to its customers by way of higher tariffs. In rail, prices are not regulated. In pipelines they now are, and tariffs are a bit of a sore point at Transnet after the new National Energy Regulator recently turned down its application for a tariff increase to help fund the costs of the planned R9,3bn new multiproduct pipeline from the coast to Gauteng.

Ramos emphasises that someone has to pay for the investment projects, and if it’s not going to be customers by way of higher tariffs, taxpayers would subsidise costs via the fiscus — a route she and the government have rejected.

Tariffs could well become an issue in coming years and it’s a tough one, given that a big part of the point of the government’s public sector infrastructure investment plans for state-owned enterprises such as Transnet and Eskom was to lower the cost of doing business in SA, and remove infrastructural constraints to growth.

Ramos says the way Transnet can make the biggest contribution to decreasing costs is to increase volumes through its rail network and its ports; and if it can increase productivity, it can offer a better service to clients.

The group’s investment spending, much of it on long-neglected maintenance, is fundamentally about expanding capacity so the group can put more volumes through SA’s publicly owned rail, port and pipeline networks, and reduce costs. Ramos has articulated a clear strategy for doing that and the latest financials indicate the benefits are starting to come through.

But Transnet is, after all, a state-owned enterprise, not a listed company. And what she and her team at Transnet have to show in coming years is not only that they can deliver on their investment and efficiency promises, but that they can do so in a way that is best for SA.

Joffe is chief leader writer.

June 27, 2007

Cameroon, Chad, CAR WOULD Benefit from Less Costly, More Reliable Road and Rail Links

I was almost amused by this article and release from the World Bank. The development plan of Trans African Development Company specifically addresses these infrastructure projects and has been designed to foster economic benefit and cooperation within all of these countries. 
World Bank (Washington, DC)
NEWS
26 June 2007
Posted to the web 27 June 2007
Washington, D.C.
The World Bank Board of Executive Directors today approved a US$201 million regional operation to finance transport and trade improvements in Cameroon, Chad and the Central African Republic.

The financing package consists of an International Development Association (IDA) credit of US$147 million to the Republic of Cameroon and an IDA grant of US$24 million to the Central African Republic and an IDA grant of US$30 million to the Republic of Chad for a Transport transit Facilitation project.

The three-country project is aligned with the CEMAC (Central African Economic and Monetary Community) Transport and Trade Facilitation project, approved by the CEMAC heads of state in 2006, which aims to facilitate regional trade among the CEMAC member states and improve the countries’ access to world markets.   It is part of an unprecedented multi donor effort in the region to improve transport infrastructure, which is co funded by the African Development Fund, the European Union and the Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency), as well as the three governments. IDA’s participation to the project will be less than thirty percent.

Transport costs in central Africa are among the highest on the Continent. For Chad and the CAR, both landlocked countries, transit costs represent 52% and 33% of the value of exports respectively. Road travel from Douala, Cameroon –the main port and regional gateway– currently takes about 15 days to N’Djamena, Chad and 10 days to Bangui, CAR. Delays in the port can add another 28 days.

The project targets specific sections of the road corridors connecting N’Djamena and Bangui to Douala for rehabilitation, along with rail improvements, in a context which will allow a sustainable institutional framework for the rail sector.

In addition to supporting the core transit infrastructure, the project will advance operationalization of the customs union among the three countries and reduce physical and other barriers along the Douala-N’Djamena and Douala-Bangui corridors.   It is also expected to increase the regional integration of CEMAC member states by supporting a new transit regime in the sub-region that can streamline movement of goods among the CEMAC countries. Finally, the project will finance technical assistance and computerization to enhance the efficiency of the port of Douala, thereby speeding the port clearance process.

In Chad’s case, the IDA grant will finance 25% of the works and equipment costs for the transport improvements. The remaining 75% will be financed through Chad’s oil revenues.

“This project recognizes the need for regional approaches in a part of Africa where landlocked economies are profoundly disadvantaged by costly and unreliable transport and trade processes,” said Jean-Francois Marteau, Task Team Leader for the project. “What we should see as a result are more reliable services, lower transport costs and in the long term improved access to world markets and greater trade flows among the three countries.”

The Roads and railway Infrastructure component of the project, co-funded by four donors, will focus on periodic maintenance, rehabilitation and upgrading works on selected rail and road sections along the corridors and paving of existing gravel road sections.   It will help harmonize and enforce the axle road control policies, improve rest areas, help rehabilitate key rail infrastructure and implement HIV/AIDS awareness and mitigation measures.

The Transit and Transport Facilitation Investments will include information and communication technology between stakeholders, especially within the port community. It will improve transit regime and border crossing through cargo tracking, borders posts and, strengthen port safety and security.

The Customs and Transport Sector Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building will strengthen CEMAC customs union, mostly through improving national customs and transport facilitation institutions.

For more information on the World Bank in sub-Saharan Africa visit: www.worldbank.org/afr

For more information about the World Bank in Cameroon visit: www.worldbank.org/cameroon

For more information about the World Bank in CAR visit: www.worldbank.org/car

For more information about the World Bank in Chad visit: www.worldbank.org/chad

For more information about this project visit: http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSi

June 26, 2007

Kenya approves participation of private sector in the development and management of roads.

Private Sector to Manage Roads, Says Nyachae

East African Standard (Nairobi)
NEWS
27 June 2007
Posted to the web 26 June 2007

By Patrick Wachira
Nairobi
The Cabinet has approved participation of the private sector in the development and management of roads in the country.

Roads and Public Works Minister, Mr Simeon Nyachae said the Government had approved the required legislative framework to facilitate private sector involvement through private/public partnerships. The minister said the draft legal framework had been presented to the Attorney-General for enactment through Parliament.

