The Political Economy of Regional Integration and Development in Africa: Rethinking the theoretical models.
- Introduction:
Regional integration has been on the agenda of policy makers in Africa from independence in the late 1950s to date. Post independence nationalist leaders like Kwame Nkrumah sees political integration as a necessary precondition for economic development on the continent[1]. Although the idea of a full political integration was shelved for a gradual approach canvassed by the Monrovia group like Nigeria and Liberia, successive leaders on the continent have never stopped engaging in what is known among scholars of regionalism such as Fredrik Soderbaum and Tim Shaw[2] as Summitry regionalism as different plans have been made and are still being made for full integration of the continent.
Regional integration in Africa is informed by the need to address the structural problems created for African economies by the form of states bequeathed on the continent by departed colonialists. Apart from the micro and landlocked nature of many of these states, virtually all the states are externally oriented and unduly integrated into the global capitalist economy. As Schneider[3], contends, Africa is excessively open to the global capitalist system. This is evidenced in the fact that the ‘ratio of extra-regional trade to GDP in Africa is twice that of Latin America and nearly four times that of Europe’. Thus, the external orientation of African economies has weakened the capacity for the actualization of the regional integration agenda. It is even more problematic that Africa has been encouraged by development agencies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund[4] to specialize in the production of commodities for exports. Empirical evidences from the Asian countries show that Africa may not be able to effectively harness economies of scale in production and leverage on large domestic markets that hold great potentials for economic growth and development on the continent.
The political economy of regional integration and development in Africa relates to the nature and the character of the state, the degree of commitment of political leaders, institutional capacity of each state and the theoretical models under which regional integration has been framed in post-independent Africa. The state in Africa is an artificial creation, whose main objective is extraction of surplus for the developed economies in Europe, United States of America, Canada and Japan. It was originally designed as a rental state which lacks capacity for productivity and manufacturing[5]. The commitment of political leaders to full regional integration has been affected by the paradox of nationalism and Pan –Africanism. While the leaders make slogans about Pan-Africanism, they are conscious of their power base and the privileges that this confer on them. Perpetuation of such privileges and the protection of the power base underlie the lack of genuine commitment to a full integration of the African continent both economically and politically[6].
A transformational regional integration requires some level of institutional capacity both at the national and regional levels. For example, the bureaucracy in each country must be staffed by people who are capable and buy into the idea of integration[7]. The most important aspect of the political economy of regional integration in Africa, which informs this paper, is the theoretical model that has been adopted in Africa since independence, both at the sub-regional and continental level. Neo-colonial African leaders, who often act as surrogates of the Transnational Capitalist Class, to which they belong both by design and default[8] have looked to Europe and its integration process as an exemplar of process to follow in forming regional integration on the continent.
Lacking in appreciation of the divergence in the evolution of the state in Europe and Africa, African leaders have formed their integration agenda on the basis of market integration theory, modernity and prevailing economic orthodoxy. This ‘Western, Euro-centric conceptions of regionalism, particularly those centred on the market integration approach, have promoted a very biased understanding of regional integration in many parts of the developing world’, thus leading to a dismal performance in intra-African trade and making the prospect of a full continental integration a remote possibility[9]. Despite the fits and starts of African experience with regional integration, unfolding events in the global economy and a few instances of endogenous efforts in enlarging the frontiers of interconnectedness, it remains the most viable path to economic development as well as social and political stability on the continent today and in foreseeable future[10].
A study conducted by the United Nations Development Programme on regional integration and human development[11] shows the necessity of integration as a strategy for not just economic but social development. For instance, based on empirical evidence from simulations in some African and Asian countries, the study finds out that ‘continental integration as opposed to a sub-regional approach within Africa or integration in global markets-leads to significant increases in welfare across Africa. In contrast, global integration in the absence of regional integration may reduce welfare in African regions under certain circumstances’[12]
Consequently, this paper examines the limitations of the theoretical models that have been adopted for regional integration and argues for the application of a new theoretical approach which, at once de-emphasize the centrality of the state in driving the process, and also presents higher possibilities for the formulation of a context specific and transformational integration.
The next section examines the political economy of regional integration in Africa and the challenges confronting the realization of a full continental integration. Section three examines the various theories that have been applied in the process of driving integration in Africa as well as their limitations, while section four proposes a nuanced and workable theoretical model that can assist in both realizing the objective of a continental integration in Africa by 2025 and making integration transformative, through affecting the lives of ordinary citizens of Africa. Section five concludes with further recommendations.
II The Political Economy of Regional Integration in Africa.
Studies on regional integration, especially in African context has usually been examined from the economic point of view[13]. However, regionalism and regional integration are ‘political economy phenomenon that requires a more general theory of social and economic transformation’[14]. Other scholars such as Bob Jessop and IverNewmann[15] have established the intricate relationship between regionalization, regionalism or regional integration and politics. Whereas Jessop sees regions as emergent socially constituted phenomena, Newmann argues that regionalism is an inherently political act, which must be reflectively acknowledged and undertaken as such.
The state in Africa as it is currently constituted is a product of many years of interrelated domestic and external forces that acted in unison to determine its composition; exploit, extort and subjugate its very essence. These forces have also shaped the contemporary structure of its economy, altered its natural boundaries, assaulted its culture and emasculated its capacity for autonomous development. As Geoffrey Schneider[16] argues,
In fostering wars and trade in slaves, other economic endeavours were displaced and contacts between many regions within Africa and other regions both inside and outside of Africa were disrupted. Thus, in a dialectical fashion, while some regions were experiencing globalization, others were increasingly isolated. And the regions with the strongest global linkages were experiencing a destructive form of trade, rather than developing skills, industries and technologies that might form the basis for future economic successes.
He also notes that:
while colonialism enhanced African integration into the world economy, contacts between African states under rival colonial powers and between Africa and Asia were severed, disrupting long distance trading networks that had existed in much of Africa for centuries and decreasing the scope of products exported from many African countries…colonial powers actively discouraged entrepreneurial activities and manufacturing by Africans, preventing a wider range of African products from being produced and exported[17]
The structural disarticulation in African economies today is not by accident. As Bade Onimode[18] argues, Africa was forcefully integrated into the global capitalist economy not for its own purpose of development, but for the sake of the development of the economies of the core capitalist countries. The raw material export orientation of these ex-colonies was strategically designed to be so. The forms of infrastructures that the colonialists developed were essentially geared toward facilitating exports of raw materials. The strategy to keep African economies in a disarticulated form did not end with colonialism. Former colonial masters such as Britain but especially France continued to play active roles in playing the former colonies against one another[19] which has kept back genuine efforts toward achieving full integration on the continent. International development agencies such as the World Bank and the IMF have continue to help the erstwhile colonial masters in perpetuating their agenda by subtly and directly forcing Africa leaders to keep their economies open to manufactured products from the west while concentrating on exports of raw materials, on which according to these agencies, Africa has comparative advantage.
Unfortunately, post-independence political leaders in Africa have cooperated with their former colonial masters by involving themselves in primitive accumulation, inept leadership and subservience to the dictates of the west[20]. Mismanagement of the economies of various countries on the continent, with few exceptions created opportunity for the Bretton Woods institutions to more or less usurp the power for policy making in African countries since the 1980s through various reform packages and a virulent form of neo-liberal economic doctrine. Post-colonial African leaders have paid lip service to regional integration because of its potential to undermine the base of their power and authority. Given the kleptocratic nature of political leadership in Africa, power confers enormous advantage such as influence, wealth and recognition. To surrender these privileges willingly without the force of arm, in the name of regional integration is akin to committing political suicide. The above historical narrative is essential for a full understanding of the trajectory of regional integration and development in Africa today. Despite the concerted efforts by agents of modernization to deconstruct and obstruct historical interpretation of the African condition, history matters for development.
As stated earlier on, African leaders have made efforts to foster integration among the various countries on the continent. However, such efforts have been informed by the need to follow the example of European integration. Integration project on the continent has also been constructed on the basis of creating market access for products from one region to the other. Other pertinent issues such as industrialization cross border movement of people and cultural integration has not received the kind of attention that is required to make integration meaningful and transformational. Cases of xenophobic attacks on foreigners from one African country to the other continue apace in places such as Nigeria against Ghana in the 1980s, periodic cases of South Africa against her neighbours such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Nigerians and of late Kenya against Nigerians.
Although various reasons which range from criminality to fears of taking over of local jobs are often adduced for such actions, it goes to show that ordinary African citizens are yet to understand the benefits of having their brothers and sisters from other countries making a living in their exogenously constructed territories. The overarching benefits of regional integration has not been effectively communicated to the rank and files of African citizens, For now, the subjection of the integration agenda to purely economic imperative tends to cause hostility against the idea, even at the most micro-level of the society.
The desire for market access creates its own challenges for integration on the continent. For instance, overlapping integration, in which one country belongs to more than one free trade areas, is a common feature of regional integration on the continent[21] . Other challenges to regional integration in Africa include infrastructural deficits, especially in sea and airports, road networks, and rail networks. With the exception of South Africa, and increasingly Ghana, Burkina Faso and a few other countries, generation and distribution of electricity to households and industry remain a formidable challenge to majority of the countries in sib-Saharan Africa. Institutional weaknesses at the national level also hinder effective planning, negotiation and realization of the integration agenda. As the World Bank notes, in ‘Defragmenting Africa’ there are various restrictions to the free movement of goods and services as well as of people across the continent[22]. Low development of services industries such as finance markets, commodity markets, capital markets as well as information communication technology also hinders effective integration in Africa. These factors are responsible for the low performance of intra-Africa trade today.
.
- Dominant theoretical models of regional integration in Africa
Theory matters in social discourse as it gives meaning to perspectives and orientations. According to Fredrik Soderbaum[23] theory can be a very practical tool, which enables us to make sense of the world. Many theories have been proposed for discussing regional integration in Africa. While some of these theories are essentially related to the old regionalism such as neo-functionalism, the focus of this section is the analysis of those theories of regional integration that are essentially deterministic from economic perspective. This section examines four of such theories, their limitations and implications for the success or failure of regional integration in Africa.
Market Integration Approach:- The market integration approach to regional integration was based on the liberalization of intraregional trade which was designed to abolish discrimination between contracting parties.[24] According to van Rooyen[25] ‘market integration involves the lowering and removal of trade barriers between states in a region in order to increase trade between them’. Following Ballassa (1962),[26] Lee (2003)[27]lists the various forms of market integration to include, free trade areas, customs union, common markets, economic union and total economic integration. This approach to regional integration is essentially deterministic in that it only considers the economic aspect without looking at the political and social dimensions of such arrangements. Besides, this approach essentially favour vertical integration, that is, North- South integration. It is problematic for regional integration in Africa because of the low level of industrialization of the economies as well as the concentration on primary exports.
The linear integration model of regional integration is not the most appropriate way to conceive or structure regional integration in Africa. This is because the barriers to intra-regional trade have more to do with underdeveloped production structures and inadequate infrastructure rather than with tariffs or regulatory barriers. Also, many of the structural pre-conditions inherent in the market integration paradigm are absent in Africa. Despite its limitation, it is the dominant theoretical model informing regional integration in Africa today. Under some unique circumstances few countries in Africa such as Mauritius and Botswana owed their continued economic growth to the application of this model of integration, especially with the European Community.
The Neoliberal Economic Theory
This theory is in the main, a variant of themarket integration approach to regionalism. It favours North-South integration while at the same time focusing on the integration of peripheral economies into the global economy. According to Gibb[28], this approach prioritizes ‘open regionalism….as a mechanism to enhance multilateral liberalization and promote integration in the world economy. It is underpinned by the principle of comparative advantage, which says that countries should specialize in producing what they are specially endowed to produce. Given the specialization of the third world countries in Africa in the production of raw materials, this theory somehow replicates the regime of what SarminAmin[29]called unequal exchange between the North and the South. In agreeing with Gibb, Gamble and Payne[30] the neo-liberal theoretical framework of analyzing integration is open regionalism, which tend to reinforce the detrimental effects of economic globalization and global capitalism. They also see the contemporary form of regionalism as a manifestation of economic globalization and prevailing form of hegemony.
Dependency or Development Cooperation Approach
This developed as a reaction to modernization theory of the 1950s. Modernization theory was developed by Western scholars studying the political economies of the newly independent states of Latin America, Asia and Africa. They attributed the development challenges of these countries to low political culture and undeveloped institutions. One of such scholars was W.W Rostow[31]who attributed the development problems of the new nations as typical of countries at their levels of development. He concludes that these countries possess the characteristics of traditional societies, which will change to modern societies as they follow certain five stages, which he termed stages of economic growth.
Dependency theory countered such postulations and tagged them a-historical. With particular regard to a strategy for economic development, it emphasized development cooperation using import –substitution industrialization strategy and protectionism[32]. According to Speroand Hart[33], due to the relative important position of developing countries in the 1970s (a result of the oil crisis) this approach was adopted as a counter-poise to neo-classical approach. Its importance is echoed by the strong voice of the call for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) However, because like the neo-liberal approach, dependency is also essentially economistic, it fails to capture other non-economic factors such as politics, history of state formation and diversities among states, that drive regional integration. Therefore, as far as regional integration in Africa is concerned, this approach has not facilitated economic development.