Reviewing the Commission for Africa
By Chris Landsberg, Director: CPS and Chair: IPMS Africa
and Sehoai Santho, WK Kellogg Foundation: Lesotho
June 2005
Why the Commission for Africa?
The report of the Commission for Africa was
published on 11th March to generate interest in
and commitment to Africa. The 400-page CfA
report, titled "Our Common Interests", sets out
to "examine Africa's past, present and future"
and provide an "assessment of the situation in
Africa and policies towards Africa". The
Commissioners also planned to generate increased
support for the G8-Africa Action Plan and the New
Partnership for African Development (NEPAD). The
central question asked by the Commission was
this: What can the rest of the international
community do to support successful African
development?
The report has been viewed in some quarters as
"a Marshall Plan for Africa". It talks about
spurring "Africa's turning point", presenting a
"forceful response" to Africa's vast challenges,
based on "a partnership between Africa and the
developed world that takes full account of
Africa's diversity and particular circumstances".
British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared the
social conditions in Africa "a scar on the
conscience of the world". The gives numerous
specific instances of this scar:
* Africa's share of world trade
constitutes only 2% of all trade.
* 4 million children in Africa
under the age of five die each year, two-thirds
from diseases which could be cured with such low
cost remedies as Vitamin A supplements, oral
re-hydration salts, insecticide-treated-bed-nets,
and medicines to treat intestinal worms.
* Half of Africa's population
lives on less than one dollar a day.
* Africa has experienced more
coups, wars, and violence than any other region.
* Africa has more displaced people
than any other region in the world, and more
economic dislocation and damage, as a result of
war (p38).
* Africa is urbanising at twice
the rate of Asia and Latin America (p50).
* 300 million Africans do not have
access to safe water. 60% do not have access to
basic sanitation.
What does the Commission want to see done?
The Commission makes a number of bold
recommendations, and group them under several
headings, essentially things it would like to see
happen to turn-around the African condition:
* governance and capacity building
* peace and security
* investing in people
* growth and poverty reduction
* more and fairer trade
* where the money will come from
(both internal and especially external sources)
* how to make it happen (the roles
and responsibilities of different actors)
Governance and capacity building
The Commission notes that governance is at the
core of Africa's challenges; it highlights
progress in that African leaders in the main are
committed to free and fair elections, and to
remain in power in accordance with the provisions
of the constitution under which they came to
power.
Specifically it recommends that:
* Pan-African regional bodies and
programmes such the AU, ECOWAS, SADC, NEPAD, and
the African Peer Review Mechanism should be
supported.
* African countries should work
with bodies such as the Africa capacity-building
Foundation, the Partnership for African
Capacity-Building, and African Regional Technical
Assistance Centres, to draw up comprehensive
capacity building strategies.
* Africa's institutions of higher
education should be supported with $500 million a
year for the next ten years, and $3 billion
should be provided over 10 years to support
centres of excellence in science and technology.
Peace and security
The report observes that in Africa we have 13
million displaced people and 3.5 million
refugees, more than anywhere else in the world.
It calls for prevention of conflicts and recommends that we should:
* Reduce unequal access to
resources based on ethnicity, religion, etc.
* Improve our early warning,
mediation, and peace-keeping systems (p41)
On the international front:
* A UN Peace Building Commission
should be set up during the course of 2005 (p42)
* Negotiations to set up an
International Arms Trade Treaty should commence
no later than 2006, and that in the meantime
there should be more rigorous enforcement of
existing regulations (UN)
* The UN should Identify,
legislate, and enforce rules on conflict
resources (p41)
Investing in people
The Commission addresses issues of education,
health and social inclusion. It notes that under
present trends we in Africa shall achieve the
MDGs not in 2015 but between 100 and 150 years
later.
In line with its focus on poverty reduction, the
Commission places great emphasis on providing
education and the provision of health services to
Africa's population.
In the area of basic education it recommends that:
* Under the banner 'Education For
All' Africa should provide free education at
primary, secondary and 'higher' levels, including
adult learning and vocational training. This, it
says should be funded by the rich countries of
the world.
* We ask the rich countries to
help us provide more places for girls in the
classroom.
* We ask the rich countries to set
up and fund regional networks to support us in
the development of more appropriate curricula at
all levels.
* We reduce our teacher pupil ratio to under 1:40.
Growth and poverty reduction
The report concludes that: "Africa is poor
ultimately because its economies have not grown."
In order to ensure growth and poverty reduction
it recommends that Africa should:
* Invest heavily in improving our
investment climate for local entrepreneurs.
* Devote about $20 billion a year
on infrastructural development in order to
achieve growth rates of 7% a year.
* Double the area under irrigation by 2015 (p50)
* Improve our storage facilities,
roads, and energy infrastructure with support
from the rich countries so that we reduce the
level of post harvest losses that we suffer from.
The report estimates that for an investment of
between $30 million and £50 million, maize worth
$480 million a year can be saved. (p50)
* Trade more with one another
within Africa, especially food and other crops,
which it estimates could be worth $50 billion
compared to $17 billion from sales outside
Africa. (p50)
* Improve land rights especially for poor people and women (p50)
* Increase the capacity of our
local governments to manage urbanisation, and
their own capacity to plan for it.
It calls on the rich countries to:
* Provide $10 billion for
infrastructural development up to 2010 and
another $10 billion after that date, subject to
review. (p49)
* Use the Multilateral Investment
Guarantee Agency to insure foreign and domestic
investments in post conflict countries. (p49)
* Give $100 million to an African
Enterprise Challenge fund to increase the access
small enterprises have to finance.(p52)
* Give $100 million over the next
10 years to improve climate observation through
the Global Climate Observing System.
* Include, by 2008, climate change
risk factors as an integral part of their project
planning and assessment programmes. (p51)
More and fairer trade
The report acknowledges that African goods
suffer from severe tariff and non-tariff barriers
as they enter western markets. It describes the
barriers and subsidies as "absolutely
unacceptable" and says that they are "politically
antiquated, economically illiterate,
environmentally destructive, and ethically
indefensible." (p256)
The report suggests that in order for Africa to
increase its income from trade the continent
should:
* Improve road, rail, and water
systems to help us get our goods to market
quickly and cheaply. (p53)
* Streamline customs procedures
thereby reducing the time required to clear
goods. Customs delays add 10 per cent to the cost
of exports.
* Create regional trade blocks by
removing internal trade and customs barriers.
* Reduce dependency on primary commodity exports. (p54)
The report calls on the rich countries to:
* Progressively reduce all tariffs to zero by 2015 (p55)
* Apply international health and
safety standards rather than those that they have
developed specially for themselves.
* Ensure that any deal at Doha
must allow reforms to proceed at a pace agreed by
us not forced upon us.
* Conduct The Economic Partnership
Agreement the EU is negotiating with Africa on
the same terms as the Doha round. i.e. to deliver
development, with no demands for reciprocity
required of us.
* End all export subsidies and
trade distorting support by 2010. (p55)
* End immediately all export
subsidies and trade distorting support for Cotton
and sugar.
* Transform Rules of Origin so
that more countries are included and these
countries should henceforth be required to add
only 10% to the value of the goods to qualify.
This would raise $5 billion a year for Africa and
mean a full 1% increase in our global rate of
growth. (p56)
Resources
The total cost of the projects envisioned will
be $75 billion a year by 2010. The key issue is
of course where the funds will come from to
finance these recommendations. A number of
possible sources of financing - foreign direct
investment, remittances from the Diaspora,
reversing capital flight from Africa, increasing
savings, and increased aid - are examined. Having
dismissed all but aid as not feasible, the
Commission concludes that a doubling of aid is
the best way of generating the finance required
for these programmes.
The rich countries should contribute $25 billion
a year. During the second phase, i.e. after 2010
the report estimates that should be able to
provide another $12.5 billion, while the rich
countries increase their contributions by another
$25 billion a year.
This aid the reports says should be:
* Based on our priorities
* Used transparently and productively
* Free from strings.
* Paid directly into African government coffers.
* Committed for periods longer than three years.
* Given mostly as grant and not as loans.
* In support of the drive to
increase income the Commission says that:
* All multilateral and bilateral
debt (stock and service charge) should be
immediately cancelled for poor sub-Saharan
countries (p60).
Where necessary to achieve MDGs there should be
immediate measures put in place to finance 100%
debt service cancellation (p60). Quoting the
Monterrey Commitments it declares "No country
genuinely committed to poverty reduction, good
governance, and economic reform will be denied
the chance to achieve the MDGs through lack of
finance".
Making it happen
This singles out certain actors and institutions
and their role is vital in making all these goals
become reality. As such the Commission recommends
that:
* The World Bank, IMF, and WTO
should structure their strategies to focus on
development, growth and poverty reduction and
announce these new strategies during the 2005
annual meetings;
* Africa should be given a greater
say in the decision-making of the IBRD and IMF.
* The top jobs in IMF and IBRD
should be open to any one and the selection made
transparently and openly;
* Africa should be represented on UN Security Council;
* Finally the Commission
recommends that there should be independent
monitoring of progress on implementing its'
recommendations and that this should be done
annually by two people, one African and one
International, with secretarial support from an
existing African or international organisation.
What will it achieve?
The report almost makes promises that are going
to be difficult to fulfil. It says certain
crucial results will be achieved if all the
recommendations are implemented. If all the
recommendations are implemented then:
* Africa will achieve an average
annual growth rate of 7%; this is a bold proviso
and we will have to keep those who make it to
these promises;
* 5 million additional hectares
will be under irrigation and productivity will
increase by 3.4% a year;
* All people needing
Anti-retroviral treatment will get it by 2010;
* HIV/AIDS infections among young
people will be reduced by 25% by 2010;
* 5m orphans and vulnerable
children will be provided with access to basic
services by 2010;
* 40m allowances of - $6 per month
- will be provided as child support and
disability support each year by 2015;
* there will be universal free primary education by 2015;
* secondary school gross enrolment rate will reach 50% by 2015;
* there will be free access to
basic health services for all by 2015;
* the number of health workers
will be tripled producing an additional 1 million
extra doctors and nurses by 2015;
* the lives of over 5 million
children under the age of 5 will be saved, and 5
million adult deaths will be prevented between
2006 and 2015;
* 500m people will be treated by
chemotherapy against debilitating parasitic
diseases by 2015;
* 380 million women and children
will be protected against vitamin and mineral
deficiency by 2006; 2006 is of course around the
corner and civil society should already prepare
to measure these promises and targets;
* 95 per cent of pregnant women
and children will receive bed nets and will be
treated for malaria 2015;
* 70% of TB cases will be treated by 2015; and
* Polio will be eradicated by 2008.
A critical analysis of the report
The report addresses the linkage between local
and external factors and the global economic and
governance regime; the continent's poverty
situation is inextricably linked to challenges of
global trade, finance, and governance.
What is now needed is for the report to be
engaged in terms of clear benchmarks and
indicators for measurement. It is also going to
be important to see whether the British
Government would be able to lock G8 and EU
members into serious reciprocal commitments and
pledges on aid, trade, market access, and debt
eradication. Indeed, it will be important to
distinguish between pledges versus commitments.
This report raises very serious challenges, and
it has some major pitfalls. We will have to look
out for the challenge and problem of political
will, on the part of both African and western
constituencies, to see whether they are committed
to make the partnership work.
One trap the report itself falls into is to
engage Africa in moralistic as opposed to
"self-interest" terms; there is therefore not
enough reference to power and interest
considerations, an insufficient ingredient to
generate action and commitment over the continent.
The biggest challenge for the Commission for
Africa, and for its report is that Britain will
find it exceedingly difficult to persuade fellow
G8 countries to abandon trade subsidies and open
their markets, effectively control arms traffic
and finance a massive expansion of development
aid. For very long, the world has just not been
serious about Africa; there appeared not to be
the realization that it is in the west's
strategic interest to help stabilize the
continent and live up to their historical
commitments toward Africa.
It should also be stressed that proposals are
not balanced carefully enough between mainstream
and orthodox macro-economic growth theories, and
a new developmental paradigm that places social
policies and social development at the heart of
poverty eradication. While no one can dispute the
need for faster economic growth, it is crucially
important that substance and meaning is given to
the idea of the democratic developmental state.
Finally, on the question of an International
Finance Facility, we should remember that in 2004
already, some G8 countries were lukewarm about
the idea. Britain should therefore carefully
spell out how they will go about getting buy-in
into the process, or propose what alternatives it
has if the idea should fail.
The report proposes the phasing out of some
subsidies in the developed countries in order to
address the unfairness of the current system of
trade. It should be noted however that addressing
market access limitations are not the central
problem for Africa in the global trading system.
Only those African countries with stronger export
capacities are likely to benefit from better
terms of trade.
We should also start with the basics, and see
whether Britain and other G8 and EU countries
could start with a basic idea such as living up
to the 0,7% of GDP aid levels. That will be a
true sign of commitment by Britain and the west
and a breakthrough for mutual accountability and
responsibility between Africa and the west.
It is critical to spell out in greater detail
how people could participate in real and
meaningful ways in politics. The report is for
example silent on the crucial issue of meaningful
gender participation and addressing the gender
relations of powering Africa. While it raises the
issue as an important one, it is important to
spell out in detail how this issue is to be
addressed in the continent.
On Governance, it is important for all of us to
develop indicators that spell ways of holding
both Africa and the west to account for
commitments made and actions undertaken. As in
other areas, we must watch out for a gap between
promise and delivery. In short, the Commission
for Africa report makes such radical suggestions
in the areas of continental and global governance
as it affects Africa. We must specifically be
vigilant to whether actors on both sides of this
divide - Africa and the Industrialized North -
will live up to some of the radical governance
provisions.
On the recommendation for greater transparency
in the Extractive Industries, it would be
interesting to see whether powerful foreign
governments and companies from the industrialized
north will live up to these far-reaching
proposals.
We need monitoring mechanisms to see whether the
outside world lives up to peacekeeping
commitments, and whether donors would commit to
50 per cent of the already-existing African Union
Peace Fund. The AU and sub-regional bodies have
in recent years shown great willingness to keep
the peace in Africa. Problem is that they lack
resources, finances and equipment to do so.
So while in the report the international
community is urged to help bolster Africa's peace
support operations capacity, reality is that
there has been over the past years peacekeeping
disengagement from Africa.
The Commission's calls for investments in
schools, clinics, and other educational and
health facilities are key elements of the
developmental state; yet the issues of social
policy are not given enough attention in the
report. While the report speaks of combining
"people's participation in growth", it still
locates it too much in neo-classical economic
orthodoxies, underpinned by market economics.
The Commission's encouragement for African
governments "to remove school fees for basic
education", and for donors to fund the costs of
such development projects until African
governments can absorb the costs themselves, is a
radical departure from World Bank and IMF
orthodoxy, which called for African governments
to levy school fees.
The report proposes another specific idea: that
donors should make a long-term commitment to fill
the financing gap in cases where African
governments are not able to provide fees for
basic healthcare. This is important, and we
should be vigilant to see how these are met. But
it is also important for us to see how African
states scale up HIV/AIDS as a policy priority.
So the call by the report for top priority to be
given to scaling up HIV/AIDS treatment should be
taken seriously. Existing systems to tackle
HIV/AIDS treatment must be strengthened. In
recent years there have been much talk of the
Global Fund for Aids. Yet we know that progress
here is also uneven at best. As such, donors are
asked to help address the $3.2 billion shortfall
for 2006 for the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria. Donors should also
"develop incentives for research and development
that fit the health requirements in Africa", and
set up purchase agreements for medicines and
increases in direct funding for African-led
research.
The Commission report call for Africa's capacity
to trade and to negotiate more effectively to be
enhanced, and that the industrialised world's
trade barriers should be dismantled as a matter
of urgency. While these recommendations are
important, yet they will be the result of taxing
negotiations between the developing and developed
worlds. Third, transitional support to help
African countries adjust to new trading regimes
must be provided. These again are far-reaching
proposals that speak to the core interests of the
west; and would be interesting to see whether the
British government will succeed in even modestly
moving its G8 and EU partners along this path. http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001296/index.php