“In May 2007, bids for the first concessionaire project along the Athi River-Nairobi-Kikuyu Road section of the Mombasa-Nairobi – Malaba road and Southern by-pass were received and are currently under evaluation”, said Nyachae.

The minister said concessioning was found viable after a study in 2000 by a consultant with the assistance of the World Bank and commissioned by the Government.

“The study concluded that concessioning was viable, especially along the Northern Corridor which covers Mombasa-Nairobi-Malaba road, with an average daily traffic flow of more than 10,000,” said Nyachae.

He was speaking at the Kenya School of Monetary Studies in Ruaraka when he opened a workshop for road engineers and other technical personnel involved in roads construction and maintenance.

The move could mean that once the management is placed in private hands, such controversial means of raising revenue for maintenance as the toll stations could be re-introduced.

Toll stations were done away with years ago, among other reasons, because they were a conduit for graft. They were replaced by the fuel levy.

Nyachae said Government efforts to provide good roads were hampered by inadequate funding for both capital and maintenance works.

Other bottlenecks include huge maintenance backlog of the road network, overloading by heavy goods vehicles and a cumbersome procurement process.

The minister also said inadequate road maintenance equipment as well as lack of capacity for local contractors, was a challenge.

Many contractors, the minister regretted, were behind schedule even after the Government had borrowed Sh2 billion to buy equipment for hire by local contractors in 16 regions across the country.

AU Summit Starts Meeting with Unified Africa discussions.

AU Summit Kicks Off With PRC Meeting

BuaNews (Tshwane)
NEWS
26 June 2007
Posted to the web 26 June 2007

By Lavinia Mahlangu
Accra
The African Union Summit has kicked off in Accra, Ghana with the opening of the African Union (AU) Permanent Representatives Committee (PRC), as part of the process to plot the way forward to a unified continent.

The first round of high level meetings began Monday, with a call for the PRC members convening at the International Convention Centre, to apply their minds to the unique and significant process ahead.

“Excellencies, you have before you a number of documents which, hopefully, articulate African issues in greater detail and depth and you are required to consider them and make appropriate recommendations to the Executive Council,” Ghana’s Foreign Minister Nana Akufo Addo said in his opening address.

“I urge you all to put Africa first in all your deliberations to make our Union achieve its objectives and our continent a better place to live.”

The PRC is meeting on Monday and Tuesday and will deliberate on issues including the Grand Debate on a unified African government.

PRC delegates are also deliberating on other issues of concern to the continent, such as legal and institutional matters including the report on the status of treaties entered into by the AU and its predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity.

Socio-economic matters will also be under the spotlight, such as Africa’s progress on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and the report on the AU’s relationship with Regional Economic Communities (such as the Southern African Development Community and the Economic Community of West African States, in which Ghana is located).

The PRC will deliberate and make recommendations on these and other matters, and forward them to the Executive Council of Foreign Ministers who will meet on 28 to 29 June for their 11th Ordinary Session.

The Executive Council will in turn, make their own assessments and forward them to the AU Heads of State, who are to meet from 1 to 3 July.

Minister Addo, who also sits on the Executive Council, explained that the 9th Ordinary Session of the Heads of State Summit was a crucial one “which seeks to determine the way forward for the African Union…which is firmly anchored in good governance, respect for human rights and sound economic management.”

The minister said Africans have a clear idea of where they had come from and what challenges currently face their continent, a fitting statement from the official whose country celebrates 50 years of independence from Britain this year.

“We rejoice at the fact that Ghana’s independence on March 6, 1957 changed fundamentally the outlook of the African continent and its status and role in the world.”

“Developments in our era, especially the process of globalization which is engendering greater and greater integration of entire regions and continents, enjoin us to make, at this Accra Summit, historic and far-reaching decisions about the political and economic integration of our continent,” Minister Addo told delegates from over 50 African countries and their development and political partners from across the globe.

“This is thus the relevance of devoting this summit to a deliberation on the future direction of our continent.”

Speaking on 24 May at a seminar commemorating Africa Day, Dr Chris Landsberg, Executive Director of the Center for Policy Studies, outlined the three possible models to be considered by African leaders towards continental integration.

The first type is the “United States of Africa” model, which Dr Landsberg described as a “radical” view led by the Libyan President Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

“It ‘plagiarizes’ [Former Ghanaian President Kwame] Nkrumah’s ideas of a united Africa and wants an African government now,” Dr Landsberg explained in his presentation.

Its drawbacks however are that “Gaddafi’s model does not talk of democracy, values, human rights and governance.”

The second option is the “African Union Government”. It is led by former Nigerian President Olesegun Obasanjo.

“It advocates for the taking of 15 continental institutions created under the African Union and transforming them into the 55th state in Africa and the rest of the states should cede some sovereignty and functions to it,” said Dr Landsberg.

“Obasanjo rushes to say that the union should be established by 2015 with a president serving for a three year renewable term.”

The third option, the “Union of African States” is led by South African President Thabo Mbeki.

Dr Landsberg explained that this model advocated for taking the traditional AU route and turning Africa into a union of states, subscribing to common goals and values.

“It recognizes that this will take a long time and that we should in the mean time embark on strengthening three sets of institutions: executive institutions, judicial institutions and financial/technical institutions.”

According to Dr Landsberg, this is the predominant view among African leaders.

“In Accra a compromise is going to be achieved on realistic time lines for an African government. The radicals are going to be drawn to compromise and pursue strengthening financial institutions among others,” Dr Landsberg said.

Once the PRC and Executive Council have completed their work and handed over their recommendations to the Heads of State, the leaders will review their options, after-which Africa’s new direction will be known.

“This is the process that will strengthen our Union so that it can be a formidable force in the 21st century for the defense and advancement of Africa’s strategic interests,” Minister Addo said.

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,500 other followers

%d bloggers like this: